HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 20, 2003 Item PacketMarch 17, 2003
CUP 03-008
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING March 20, 2003
APPLICANT Paramount, LLC ITEM NO. ~ 3
REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for 764
single-family residences, 73 townhomes, 270 apartments, community center, schools, & churches in proposed
R-8, R-40, L-O & C-G zones for proposed Paramount Subdivision - w/o Meridian, n/o McMillan
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
See attached Comments
Ok
No Comment
"No Comment"
See attached Comments
No Comment
~~
~prll ~~
Contacted: (1~~ ~~~ / Date: '~ ~~ Phone: {
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clry of Meridian.
MAYOR
ROBERT D. CoRR.rE
CHtfiF
KEN W. BOWERS
COUNCIL MEMBERS t DEPUTY CHIEF - FIRE PREVEIv'TfON
WB.LLaML.M. NwRY 7osEPxSn.vw
KErrxBmD
DEPUTY CHIEF -TRAINING
TAMMY DE Wxcun
CHIiRIE MCCANDLESS Crrr of
~``ey
i~i BE.L JOHNSON
RURAL FmE COMMISSIONERS er
G~n ~ 540 East Frmiklin Road
RICFIARD GREENS s 1D`w~ ~i Meridian,ID83642
TERRY LEIGxION ~C`y,~ (20$) $g$-1234
STEVE ELLIOTT H
'`Tw.,sunr. `'^'~ ~ ;~;. Fax (208)895-0390
MERIDIAN CITY/RURAL, FIRE DEPARTMENT
RECEIVED
March 10, 2003
MAR 1 2 2003
City Of Meridiaa
City Clerk Office
TO: Mayor, City Council and the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Joseph Silva, Deputy Chief, Fire Prevention
SUBJECT: Pazamount Subdivision AZ 03-006, CUP 03-008, PP 03-004
The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimL~m levels of fire
protection for the proposed project:
1. The project which comprised of single family dwellings will require afire-flow of 1,000
gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire
hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' apart. 1997 UFC Appendix III-A
2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian
Water Department.
3. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire
Department. The proposed Ere hydrant locations will be submitted to the Public
Works for plan review.
4. All roads and fire lanes shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside.
5. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs aze required before
combustible constriction begins. UFC 901.4.2 &901.3
6. Two points of access will be required for the project or portions of the project that serve
over 50 homes. This will be a concern the way the project is phased in the early stages
of development.
7. Commeraal and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the
Uniform Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an
average of 400' apart. 1997 UFC Appendix III-A
8. Multi-family residential on the site will require afire-flow of 1500 GPM plus the
amount required by the fire sprinkler demand.
9. All access roads within the project shall have a clear driving surface with a minimum
width of 20' available at all times. Restricted parking on some streets and access
poims to fire lanes may be required to maintain a cleaz emergency access which is
20' wide. iJFC 902.2.2.1
10. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is
not provided with an outlet shall be required to have a approved turn around.
11. The proposed 1107 unit subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household
would have a total estimated population of 3,210 residents at build out. This will
generate an estimated 133 calls for service based on historical trends. The
commercial, schools and churches will have an unknown transient population and
will have an unknown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The
Meridian Fire Depamnent has experienced 2069 responses ui the year 2000 and
2251 calls for service in 2001. According to a report completed by Fire &
Emergency Services Consulting Group in February of 2000 our requests for service
are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010.
12. The proposed project lies on the edge of the five-minute response zone goal.
Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to
enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life
Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for
facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient
operational funds to staff the facilities.
13. It is requested that building separations be maimained per the Building Code in
Blocks 32, 33, 34, 35,30, 31, 36, 37 to reduce the possibility of fires being
transmitted from house to house.
CENTRAL CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEP
•• DISTRICT ~j ~j~j~EID
HEALTH Environmental Health Division eturn to:
DEPARTMENT ^ Boise
FEE 1 ~ 21;'l3 ^ Eagle
City of Meridian ^ Garden City
Rezone #
Conditional Use # C(.*`1~ O3 -~O~ ~1Qeridian
Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ^Kuna
^~
^ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal.
^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal.
^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal.
^ 4. We will require more data concerning sail conditions on this Proposal before we can comment.
^ 5. Before we can comment conceming individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of:
^ high seasonal ground water ^ waste flow characteristics
^ or bedrock from original grade ^ other
^ 6. This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutdents and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or
surface waters.
^ 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and
wateravailability.
~8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for:
~eentralsewage ^ communilysewagesystem ^ communirywaterwell
^ interim sewage ~¢sentral water
^ individual sewage ^ individual water
~9. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare,
Division of Environmental Quality:
~-eentral sewage ^ community sewage system ^ communky water
^ sewage dry lines ,8-eentral water
~,10. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem.
^ 11. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other
considerations indicate approval.
^ 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State
Sewage Regulations.
^ 13. We will require plans he submitted for a plan review for any:
^ food establishment ^ swimming pools orspas ^ child care center
^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store
~4• ~.7-I~ .C~,^sww,e~rrrx-- ~pce,...,.,..~. e. ~,wlz>*-s Date: .Z //?- /~
,g-rv-,~c e,~,s~ Reviewed By: ~i
Review Sheet
coeosrooikc
CENTRAL
• • DISTRICT
~i1'HEAL
DEPARTM
TH
ENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N, ARMSTRONG PL. • BOISE. ID 83704-0625 • (208) 375-5211 • FAX 327-8500
To prevent and treat rlisertse and disability; to pron+ole healthy lifestyles; and to pro(ect and promote Ure healfl+ and quality of om~ eervirnnnuul.
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that storm water bepre-treated through a grassy swale
prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to ground water and
surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design
of this project should obtain current best management practices for storm
water disposal and design a storm water management system that is
preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could
be used for guidance are:
State of Idaho Catalog of Stormwater Best Management Practices For
Idaho Cities and Counties.
Prepared by the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, July 1997.
Stormwater Best Management Practices Guidebook.
Prepared by City of Boise Public Works Department, May 2000.
Serving Palley, Ebnore, Boise, and Ada Camtlies
Ada / Bolse County Office Ada-WIC Satellite Office Elmore County Office Valley County Ollice
707 N. Armsrong PL 1606 Robert Si, 52C E 8th 8lreet N. 703 N. 1st S*reei
Bcise. ID 83704 Boise. ID 83705 Mountain Home, ID E"x647 P.O. Box 1448
Enviro, Health: 327-7499 Ph. 334-3355 Enviro. Health: 587-9225 McCall. ID. 83638
Fcmily Planning: 327-7400 FAX: 334-3355 _ Family Health: 587-4g07 Ph. 634-7194
Immunizations: 327-7450 WIG 587-4409. FAX: 634-2174
Senior Nuiri!iom. 327-7460 FAX: 587-3521
WIC: 327-7486
FAX: 327$500
MAYOR
Robert D. Come
CTCY COUNCII. MEMBERS
Tammy deWeetd
Keith Hird
Cherie Mc(:andless
William L.M. Nary
MEMORANDUM:
HIIB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-0433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
To: Mayor, City Council and Planninrrg~. ~lBJJc~~Zoning Commission
From: Wendy Kirkpatrick Planner II
David McKinnon, Planner II
Bruce Freckleton, Senior Engtneenng Tech
Re: Paramount Subdfviaion
p k2 Co~~ ~~~,
3(~°~e3
~.~2~n ~D , 11,1 Z ¢l3
March 20, 2003
R,ECEIVEI}
f~l~R 1 7 2003
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
• Annexation and Zoning of 397.11 Acres from RUT (Ada Courny) and R-1 to
R-8, R-40, r0 and C-G Zones, by Paramount, LLC (File No. AZ-03-00~.
