Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
March 20, 2003 Item Packet
March 17, 2003 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING March 20, 2003 APPLICANT Paramount, LLC PP 03-004 ITEM NO. ~ Z REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 764 building lots and 37 other lots on 392.17 acres In proposed R-8, R-40, L-O and C-G zones for proposed Paramount Subdivision - west of North Meridian and north of West McMillan Roads AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: ` CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: ~/p , a'~~~ ~~~~nAD ~/1J~ CITY ATTORNEY O"" ~""' """"""__T ~J CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: See attached Comments ~l,(v~)~ CITY BUILDING DEPT: (' _ CIiY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: See attached Comments ~ `.1 "No Comment" CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See aitaChed Comments SANTfARY SERVICES: NO Comment ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached COmment5 NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: NO Comment SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: See aftathed Comments IDAHO POWER: IDAHO TRANSPORTATION See attached Comments OTHER: ~~`~~1 1J1J~"'~~' Date:z~ Phone: 1 r'' 1 ~/ Materials prese~ed of pupllc meeHnpa shall become property of theCity of Merldlan.? ~1 A ..~I,f ,1/1 ]( MAYOR ROBERT D. COARIE CHIEF KEN W. BOWERS COUNCIL MFTARFR 4 E DEPUTY CI3i6F - FRtE PREVENTION WR.LIAM L.M. NARY 7osEex Suva KE1TI{BIRD ~ T W ' crrr of DEPUTY CHIEF - TRARatNG AMMY DE EIs [iD CHERIE MCCANDLESS . 7~/ ~``?yv i~ BILL JOHNSON RURALFIRE COMt.IISSIONERS er i~l L - ~ 540 East Franklin Road RlcxaAO GREENS IDAHO ~. ~ Meridian, ID 83642 TERRY LEIGHTON ~C~ ~ e (ZO8) 888_1234 STEVEELLtorr " 'k'r"Ht ~-vwE i~~ Fax (208)895-0390 MERIDIAN CITY/RURAL, FIRE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED March 10, 2003 MAR 1 2 2003 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office TO: Mayor, City Council and the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Joseph Silva, Deputy Chief, Fire Prevention SUBJECT: Pazamoum Subdivision AZ 03-006, CUP 03-008, PP 03-004 The following will be the requirements and/or concerns to provide minimum levels of fire protection far 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 lII-A 2. Acceptance of the watea 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 Departme~. The proposed fire 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 construction 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. Commercial 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 Append'a 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 points to fire lanes may be required to maintain a clear emergency access which is 20' wide. UFC 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 residems 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 unlmown impact on Meridian Fire Departmem call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2069 responses in 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 aze located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staffthe 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. SETTLERS' IRRIGATION DISTRICT P,O. BOX 7571 • BOISE, IDAHO B37D7 PHONE 344-2471 February 25, 2003 Gene Smith Engineering Northwest 423 Ancestor, Suite 180 Boise, ID 83704 Re: PP 03-004 Preliminary Plat approval for Paramount Subdivision -_ - '-De~Gene -- - r-°~ RECEIVED FEB 212003 City of IYIeridiau City Clerk O£ficR After review of the preliminary plat of the above-mentioned application Settlers Irrigation District requests the following: 1. That all irrigation/drainage facilities along with their easements be protected and continue to function as such. The laterals involved are the North Slough #2, North Slough, Knight, Lemp, Harrell, Wolf, and Bisby. 2. A license agreement will need to be signed and recorded prior to construction of any irrigation facilities. 3. All Stonn drainage must be retained on-site. 4. Any changes to the existing irrigation system must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 5. The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above- mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre-construction meeting. If you have any questions please call 343-5271. Sincev Nathan Draper, Manager Settlers Irrigation District Cc: Will Berg, City of Meridian _ _ _ _ _ ~+ CE~D - " ~'. FEB ~ ~ 1003 ~~ ~ nea . e ~ .~ ., ~m errYOF~~~ ~. ~. ~ _~ x~ dr, i ~~~1 ~~ ~ ~x ~lI(~ ~ ~.r.- 3 =-,n~~~~9-1~11~~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~NIIVQ i TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 P.O. BOX 8028 •, BOISE, _ID 83707-2028 (208) 334-8300 February 13, 2003 City of Meridian Will Berg, City Clerk Planning and Zoning 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Highway 20/26 Corridor -Paramount Subdivision, Paramount, IJ.C. File No. PP 03-004 Dear Mr. Berg: US -26 has been designated a Principle Arterial. The Idaho Transportation Department would like the City of Meridian to help us preserve this corridor by recognizing the following conditions. Future right of way widths will be as follows: A) 120 feet each side of centerline (240 feet total) to provide width for a future frontage road, or B) 70 feet each side of centerline (140 feet total) if the developer provides an internal frontage road type system to feeder roads. Access to a Principle Arterial Type >V will be public road intersections only, and spaced at one mile intervals in rural-areas and or~.half mile intervals in urban areas. Approaches (other than public road intersections) maybe permitted in special cases and on a temporary basis as follows: (1) Allowed until state highway system is improved by a construction project at which time an access will be provided to the property, which does not access the state highway system. (2) Shall be recorded at the County Recorders Office. (3) Temporary access restrictions will be noted on the permit The access shown on the Preliminary Plat will be discussed with the developer upon receipt of a traffic impact study for this location. An Equal Opportunity Employer - Building setbacks from the proposed right of way widths will allow for expansion of the highway system. Noise abatement (berms, fences, etc.) will be the responsibility of the developer and will be constructed off of the state right of way. If you have any questions please call me at 334-8340. Sinc e , D N COONCE, District Traffic Engineer iblAl'OR Rul?crt D. Corric CITI' COUNCIL M@MB8R5 Tammy deWCCrd William L. M. Nary Cherie McCandless Kcilh Bird ...~`~,.~a~`LJ y-3'--~,mL'q a t:ITY OF I~~~I'~~• 1 _~'c. " _ !: eri~rcn -~~ ~, IDAHO ~ ~ HmT V u-/ ,s,x~% ',190] LEGAL DEPA RTbIENT ('or)..x-~um9 • Fax :xa-'SnI PaRl:B S RECREATION 1_08 888-3579 • Fa.¢ S~tB-1501 PFHLIC «'OIiRS (_OS) S93-SiUU •Fas Sti7-I?97 BUILDING DEPA RTbIENT ('US) 83i-'_'1l • Fax Y87-1'_97 PLANNING AND ZONING I _08) 881-5533 • Fax N88-riN51 TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Clerk's Office Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: March 13, 2003 Transmittal Date: February 10, 2003 File No.: PP 03-004 Request: Preliminary P a approval of in proposed R-8, R-40, L-O & By: Paramount, LLC Hearing Date: March 20, 2003 zones for proposed Paramount Location of Property or Project: west of North and north of West acres David Zaremba, P/Z (NO VAR, VAC, FP) Jerry Centers, P/Z (NO VAR, VAC, FP) Leslie Mathes, P/Z (NO VAR, VAC, FP) Michael Rohm, P/Z (NO VAR, VAC, FP) Keith Bofup, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Robert Corrie, Mayor Bill Nary, C/C Tammy deWeerd, C/C Keith Bird, C/C Cherie McCandless, C/C Water Department Sewer Department Sanitary Service (No VAR, VAC, FPJ Building Department Fire Department Police Department YOUr City Attorney GIs City Engineer City Planner Parks Department RECEIVED FEI3 19 2003 Cfty of Meridian City Clerk Offioe Melidlan SCh001 DIStf1CL (No FP) Meridian Post Office (FPiPP onry) Ada County Highway District Community Planning Assoc. Central District Health Nampa Meridian brig. District Settlers Irrigation District Idaho Power Co. (FPiPPonry) U.S. West (FP/PP Only) Intermountain Gas (FP/PP only) Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PPonry) Idaho Transportation Department (No FP) Ada COUnty (Annexa6'on ony) Meridian Development Corporation Historical Preservation Commission Remarks: ~ , p~ >l: .;,, i/ /, f/. 33 EAST IDAHO • MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 588.4433 • Fax (208) 887.4813 City Clerk OtPice Fax (208) 888-4? 18 Human Resources Fax (?OS) ?88-I 193 CENTRAL CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT •• DISTRICT HEALTH Environmental Health Division RECEIVE13~turn to: DEPARTMENT ^ Boise FE6 1 ~ ~+'~,~ ^Eagle Rezone # Cit of IVleriaian ^ Garden City Conditional Use # ~ 1 y er 1OP ~ridian Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ~p ~~ -O©>~ ^Kuna ^ ACZ .ti...z.,,.~._,..,~ ~ i ^Star ^ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Spec'rfic knowledge as to the exact type of use must be prd3Hded before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning 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 nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. ^ 7. This project shall be reviewed 6y the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. ~8: After writte9 approval from appropriate entfties are submitted, we can approve this proposal far: ~-eentral sewage ^ community sewage system ^ communiry water well ^ interim sewage 0-e~entral water ^ individual sewage ^ intlivitlualwater ,~9. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: -sentralsewage ^ communitysewagesystem ^ communilywater ^ sewage dry lines ~=eenVal 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 be submitted for a plan review for any: ^foodestablishment ^swimmingpoolsorspas ^chiltlcarecenter ^ beverage establishment ^ grocerystore 4. ~~s-,~c~ sir .a~.~ .Irs.~ crag.,. w.~r~ Date: Z / //'z~/~ GPri~ew.+.~t.s+_.r.~~m,~r Reviewed By: ~/r`%~~e coHO9rooia~ Review Sheet CENTRAL ~~ DISTRICT ~1'1'HERLTH DEPARTMENT MAINOFFICE~707N.ARMSTRONGPL ~ 601SE,ID83704-0825(208)375-5211~FAX327-8500 Tn prevent and treal disease mtd disability; 1o promote healthy lifesrydes; and to protect and prnmale Ure /reu1W and quality of orv efrvironmen/. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that storm water be pre-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. ServingYalley, ELnore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada /Boise County Ollice 707 N. Armsrong PI. Boise. ID 83704 Enviro. Health: 327-7499 Fomily Plonning: 3277400 Immunizations: 327-7450 Senior Nutrltiorc 327-7460 WIC: 327-7488 FAX: 327-8500 Ada-WIC Sa}ellite Office 1506 Robert 51. Boise. ID 83705 Ph. 334-3355 FAX, 334-3355 Elmore County Office 520E 8th Street N. MoUnipin Home, IG 83647 Enviro. Heolih: SB7-9225 Family Health: 587-4407 VJIC: 587-4409 FAX: 587-3521 Volley County Ollice 703 N, 151 Street P.O. Box 1440 McCall, ID. 83630 Fh. 634-7194 FAX: 634-2174 Preporing Today's Student for Tomorrow's SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell Joint School District No. 2 911 Meridian Road • Meridian, Idaho 83642 • (208) 855-4500 • Fax (208) 888-6700 February 12, 2003 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Planners: RECEDED FEB ~ ~ 2003 City of Meridian City Clerk Office The Meridian School District has experienced