• Preliminary Plat Approval of Seven-Hundred and Sixty Four (764) Building
Lots and Thirty-Seven (37) Other Lots on 397.11 Acres with Proposed R-8,
R-40, L-O, and C-G Zones, by Paramount, LLC (File No. PP-03-004).
• Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Planned Development Consisting of
Seven hundred and sixty-four (764) Single Family Building Lots, seventy-
three (73) Townhouse Lots, two hundred and sevemy (270) apartmerns, four
mixed-use areas with approximately 577,606 square feet of office and retail
space, and thirty-two (32) Common Lots on 392.17 Acres in proposed R-8, R-
40, L-O, and C-G Zones. The Proposed Planned Development Includes a
Request to Allow a Land Use Exception (Office/Commercial Uses in a
Proposed R-8 Zones), by Paramount, LLC (File No. CUP-03-008).
We have reviewed the above referenced submittals and offer the following comments, as
conditions of approval. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly
modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council:
APPLICATION SUMMARY
The applicant, Paramount LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat and
Conditional Use Permit approval of a Planned Developmern consisting of 801 lots on 392.17
acres of land generally located within the square mile bordered by Chinden Blvd, Meridian,
Linder and McMillan Roads. The land is presently zoned RUT, and the applicant has requested
that upon annexation, all of the property be zoned R-8, R-40, L-O, and C-G.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 2
The applicant's preliminary plat approval request is for seven hundred and sixty-four (764)
single family detached building lots, seventy-three (73) townhouse lots, a muhi-family lot (for
approximately two hundred and sevecrty (270) apartments), a future high school lot, a future
elementary school lot, an LDS church and seminary site and four mixed-use azeas with
approximately 577,606 square feet of office and retail space, and thirty-two (32) Common Lots
on 392.17 acres. The common lots include a continuous ten foot (10') wide multi-use pathway
system, a community cemer with a pool, several pocket parks, and two (2) large ponds in
addition to the typical landscape buffers.
The gross density of the proposed subdivision is approximately 2.8 dwelling units per acre (this
number will change when Lot 1 Block 43 is designed and re-subdivided for future residential
development). The project is a multi-phase development with at least thirteen (13) separate
phases.
The Planned Development application includes requests to allow reduced development standards
including reduced setbacks, reduced lot size, reduced frontages, and reduced house sizes and to
allow blocks within the subdivision to exceed length maximums (1000'+). The following is list
of the proposed standards for a variety of housing types proposed by the applicant and a list of
City (R-8) standazds for comparison:
A. Alley loaded attached single family (townhouse"):
Minimum Lot Size: 3159 square feet
Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,101 squaze feet, exclusive of the garage.
Setbacks: Front-10',
Reaz-15',
Side-5' (0' interior)
Side Street-10'
Minimum Frontage: 27'
B. Alley loaded detached single family:
Minimum Lot Size: 3,960 squaze feet
Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,101 square feet, exclusive of the gazage.
Setbacks: Front-10',
Rear-15'.
Side-5'
Side Street-10'
Minimum Frontaee: 36'
C. Standard single family residential:
Minimum Lot Size: 5,500 square feet
Minimum Dwelling_Size: 1,301 squaze feet, exclusive of the garage.
Setbacks: Frorn-10',
Rear-15',
Side-5'
Side Street-10'
Minimum Frontaee: 50'
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 3
D. City Standards for the R-8 Zone
Minimum Lot Size:. 6,500 square feet (detached)
4,OOOsquare feet (attached)
(Townhouses are prohibited*)
Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,301 square feet (detached)
800 square feet (attached)
Setbacks: Front: 15' living azea, 20' garage (or 15' if side entry)
Rear: 15'
Side: 5'
Street side: 20'
Minimum Frornaee: 65' (detached)
40'(attached)
("Townhouses are defined as three or more attached single family dwellings. Attached
Single Family Dwellings are defined as no more than two attached single family dwellings)
In addition to the above noted reductions to the MCC the applicarn is requesting the approval of
a sales trailer to be located and relocated within the development as the subdivision is
constructed.
The applicant has requested a land use exception (per MCC12-6-3) to permit office, multi-
family, townhouse and commercial uses within the proposed subdivision. The four (4) "mixed
use" lots (Lot 2 Block 1, Lot 2 block 40, Lot 2 Block 45, and Lot 57 Block 3), the townhouse lot
(Lot 3 Block 40) and the future multi-family lot (Lot 1 Block 45) combined equal approximately
71.75 acres of land, or approximately 18% of the total subdivision.
The applicant has not submitted detailed plans for the four "mixed use" lots, or for the multi-
family and townhouse lots and is requesting only conceptual approval of the aforementioned
uses at this time. The proposed "excepted" uses will require a detailed conditional use permit in
the future, prior to development.
The legal description submitted with the application appears to meet the requirements of the City
of Meridian and State Tax Commission and places the parcel corniguous to existing city limits.
The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area and essential City services are or
can be made available to the subject property.
CURRENT OWNERS OF RECORD
Paramount LLC is the a,rrern property owner and they have submitted an affidavit of legal
interest to allow the submission of subject applications.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 4
LOCATION
The property is located generally located within the square mile bordered by Chinden Blvd,
Meridian, Linder and McMillan Roads.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
North: Rural Residential zoned RUT and Rl (Ada County)
South: Rural residential lots, zoned RUT (Ada County), proposed Cedar Springs North
subdivision, zoned R-8.
East: Rural Residential, zoned RUT (Ada County)
West: Proposed Lochsa Falls subdivision, zoned R~ and several rural residential properties,
zoned RUT (Ada County.)
ANNEXATION 8c ZONING ANALYSIS
According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both
the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances
of each proposed zoning amendmem in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate
evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment "
The following is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis by staff:
A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a
Comprehensive Plan amendment;
Staff finds that the requested zoning designations, R-8, R-40, L-O, and C-G are in
general compliance with the effective Comprehensive Plan (`02) and the Future
Land Use Map, which designates the land to be "Medium Density Residential."
are permissible under the excepted land use provisions of the MCC (12-6-3.1 The
Comprehensive Plan also designates a community park and a school site within
the proposed subdivision boundaries. A park has not been provided by the
applicant within the project; however, the applicant has provided a 55 acre high
school site and a 10 acre elementary school site within the subdivision.
The Comprehensive Plan also indicates that the subject property should have a
"Multi Use" pathway running east-west through the middle of the proposed
subdivision. Page 54 of the Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue of pathways
and states that they should be in compliance with the Parks and Recreation
Comprehensive Plan (not yet adopted) and that the pathway should be located
"off street". The applicant has provided a pathway in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 5
Please review the Parks Department comments concerning the need for a
community park within the subdivision
B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the
future;
Staff does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subject property
in the future.
C. is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the
fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning -for example, a
residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use
permits;
Staff finds that the proposed single family residential subdivision with
commercial and multi-family uses would be allowed within the requested zoning
designations, if accompanied with a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned
Development
D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that
the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new
railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed
in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area;
Staff finds that the land to the east (Locsha Falls) and south (Cedaz Springs North)
of the property has recently been approved for development similar to the
proposed subdivision. Staff finds that the requested zoning designations are
harmonious with recently approved developmems in the North Meridian Area and
should be rezoned in the requested manner.
E. Will the proposed uses be designed, canstracted, operated and maintained to
be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended
character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the
essential character of the same area;
Staff finds that the proposed uses (single family residential, commercial, office,
and public schools) will inevitably change the existing rural character of the
subject property. The proposed uses are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan
and Future Land Use Map.
F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony (oral and written)
to determine whether or not the proposed uses will be disturbing or hazardous to
the existing or future neighboring uses.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 6
Staff does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be hazardous, but
may be dismptive to future or existing neighbors.
G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the
establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide
adequately any of such services;
Staff finds that the property to be annexed will or can be served adequately by all
essential public facilities and services if all conditions of approval are met by the
applicant. The applicant shall be required to extend water and sanitary sewer
mains to and through the proposed development, thereby making them available
to the adjacent properties.
approval of the prooosed subdivision if the applicant does not meet ACRD
re,~c uirements.
Please review ACHD, Police and the Fire Department's comments concerning
this subdivision for further information regazding public services and facilities
H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of
the community;
Staff finds that there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost
for public services and facilities, if the applicant complies with the conditions of
approval for the accompanying conditional use permit and preliminary plat
applications.
I. Will the proposed uses not involve nsea, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any
persona, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of
traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
Staff recognizes the fact that traffic and noise will increase significantly upon
build-out of the proposed subdivision; however staff does not feel that the amount
generated will be detrimental to the public welfaze of the city if all conditions of
approval are met.
Staff finds that the proposed subdivision will not involve uses that would create
other nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the
surrounding area.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 7
J. W~71 the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so
designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
streets;
Staff finds that the subdivision's vehicular approach off of Chinden Boulevard
will need to be aligned with the existing public street (N. Fox Run Ave.) on the
north side of Chinden Boulevard, or that it will need to be relocated elsewhere, in
accordance with ACRD and ITD comments. If the roadway cannot be re-aligned
with the existing public road, the intersection will not meet off-set requirements
and will never be considered for a traffic light. The other proposed roadways will
need to be improved in compliance with ACRD requirements in order to alleviate
interference with the existing and proposed intersections.
Please review ACRD comments concerning vehicular approaches and traffic
generation.
K Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic
feature of major importance; and
Staff finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or
damaged by approving the annexation and re-zone. Any existing trees larger than
4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance.
L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of
Meridian. (Ord. 592,11-17-1992)?
Staff finds services are available to the site and that the inclusion of a new
elementary school and high school within the subdivision makes the annexation
of this property in the best interest of the City.
ANEXATION AND ZONING CONDTIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services aze
available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape hrigation.
2. All imgation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, irnersecting, crossing
or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13.
Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users
association (ditch owner's), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public
Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be
reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 8
3. A Development Agreement shall be entered irno between the Developer and the City of
Meridian that will require, among other conditions, that all future commercial, townhouse,
and multi-family uses obtain conditional use permit approval prior to development, the
construction of the multi-use pathway, and limiting Lots 1-13, Block 32, Lots 1-12, Block
33, Lots 1-12 Block 34 and Lots 1-13, Block 35 to attached and townhouse construction only
and limiting Lots 1-13 Block 30, Lots 1-2 Block 31, Lots 1-12 Block 36, and Lots 1-13
Block 37 to one dwelling per lot.
4. The applicant shall be required to dedicate a permanent easement, and a temporary
construction easement, through the project to Meridian road for the North Slough Sewer
Trunk after preliminary plat approval by the Meridian City Council, and prior to submittal of
the application for the final plat of Phase one.
P1tEL_TMiNARY PLAT FINDINGS AND 1tE0UIREMENTS
Sections 12-3-3 7.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed
subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the
following:
a. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan;
Staff finds the subdivision to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
b. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development;
Staff finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development
c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement
program;
-staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement
funds.
d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development;
Staff finds that the development will not requve major expenditures for providing
supporting services.
e. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the
Commission's attention.
Staff finds that the proposed location of the collector street on the south side of Chinden
Blvd. is a safety issue and will need to be re-aligned with the public street to the north in
order to be serviced with a traffic light in the future. The current location does not meet
off set requirements. Other than previously noted staff does not find any other health,
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 9
safety or environmental problems associated with this subdivision that may be brought to
the Council or Commission's attention.
ADDTTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
Interconnectivity: The applicant has designed the subdivision with several stub-streets to provide
irnerconnectivity with future development on adjacent lots. Staff supports the proposed stub
streets and recommends the inclusion of additional stub-streets or access easements at the
following locations:
1. Between Lot 5-7, Block 25 extending to the south.
2. Along the southern boundary of Lot 19, Block 7, extending to the west.
4. Between Lots 32 and 33, Block 7 extending to the north
5. Through Lot 20, Block 25 extending west
6. Through Lots 25 and 26, Block 25 extending to the south.
7. Between Lots 16 and 17, Block 1 extending to the west.
8. Provide an access easement or curb cut through Lot 1, Block 43 between Lot 1, Block
52, and Lot 1, Block 53 to the un-platted parcels directly north of Producer Street.
9. Provide an access easement or curb cut through Lot 1, Block 43, in alignment with N.
Mitchum Ave.
10. Provide an access easement or a curb cut within Lot 1, Block 26, in alignment with
the proposed driveway access on N. Studio Way.
In addition to the proposed and recommended stub-streets the applicarn has provided several
pedestrian pathways within the subdivision. As mernioned above, staff supports the proposed
pathways and would recommend the addition of at least two more pathways within the center of
Block 11, between Lots 10 and 11 and a pedestrian pathway between Lots 17 and 32, Block 3.
All of these recommendations are included in site specific condition of approval number 8 below
Block Leneth: Blocks 1, 3, 7, 11, and 24 exceed the maximum block length of 1,000 feet (MCC
12-4-5). If modifications are made to block 7 through the addition of a stub street the block will
be under 1,000 feet in length. The project is a planned development and therefore a variance is
not required for the proposed development. Staff does not object to the proposed block lengths,
nevertheless the Commission and Council should determine if the block lengths are appropriate
for the proposed development.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 10
Reduced Lot Requiremerns: The lots dimensions within the proposed subdivision are less than
those required by the currern Zoning Ordinance and would not be permitted without the
applicant's request for a Planned Developmern. Staff does not object to the requested reduced
dimensions.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL /PRELIMINARY PLAT
1. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site shall be via main line extensions from mains
being installed as part of the Lochsa Falls project. The applicant will be responsible for
constructing the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development,
thereby making them available to adjacent properties. The subdivision designer is
responsible for coordinating main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.
17vs development shall be subject to latecomer fees, to reimburse those responsible for
bringing sanitary sewer and water service to the area, when and if the Latecomers Fee
Agreement is established. Latecomer's fees shall be due and payable prior to signature
on the final plat for each phase.
The applicant shall be required to dedicate a permanent easement, and a temporary
construction easement, through the project to Meridian road for the North Slough Sewer
Trunk after preliminary plat approval by the Meridian City Council, and prior to
submittal of the application for the final plat of Phase one.
2. The applicant has indicated that a pressurized irrigation system will be provided within
this development, but has not indicated who will own and maintain the system. If the
system is being proposed as a private system, plans and specifications for the irrigation
system shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development
plan review process, and a draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual
must be submitted prior to plan approval, and be the applicant shall be subject to
irrigation plan review fees. Please revise the plat to show how the system is going to be
served (i.e. connection to an existing system, or independent pumping facilities)
Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this
development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be
supplied by a year-round source of water. Applicant shall be required to utilize any
existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not
available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a
single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of
assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian
City Engineer.
A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. A solid
fence shall be required around the perimeter of the subdivision unless the City agrees in
writing that such a fence is aot required.
4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted with the final plat application. The detailed
landscape plan shall include a 20' landscape buffer between all residential uses bordering
the commercial/office (Village Center) uses on Block 40.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 11
5, Please revise the preliminary plat map to show how all existing hrigation/drainage
ditches are to be treated. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural
waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and corniguous to the parcel shall be
tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate
irtigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written
approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users
association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the
Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
6. Detached sidewalks shall be requued along the ernire subdivision frontages of Ustick
Road, N. Meridian Road, Chinden Boulevard, and Linder Road and adjacent to the
designated collector roadways.
7. A circulation pump/aerator or other means of preventing the irrigation ponds from
becoming stagnant shall be required.
8. Re-align the collector roadway on Chinden Blvd. to align with N. Fox Run to the north. If
this cannot be accomplished the plat shall be revised in accordance with new ITD and
ACHD recommendations.
9. Add stub streets in the following locations:
A. Through Lot 20, Block 25 extending to the west.
B. Along the southern boundary of Lot 19, Block 7, extending to the west.
C. Between Lots 32 and 33, Block 7 extending to the north.
D. Through Lots 25 and 26, Block 25 extending to the south.
E. Through Lots 6 and 7 Block 25, extending to the south.
F. Between Lots 16 and 17, Block 1 extending to the west.
G. Provide an access easement or curb cut through Lot 1, Block 43 and Lot 1, Block 52,
and Lot 1, Block 53 to the un-platted parcels directly north of Producer Street.
H. Provide an access easemern or curb cut though Lot 1, Block 43, west of Lot 1 Block
42, lining up with N. Mitcham Avenue.
I. Provide an access easemern or a curb cut within Lot 1, Block 26, in alignment with
the proposed driveway access on N. Studio Way
10. Add micro-paths in the following locations:
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 12
• In between Lots 31 and 18, Block 3,
• In between Lots 10 and I1, Block 11.
(All micro-paths shall be coostracted in compliance with the Landscape Ordinance,
and shall be the responsibility of the developer.)
10. Revise the plat notes as follows:
•Add a note to the plat requiring any re-subdivision of this plat to be in compliance with
the most recently approved subdivision standards of the City of Meridian.
•Add a note to the plat that restricts fencing adjacem to the pathways within the
subdivision to no greater than four feet in height if solid sight-obscuring material is used
for fence construction.
•Add a note to the plat that states the ownership and maintenance responsibilities of the
pressurized irrigation system within the development.
•Add a note to the plat regarding the ownership and maintenance of the common lots
within the subdivision.
•Add a note to the plat regarding the Right to Farm Act.
1 I. A revised phasing plan depicting the phasing for the retail/office, townhouses, and multi-
family housing must be submitted prior to the next public hearing.
12. Phasing for the overall project may be modified by staff level approval, provided written
explanation of phasing changes are provided by the applicant and final plat approval
request of said phases are contiguous to previously approved phases.
13. Ten (10) copies of a revised plat shall be submitted to the City Clerk's Office at least ten
days prior to the next public hearing for this plat.
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. Written commerns in response to the staff report and Conditions of Approval must be
submitted the Meridian's Planning and Zoning Department three days prior to public
hearing.
2. Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's approval letter for the
subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. Make any corrections necessary to
conform.
3. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department.
4. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing,
landscaping, play equipment, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 13
signature on the final plat.
All pathways within the proposed subdivision shall be designed in accordance with MCC
12-13-1 S "Micropath Landscaping".
6. A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape ordinance shall be submitted
for the subdivision with the final plat application, the landscape plan shall include the
location and design of any proposed playground equipment.
7. Sidewalks within the proposed subdivision shall be built in accordance with MCC12-13-
10-8.
8. 250 and 100-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations
designated by the Public Works Departmem. All streetlights shall be installed at
subdivider's expense. Typical locations aze at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
Final design locations and quantity aze determined after power designs are completed by
Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from
the Public Works Department prior commencing installations.
9. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting,
crossing or lying adjacern and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per
City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate
irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owner's), with written
approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users
association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the
Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
10. Please submit up to date groundwater/soils monitoring data to the Public Works
Department for review. Any drainage areas (detemion/retemion basins) must be designed
to ensure that water is retained only during 100-year storm events, and for a period of
time not to exceed 24 hours. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3:1.
11. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by
installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that
were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for
those trees that have to be removed.
12. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Ot&ce.
13. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells
may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
14. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Departmern for all
building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 14
15. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying
that all street finish centerline elevations aze set a minimum of three feet above the
highest established normal groundwater elevation
STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES
The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each
proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if
they shall find evidence preserved at the heazing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3):
A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open
spaces, parking landscaping and other features as may be required by this
ordinance;
Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use
and all other required features as noted above.
B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian
Comprehensive Phm and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance;
The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as "Medium
Density Residential" with a portion of the subdivision located within a neighborhood
Center. Staff finds that the proposed residernial uses are harmonious with and in
accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The project is being proposed as a conditional use for a planned development in order to
allow several land use exceptions in addition to the aforementioned reduced lot sizes,
reduced street frontages, and reduced setbacks. The proposed commercial, multi-family,
and office land use exceptions are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, but
are permitted through section 12-6-3 of the Planned Development Ordinance.
The applicant is proposing just over 50 acres of retail/office land use exceptions. Within
the 50 acres, the applicant estimates "approximately 577,606 square feet of office and
retail space." Conceptual approval of these uses is requested as part of this application.
The Comprehensive Plan shows "Medium Density Residential" as the future land use on
all of the SO-acre land use exception area. The Comprehensive Plan also shows a
Neighborhood Center on Ustick Road, between Meridian Road and Linder Road.
Approximately '/a of the center is located on Pazamourn property, intended for higher-
density residential uses of at least 8 dwelling units per acre. The commercial node at the
heart of the Neighborhood Center is not located on Paramount property. The land use
designation within the center is Mixed Use -Neighborhood, the lowest intensity mixed
use classification, which allows for up to 10 acres and 100,000 square feet of non-
residential uses (i.e. retail and office).
In January, 2002, the Planning & Zoning Dept. completed an effort to study the economic
viability of the proposed Neighborhood Centers with Edward 5tazkie of Urban Economic
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 15
Advisory Services. The conclusion of that study was that each square mile in the North
Meridian area "will support approximately 43,000 square feet of retail." This would
indicate a need for one [100,000 square foot] center each 2.25 square miles, or an average
of 3.3 acres of retail space per square mile. The proposed retail/office land use exception
faz exceeds the square footage intended for the neighborhood center adjacern to the
project.
The approval of the proposed 50 acres and 577,606 square feet of office/retail land use
exceptions will likely have the effect of rendering the commercial neighborhood center
shown on the Comprehensive Plan economically unviable. The sheer scale of the
proposed retail/oflice land use exceptions appears to be more regional than neighborhood
in scale.
If the project is approved as a Planned Developmern, it will be excluded from several of
the minimum requirements of the MCC.
C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with
other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character
of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential
character of the same area;
Staff finds that the proposed residernial subdivision use will be harmonious with the
intended character of the area, but will dramatically change the existing rural chazacter of
the general vicinity, with the exception of Lochsa Falls and Cedaz Springs North
subdivisions that lie adjacent to the proposed developmern.
D. That the proposed nse, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,
will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity;
Staff finds that the proposed subdivision will have a large impact, but not necessarily
adverse impact on other properties within the vicinity. Staff does not anticipate that the
project's overall impact will be adverse to the other properties within the general vicinity;
however, the Commission and Council should consider any testimony (written and oral)
preserved at the public hearings before making this finding.
)F That the proposed use wr71 be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of
proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services;
As noted above, Staff finds that the proposed development can be adequately served by
the essential public facilities and services listed above, if the requirements of ACHD, the
Fire Department and the City are met by the applicant.
F. That the proposed use w~71 not create excessive additional requirements at public
cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 16
welfare of the community;
Staff finds that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the
community, nor would it create the need for any new facilities or services to be paid for
by the public that would be considered excessive.
G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment,
and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persona, property, or
general welfare by reason of excessive production of tratiFc, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare or odors;
Staff finds that there will be an increase in traffic and noise in the general vicinity if the
subdivision is approved, but that approval of the subdivision will not lead to a major
increase in smoke, fumes, glare, odors or other disturbances that will be considered
detrimemal to the welfare of the City and the subdivision's neighbors.
H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be
so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
streets;
As noted above, staff fmds that the proposed collector off of Chinden may create
significam interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Staff has akeady
recommended that this street be re-aligned with the public street to the north.
Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this
finding. ACHD recommendations should be adopted by the Commission and Council to
avoid interference that may result for the proposed subdivision.
I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
Staff does not find that any natural or scenic feature will be lost, damaged or destroyed
by issuance of this conditional use. Existing trees greater than 4" caliper must be retained
or mitigated for, if removed.
FINDINGS FOR USE EXCEPTIONS WITHIN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
MCC 12-6-3 "Use Exceptions" require the Commission and Council to make the following
findings in order to authorize specific uses that are not normally permitted by the use regulations
of the zone in which the developmem is located (no more than 20°/n of the gross area of the gross
project):
1. The uses permitted by the exception are strongly related to the principal use of the
development, and have the purpose of providing services or facilities useful or
complementary to the primary uae.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 17
Staff finds that the office/commerciaUhigh density residential located on the east, southeast
and western portion of the proposed subdivision are related to the primary use (residential) of
the development (R-8). The office/retail uses can provide services (i.e. medical, dental,
optical etc...) and sundries (i.e. food, clothing etc...) that will be complementary to the
residents of the subdivision, and will provide employment opportunities as well. The
proposed multi-family housing will provide a mix of housing products and income levels
within the proposed subdivision
The mixing of residential uses and commercial uses will encourage the office developmem to
be constructed in a manner that will be pedestrian fiiendly in design. The proposed medium-
density housing will provide an immediate consumer base for the office/commercial
developmem.
The retaiUoffice located at the southwest corner of the proposed subdivision does not connect
with the residential portion of the subdivision. This portion of the subdivision is accessible
only car for residents within the proposed subdivision. Staff does not find that this portion of
the subdivision is strongly related to the residential use proposed for the majority of the
subdivision.
2. No more than twenty percent (20%) of the total area of the project shall be devoted
to the uses permitted by the exception. The percentage of use exception allowed will
be determined by the Commission and Council based upon the size of the project
and intensity of the use exceptions.
Staff finds that the office/multiple-family housing/commercial uses make up 17% of the
total area of land included in the planned development.
Staff finds that the size and intensity of the excepted uses is appropriate for this location
and size of development.
3. The development will be phased so that consirnctkon of the excepted use or uses wi0
be justiTed by construction of all or a proportionate amount of the principal or
primary use or uses.
Staff finds that the excepted uses (office and commercial) will be phased and constructed
in a manner that justifies their inclusion as part of the project's primary residential uses.
4. The uses permitted by the exception are integrated into the overall project by:
a. Being located in proximity to and within convenient walking distance of the
primary uses.
Staff finds that the office/retaiUmulti-family uses located in the southeastern portion
of the proposed subdivision are in proximity to and within convenient walking
distance for parts of the overall developmem. The proposed retail /office use
located in the southwest wrner of the subdivision is not located in close proximity
to the residential uses within subdivision and is not within convenient walking
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 18
distance of the residential uses within the subdivision Staff finds that all other
office/retaiUmulti-family housing excepted uses are within convenient walking
distance for many of the residents within the proposed subdivision.
b. 17tilizing one or more of the main vehicular accesses to the primary use site as
the main access to the exception site or interconnection through a system of
private roadways and/or pathways.
Staff finds that the tetaiUoffice uses located in the southwest corner of the proposed
subdivision are ~accessibie to residents of the proposed subdivision through a
main access or an interconnected street system.
With the exception of the retaiUoflice uses located at the southwest corner of the
subdivision, staff finds that the site design incorporates interconnectivity though
shared vehicular access points. The applicant has provided a pathway system and an
interconnected roadway system for access to the excepted uses from the residential
uses.
c. Providing pedestrian and bicycle pathway connections with the primary use
site.
Staff finds that the proposed retail/office uses in the southwest corner of the
proposed subdivision are not provided with adequate pedestrian and bicycle
connections with the remainder of the development. Staff finds that all other
excepted uses are provided with connections that are accessible to pedestrians and
to the residential portion of the development.
d. Orienting buildings on the exception site to facilitate vehicular and/or
pedestrian access from the primary use site.
Staff finds that the proposed retaiUoffice uses on the southwest corner of the subject
property are located in a manner that will facilitate access from existing arterial
roadways only and do not provide any interconnectivity with the rest of the
subdivision.
A detailed layout of the buildings has not been submitted with this application.
Therefore, staff is unable to make a finding concerning the orientation of the
buildings to be developed as excepted uses.
e. Continuing architecture, landscaping, and building bulk concepts from the
primary use into the use of the exception site so they are consistent and
harmonious throughout the development.
Staff finds that the landscaping is consistent throughout the proposed development.
Architectural and building bulk concepts will need to be submitted with a new
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 19
detailed conditional use permits for each of the future office, commercial and multi-
family uses.
The Commission and Council may determine what, if any, architectural/design
concepts (residential and/or commercial) should be incorporated into all buildings
within this development at this time.
5. The use(s) permitted by the exception are neighborhood or community serving in
size and character and not regional, and are not detrimental to adjacent
neighborhoods in location and character.
Staff finds that the proposed office and retail uses, when combined, equal over half
a million square feet of possible office/retail space. Staff does not believe that the
scale of the office and retail uses is appropriate to the size of the overall
development.
Staff does find that this is a very large subdivision with a variety of commercial and
residential uses that fit within the MCC guidelines for excepted uses within a PD,
and that the excepted uses utilize less than the 20% of the land within the proposed
development.
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
Temporary Sales Trailer(sl: Staff does not object to the applicant's request for temporary sales
trailer(s) within this subdivision as long as all of the conditions of approval, listed under site
specific condition of approval number 4, below, are met by the applicant.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS (Conditional Use Permit)
1. Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the preliminary plat as a condition of the
Conditional Use Permit.
2. All development shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair
Housing Act.
3. Anew detailed Conditional Use Permit will be required prior to development of any of
the office/retail/multi-family housing within the Paramoum Subdivision.
4. Temporary salesrnformationtrxilers shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. The proposed subdivision is permitted to have no more than two temporary
sales trailers on-site.
b. The landscaping and irrigation (in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance)
shall be provided in the front yard of the sales trailer shall be completed prior to
occupancy.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 20
c. The trailer shall be skirted with material that is similar in color and material of
the rest of the trailer.
d. The applicant shall be responsible for providing adequate off street parking.
e. One wall sign is allowed for the temporary sales trailer. The sign shall be
limited in size to 18% of the wall area. No other signs shall be permitted.
f. A building permit for the temporary building must be obtained through
Meridian's Building Department prior to placing the trailer on a lot. A site plan
must accompany the building permit and be approved by Planning Department.
g. Sanitary sewer service and domestic water service may be requested for the
proposed use. Should ahook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water
service will be determined during the building pemvt application process.
h. Applicant must provide the Public Works and Fire Departments with
information on the method of fire protection to be used for the trailer.
i. The trailer must conform with all setbacks as set forth in the Paramount
Subdivision conditional use permit and preliminary plat.
j. The timeframe for the sales and information trailer is for a period of 48 momhs.
If Paramount requires an extension of this permitted period, Staff recommends
they submit a status of their plans to the P&Z Department after 48 months of
operation (starting from date of occupancy). City Council must approve of any
time extension beyond 60 months via a modification of the CUP. This timeframe
will apply to a single lot, not a combination of all future lots for the trailer use.
k. The Applicant's request to site the same trailer under the above-stated
conditions at other locations within future Paramount phases is approved without
a CUP modification. A new Certificate of Zoning Compliance and building
permit for all future trailer locations must be submitted to the City for each future
location, but a CUP should not be required for each future trailer location.
5. The applicant shall provide cross walks at the three N. Cinema Way intersections at W.
Colbert St., W. Charlton St. and W. Paramount Drive that will provide pedestrian access
to the proposed community center.
6. Fencing adjacent to Lot 10, B1ock15, Lot 1 Block 29, Lot 1 Block 24 and Lot 1 Block 38
shall be limited to 4 feet in height if solid fencing material is used, with the allowance for
an additional 2 feet of lattice work to be placed on top of the solid fence.
A planned sign program shall be required for the commercial portions of the property.
Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council
March 20, 2003
Page 21
Staff supports the general layout of the residential portion of the proposed Paramount
Subdivision; however, the Planning and Zoning Department is concerned with the large volume
of commercial/office development (577,660 square feet), and the lack of accessibility to the 19.2
acre retail/oflice lot located in the southwest comer of the proposed subdivision.
Staff recognizes that the wmbined acreage of the ofiice/retail uses is within the 20% land use
exception guidelines of the City's Planned Development Ordinance. However, the City Code
explicitly states that the excepted uses are to be strongly related to the primary use of the
proposed development, the uses should not be regional in nature, and that the uses should be
interconnected with the principal use via shared access points or pedestrian/bicyclepaths. The
19.2 acre lot at the northeast cower of the Linder and McMillan Road intersection and the 18.6
acre lot at the northwest comer of the Meridian and Mclbfillan Road intersection do not adhere to
the MCC's required findings for excepted uses. Staff cannot recommend approval of this portion
of the requested conditional use permit for a planned development.
Staff recommends that the public hearings for the Paramount annexation, preliminary plat and
conditional use permit be cor-tinued to allow the applicant to make several modifications to the
subdivision design prior to being recommended to Council. The modifications should include,
among others, the relocation of the collector roadway on Chinden Blvd, the addition of stub-
streets and micro-paths, and new phasing lines. The plat and CUP plans should also be modified
in compliance with the Commission's recommendations for the proposed commercial areas.
Fifteen (15) copies of a revised plat will need to be submitted to the City Clerk's Office at least
ten (10) days prior to the next public hearing for review by the City Staff.
March 20, 2003
RE~E~L
1~~~~~.R 2 0 2003
CITY OF bititliilAN
70ANN C. BUTLER
SANDRA L. CLAPP
KELLY M. GARRITY
' MICHAEL T. SPINK
(208) 368-1OB3
J B UT L E R @5 B C-ATTOR N EYB.COM
Jill Holinka Via facsimile 466-4405
White Peterson
5700 E. Franklin Road, Suite 200
Nampa, Idaho 83687-8402',
RE: Paramount Subdivision
SBCFile No.' 21592.7
Dear Jill:
As you are aware, the Paramounf Subdivision site was not posted with notice of tonight's Planning and
Zoning Commission Public Hearing as required by Meridian City Code §11-13-5 (A)(2). We understand\
the public hearing on this matter will not be fully addressed at tonight's hearing because of this fact.
As we discussed this morning, the site will be posted as soon as possible to meet Meridian's 10-day
requirement and we will request the Public Hearing on this matter be opened this evening only for the
purpose of re-setting this matter to Apri13, 2003 for public testimony. By continuing the public hearing,
the City will not be burdened with additional notice requirements, including notice mailings and
publishing.
Please confirm my understanding of the procedures for this evening's hearing is correct. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your assistance With this issue.
Sincerely,
JoAnn C. Butler
JCB: sg
cc: Dave McKinnon, via facsimile
Mike Wardle; via facsimile
251 E. FRONT STREET '
SUITE 200
P.O. BOX 639 ', -
BDISE, IDAHO 83701 -
208-388-1000 -
20 6-3 88-1001 0 ~ - -
WWWSec-ATl'O4~VEYS.COM
Z0'3cJtid S0b099b89ZT Lb:Lr E0. 6S 21F1W
W1~xE PJETERSON
WFIIrE, Pe~ltsorr, Motuxow, GIORAY, ROSSMAN, NYE & ROSSMAN, P.A.
may"' Daavs
,~„~,(,,,~,i ~,~ ATTORNEYS nS Lnw
aRlsioPl®{ 5. NYS
wM. F GmRAY.ly
T. Gvr Nr~tnJ.f •
Jw
9
HolavK
¢ CANYON PnRx p7THE IpAaO CEt~'~ ~
5'7oO E. PRANRLJN RD.. SURE 2
NAMeq RJAHO 83687
~~n PFmB A, P9Tmuow
EWG 9. Pxtttms
Etuc s. RCB54APr
.
.
,
D. $AMU6L JOm+eaN Tel aOR)d66.9272 V ToOnAROSS.unN
w~••
Tarsaacs R
wRtLtM A. MoRROw
wat,,u, P Mamts• PAX ao~7 a66-~aos MAR 2 0 2W3 .
Mcxotns L. wottsw
'Also mloiiexd in OR
March 19, 2003
David McKinnon
Meridian Planninig & Zoning Department
6fi0 E. Watertower lane
Meridian, ID 83642
fie: Paramount Subdivision
Dear David:
City Of Meridian ~'~'°dmittedinWA
City Clerk Office
VL4 FASIMILB 7`.RANSMISSIUN
It is my understanding based upon our telephone conversation this morning that notice
was not properly posted upon the applicable property for the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission's March 20a' hearings concerning the proposed Paramount Subdivision (Items AZ
03-308, PP 03-004 and CUP 03-008).
Meridian City Code §11-15-5 (A)(2) requires that prior to such hearing before the
Plamning & Zoning Commission, the Applicant is required to post notice of hearing upon the
property undez consideration one week prior to the heating date. Further, Idaho Code §67-
fi512(b)mandates that similar notice be posted.
If it is the determination of the City of Meridian that notice was not properly posted one
week prior to the March 20~' hearing, it would be my advice to postpone any and all publio
hearings concerning the Pazamount application until such time as the aforementioned code
sections are fully complied with. It is my understanding that the Applicant will be notified of this
by your office. If you have any question or comment, please contact me.
Sincere7l~y,~' /~
Nicholas L. Wollen
Associate Attorney, City of Meridian
Z iZ
cc;
39Cd
Meridian City Clerk
90bb99bSOZT:KtlH NOSa313d 31[HM:Q[ Z£:GT £O. 6Ti£0 09Z'cN 3'lId
S0'3rJF1d Sl~7bb99b89ZS Lb:LS £0. 6S ?JI~W
WHITE PETERSON
WHITE, PETERSON , A~'AORROW, GIGRAY, ROSSIv1AN , NYE & ROSSIvIAN, ~.A.
l~vw Dvmn
IULP Wt,W Rsa~pe A.TTVRNF.YS AT t.AW
L11IXLti70PF16R S. Nn2
wn~. F. c,ti~Rav.la CANYON FARK AT THE lDAlio CENTER RmIP A. PenRi5lPJ
7. GVY Ha.LnM • 5700 C. F1t,wxuN RD., SVItE 200 Ot[cn 3. AaLLmA
fiL 5. HCLGVKn NAMFA, IDAH083687 ~ S. RUSSMAN
U SAMUEL IOINSON
TEL (208)d66.927Z TotmA. RossMAN
7tRRew:s R
WiVis°
Wu1fAMA MORROW
Wnl.iw.e F, NiCICM$• F0. ZO dy6-x405
t 8) .
NR7fOLA$L. WcnJ.F'1
'Alan sdmitoed in GR
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
bate: March 19, 2003
To: Will Berg, City Clerk
City of Meridian
Fax No.: 888-4218
From: Nicholas L. Wollen/da
Phone: 208-466-9272
No. of Pages: _2 x (including cnvercheetJ
Paramount Subdivision
Please see attached letter dated March 19, 2003 from Nicholas L. Wollen.
"Nao xdmiwdin WA
This facsimile transmission (and/or the documents accompanying it) may contain cottfidential
information belonging to the sender which is protected by the ATTORNEY-CLdENT PItIVII,EGE. This
information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, yw are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any
action in reliance on Ute contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in cror, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the documents.
If you do not receive all Pages, please call Donna Q 118 as sooD as possible at (208)466-9272.
The original of this faaed document will not be sent unless requested by the recipient.
Z iT 39tld 90bb99b80ZT:Xbd NOS21313d 31IHM:QI Z£: LT £0. 6TiE0 09Z'GN 3"lId
Memorandum
Meridian Police Department
March 19, 2003
TO: Dave McKinnon and Wendy Kirkpatrick
FROM: Capt. Bill Musser
CC: Chief Worley
DECEIVED
MAR 192003
City Of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Piz Nth.
Ma,~el~ 20, 2ao~
~~CVVIS I1, l2 13
RE: Review and Recommendations for AZ 03-006, PP 03-004 & CPU 03-OOS
Requests for Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat Request & Conditional Use Permit
Application by Pazamount, LLC for the proposed Paramount Subdivision. Hearing Date:
03120!2003
Location of Project: Bound by Chinden Blvd, North Meridian Rd, McMillan Rd, and Linder Rd.
I have reviewed the three requests noted above regarding the proposed Paramount Subdivision, and I
have the following recommendations from the Meridian Police Department:
$ Traffic Concerns: The traffic concerns I raised in the proposed Lochsa Subdivision
development (see attached) are still valid in regard to this subdivision plan. Especially given
the proximity of a proposed high school lot adjacent to Linder Rd. between McMillan and
Chinden. The major nual highways providing the egress and access need to be updated and
improved to meet urban standards as part of this development now -not later. This is also
consistent with the precepts outlined in the 2002 Meridian Comp Ptan (Goal II, Objective A;
Goal III, Objective B: 2; and Goal N, Objective A). The issue of transportation and
roadways in particulaz is a strong Community Concem as noted in Section B of Chapter VI
of the 2002 Comp Plan. The Police Department recommends not approving the applications
at this time.
•S l~ture School Growth: The proposed Pazamoum development includes a lot for a high
school. It is understood that this would be a Meridian School District item and a separate
development plan would be needed from the district. However, the current location would
need to have a double access for public safety approaches. A direct access on Linder Rd. is
recommended along with engineering for left turn access and egress. Considering the
breadth of the development proposal the road way accesses need to be considered at this
early stage, not later. The 2002 Meridian Comp Plan addresses the need for prior planning
and the issue of transportation and roadways in particulaz is a strong Community Concern as
noted in Section B of Chapter VI of the 2002 Comp Plan. The Police Department
recommends not approving the applications at this time as a preliminary plan for the High
School ingress and egress along with a commitment from ACHD for such needs to be a part
of this development plan.
Memorandum
Meridian Police Department
March 19, 2003
• Law Enforcement/Public Safety Assessment
1. Response times for law enforcement personnel will be stretched. This is a strong
consideration as officers will only be responding to the proposed development for
theft related reports initially. Construction sites tend to have numerous thefts
associated with the development, especially when located on the fringe of the City as
the proposed Paramount development is. This will result in the pulling away of
resources from the other develop areas stretching response times in excess of five (5)
minutes for emergencies.
The distance away from the currently developed core area of the City of Meridian
will impact the response of officers assigned to area I as this development is over two
miles out of the current core. Area I officers currently cover from west of Main St. to
west of Blackcat Rd. and from north of Victory Rd. to north of Ustick Rd. The
current core coverage is approximately twelve (12) square miles. Current staffing
levels put only two (2) officers in area I when staimg is optimum. The only options
available for response to or from the north end developments aze going to be along
the existing niral highways -Meridian, Linder, Ten-mile or Locust Grove roads. All
of these roadways present problems for traffic flow at peak periods in the early
morning, after school, and when commuters return in the early evening. The current
heavy traffic at these times already impacts police response to serious and emergency
calls resulting in response times in excess of 5 minutes.
The addition of the proposed Paramount development will exacerbate current
conditions as police staffing is just now starting to approach levels consistem with a
population base offorty-thousand spread over an area of 28 to 30 squaze miles. The
Paramount development proposal coupled with developmems atready approved, such
as Bridge Tower and Lochsa in the north end and Tuscany in the south will continue
to stretch staffing and increase our ability to respond in a timely manner across the
City. Overall projections for the increase in population, given the current approved
developments coupled with Paramount, will conservatively double our current city
population of over 40,000 to an estimated 80,000. Granted this is projected to be over
the next ten (10) to fifteen (15) years, but this department and the City has yet to fill
the personnel, equipment„ and tax infrastructures needed to keep pace with such
growth. This is a concern of note within the 2002 Meridian Comp Plan in Chapter
VII, Section C: 1 Land Use under the Urban Service Planning Area, wherein "... it is
recognized that some development may precede the ability of the City, on its own, to
extend services for such development."
The 2002 Meridian Comp Plan specifically notes the City will ensure that facilities
Memorandum
Meridian Police Department
March 19, 2003
keep up with growth (Chapter IV, Goal I, Objective A) and attempt to infill as much
as possible before extending services (Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A: 3 and Chapter
Vq Goal IV, Objective C). While the Council has already approved other
developmerns such as Lochsa in the north and Tuscany in the south, the addition of
fiuther developmerns in the outer regions of the impact area will exceed caurern
police staffirtg levels. Public safety will be affected if large developmerns continue
to be approved as they have in the past. The Meridian Police Departmern
recommends not approving the applications at this time because staffing levels need
to increase to accommodate other large developments first. To do otherwise would
impact public safety.
As a plan of action in regards to staffing it is recommended future staffing be directed
at accommodating at least one (1) officer for every four squaze miles of azea in terms
of coverage and to help reduce response times within the City. Current coverage is at
1.5 officers for 12 square miles. However, there are currently 5 positions in process
of being filled that will drop the area coverage to 1 officer for 6 square miles.
2. The development plan calls for a number of single family residential dwellings that
are "alley-loaded" attached and arranged in blocks of up to four units or detached. In
reviewing the current plan the development proposal as diagramed would be contrary
to the precepts of crime prevemion through environmental design (OPTED). The
current proposal places the gazage and vehiculaz access at the rear of the proposed
residences via the alley. As such the alley lacks the element of "guardian" presence
that is it lacks a sense of openness and ownership intrinsic to front positioned garages
adjacern to public roadways. "Guardian" presence can be described as the perception
you aze being watched -that your actions can be seen by others or have the distinct
potential to be; in planning terms it may be lmown as indefensible space. The
proposed alley access dwellings have the overall effect of reducing "guardian"
presence. As such, this part of the Paramount proposal would increase the likelihood
of crime victimization to those purchasing and living in these `alley-loaded" units.
Additionally, alley-ways aze problematic in regards to traffic. They also tend to
present themselves as an attractive nuisance in that they draw children, who tend to
play in them. Alleys usually prohibit, by the nature of the construction, clear vision of
the alley way by residents and other passersby and lighting is often reduced or not
maintained over time. All of which lends itself to increasing the available
opportunity for theft or other crime.
The police departmern strongly recommends to the Council to not approve this
section of the development proposal unless it is redesigned in such a manner as to
Memorandum
Meridian Police Department
March 19, 2003
lessen the potential crime impact inherent in the current design.
The proposed but yet to be designed section adjacent to the south east of the "alley
loaded" dwellings is set for what appears to be 270 apartments with a density rating
of 18units/acre. This portion of the proposal couple with the "alley-loaded" housing
is very problematic in terms of lending design and occupancy to the potential for
property crime. Perhaps the best approach would be to extend the potential for town
homes in the area so the overall impact of high density related housing is lessened.
The proposed current mix will become problematic overtime and it will lend itself to
an increased potential in crime, which is contrary to providing for public safety.
While the 2002 Meridian Comp Plan in Chapter VII does set multiple objectives
under Goal IV for:
• the adoption of land use designations which allow for housing opportunities for
all income levels (Objective C: Action 9);
• supports a variety of residential categories for the purpose of providing the City
with a range of affordable housing opportunities (Objective C: Action 10); and
• provides for a wide variety of housing types and choices between ownership and
rental dwelling units for all ir}come groups in a variety of locations suitable for
residential development (Objective A:
Action 4),
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan, in Chapter VII provides for an assessmem of law
enforcemem needs (Goal III, Objective A: Action 4). In the Paramount proposal
applications we find the currem design to be lacking in crone preventative elements,
especially in the south east portion of the proposed development plan. The Meridian
Police Department recommends the applications not be approved as currently
submitted in the current plans.
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
g~~E~D
MAR 2 0 203
CITY OF MERIDLAti
DATE March 20, 2003
PROJECT NUMBER CUP 03-008
PROJECT NAME
Paramount Subdivision
NAME FOR AGAINST
~- ~ ,