phenomenal student growth the last ten years. The high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools throughout the district are operating over capacity. Approval of Paramount Subdivision will have a significant impact on school enrollments at Ponderosa Elementary, Eagle Middle and Eaale High School We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house three hundred eighty six (386) elementary aged children, two hundred ninety six (296) middle school aged children, and two hundred fifteen (215) senior high aged students. Additional students will further compound the current overcrowded situation. However, the developer has met with the school district and has agreed to include an elementary and a high school site within this development. School capacity is addressed in Idaho Code 67-6508. The Meridian School District is currently operating beyond capacity. Future development will.continue to have an impact on the district's capacity. If you have any questions, please contact me at 888-6701. Sincerely, Wendel Bigh Supervisor of Facilities and Construction MAYOR Robert D. Come CrPY COUNCII. MEMBERS Tway de Weertl Keith Bird Cherie McCandless William L.M. Nary MEMORANDUM: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888.4433 • FAX (208) 887-0813 City Clerk Offux: Fax (208) 888-4218 To: Mayor, City Council and Planningg. !&jjj~~~Zoning Commission From: Wendy Kirkpatrick Planner II `W'+'~ David McKinnon, Planner II f~~tl-A` Bruce Freckleton, Senior Englneermg Tech Re: Paramount Subdivision LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)466-9272 • Fax 466-0405 PUBLIC WORKB BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 898-5500 ~ Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 8845533 • FAX 888.6854 March 20, 2003 RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2003 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE • Annexation and Zoning of 397.11 Acres from RUT (Ada County) and R-1 to R-8, R-40, L-O and C-G Zones, by Paramount, LLC (File No. AZ-03-008). • 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 GG 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 seventy (270) apartments, 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 GG Zones. The Proposed Planned Development Includes a Request to Allow a Land Use Exception (OfficelCommercial 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 causidered 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 Development 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, amulti-family lot (for approximately two hundred and seventy (270) apartments), a future high school lot, a future elementary school lot, an LDS church and seminary site and fow mixed-use areas 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 center 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 futwe residential developmem). 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) standards for comparison: A. Alley loaded attached single family (townhouse*): Minimum Lot Size: 3159 square feet Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,101 square feet, exclusive of the garage. Setbac From-10', Rear-15', Side-5' (0'interior) Side Street-10' Minimum Frontage: 27' B. Alley loaded detached single family: Minimum Lot Size: 3,960 square feet Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,101 square feet, exclusive of the garage. Setbacks: Fromm-10', Rear-15', Side-5' Side Street-10' Minimum Frontage: 36' C. Standard single family residential: Minimum Lot Size: 5,500 square feet Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,301 square feet, exclusive of the garage. Setbacks: Front-10', Rear-15', Side-5' Side Street-10' Minimum Frontage: SO' 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) 4,000square feet (attached) (Townhouses ca~e prohibited*) Minimum Dwelling Size: 1,301 square feet (detached) 800 square feet (attached) Setbacks: Front: 15' living area, 20' garage (or 15' if side entry) Rear: 15' Side: 5' Street side: 20' Minimum Frontaee: 65' (detached) 40'(attached) ("Towuhouses are defined as three or more attached single family dwellings. Attached Single Family Dwellings are defined as uo more than two attached siugle family dwellings) In addition to the above noted reductions to the MCC the applicant 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 developme~.. 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 contiguous 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 current 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-4 and several rural residernial properties, zoned RUT (Ada County.) ANNEXATION & 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 amendment 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 exceoted 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 Counci! March 20, 2003 Page 5 Please review the Parks Departmern 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. 1fx 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 (I,ocsha Falls) and south (Cedar 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 recernly approved developmerns in the North Meridian Area and should be rezoned in the requested warmer. E. Will the proposed axes be designed, constricted, 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. Rill 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 maybe disruptive 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 fmds 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 developmem, thereby making them available to the adjacent properties. The applicant must meet all req_u>rements of ACRD in order to provide adequate facilities for the proposed and existine street system. Staff cannot recommend approval of the~roposed subdivision if the applicant does not meet ACRD requirements. Please review ACRD, Police and the Fire Department's comments concerning this subdivision for further information regarding 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. L W~71 the proposed pees not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; 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 welfare 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. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the properly 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 vehiculaz approaches and traffic generation. I{. 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)Y 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 are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, 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 into 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. PRELIlVIINARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REOUIItEMENTS 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 require 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 endvonmental problems associated with this subdivision that may be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIO Interconnectivity: The applicant has designed the subdivision with several stub-streets to provide interconnectivity with future development on adjacem 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 easemem or curb cut through Lot 1, Block 43 between Lot 1, Block 52, and Lot 1, Block 53 to the un-platted pazcels directly north of Producer Street. 9. Provide an access easement or curb cut through Lot 1, Block 43, in aligmnent with N. Mitcham 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 applicant has provided several pedestrian pathways within the subdivision. As mentioned 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). ff 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 aze appropriate for the proposed development. Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council March 20, 2003 Page 10 Reduced Lot Requirements: The lots dimensions within the proposed subdivision are less than those required by the current Zoning Ordinance and would not be permitted without the applicant's request for a Planned Development. Staff does not object to the requested reduced dimensions. STTE SPECIFIC CONDTfIONS OF APPROVAL / PRELIlVIINARY PLAT 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. This 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. 1f 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. 3. 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 writir-g that such a fence is not 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 commercialloffice (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 irrigation/drainage ditches are to be treated. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and comiguous 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 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 required along the etrtire 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 requved. 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 ACRD 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 easement or crab cut though Lot 1, Block 43, west of Lot 1 Block 42, lining up with N. Mitcham Avenue. I. Provide an access easement 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 11, Block 11. (All micro-paths shall be constructed 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 adjacent 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 mairnenance responsibilities of the pressurized irrigation system within the developmern. •Add a note to the plat regarding the ownership and maintenance of the common lots within the subdivisioa •Add a note to the plat regarding the Right to Farm Act. 11. A revised phasing plan depicting the phasing for the retaiUoffice, 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 Written comments 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 equipmern, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council March 20, 2003 Page 13 signature on the final plat. 5. All pathways within the proposed subdivision shall be designed in accordance with MCC 12-13-15 "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 are at street imerseciions and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are 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 adjace~rt 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 DepaRment for review. Any drainage areas (detention/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 equivalerrt 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 Office. 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 Department 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 are 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 perarit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(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 requrded features as noted above. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan 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 residential 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 50-acre land use exception area. The Comprehensive Plan also shows a Neighborhood Center on Ustick Road, between Meridian Road and Linder Road. Approximately '/s of the center is located on Paramourn properly, intended for higher- density residernial uses of at least S 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 7anuary, 2002, the Planning & Zoning Dept. completed an effort to study the economic viability of the proposed Neighborhood Cerners with Edward Starkie 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] curter each 2.25 square miles, or an average of 3.3 acres of retail space per square mile. The proposed retaiUoflice land use exception far 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 oflice/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 retaiUoffice land use exceptions appears to be more regional than neighborhood in scale. Ifthe project is approved as a Planned Developmern, it will be excluded from several of the minimum requvements of the MCC. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other axes 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 character of the general vicinity, with the exception of Lochsa Falls and Cedar Springs North subdivisions that lie adjacem to the proposed development. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with a~ 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) preserned at the public hearings before making this finding. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, strcet, 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 ACRD, the Fire Department and the City are met by the applicant. F. That the proposed use wdl not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & 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 persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, 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 detrimental 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 finds that the proposed collector off of Chinden may create significant 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 ACRD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. ACRD recommendations should be adopted by the Commission and Council to avoid interference that may result for the proposed subdivision. L 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 development is located (no more than 20% 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 use. Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council March 20, 2003 Page 17 Staff finds that the office/commercial/high 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 complememary 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 development to be constructed in a manner that will be pedestrian fi-iendly in design. The proposed medium- density housing will provide an immediate consumer base for the office/commercial development. The retail/office located at the southwest corner of the proposed subdivision does not connect with the residemial portion of the subdivision. This portion of the subdivision is accessible only car for residems 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/muhiple-family housing/conunercialnses make up 17% of the total area of land included in the planned developmem. 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 construction of the excepted use or uses will be justified 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/retaillmulti-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 development. The proposed retail /office use located in the southwest corner of the subdivision is not located in close proximity to the residemial uses within subdivision and is not within convenient wallcine 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/retaiUmuhi-family housing excepted uses are within convenient walking distance for many of the residems within the proposed subdivision. b. Utilizing 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 retaiUoffice uses located in the southwest corner of the proposed subdivision are not accessible to residents of the proposed subdivision through a main access or aninterconnected street system. With the exception of the retad/oflice uses located at the southwest corner of the subdivision, staff finds that the site design incorporates interconnectivity though shared vehicular access points. The applicam 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 retaiUoffice uses in the southwest comer 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. Stafffinds that the proposed retaiUoffice uses on the southwest corner ofthe 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 fording concerning the orientation of the buildings to be developed as excepted uses. e. Continuing architecture, landscaping, and bur7ding 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, architecturaUdesign 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, sud 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. ADDTTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Temporary Sales Trailer(s): 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 f Conditional Use Permit) Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the preliminary plat as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit. 2. All development shall wmply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. A new detailed Conditional Use Permit will be required prior to development of any of the office/retaiUmulti-family housing within the Paramount Subdivision. 4. Temporary sales/information trailers 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 shook-up be requested, an assessment for sewer and water service will be determined during the building permit 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 months. 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, Blockl5, 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. 7. A planned sign program shall be requued for the commercial portions of the property. Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council March 20, 2003 Page 21 RECOMMENDATION Staff supports the general layout of the residential portion of the proposed Paramount Subdivision; however, the Planning and Zoning Departmem is concerned with the large volume of commerciaUoffice development (577,660 square feet), and the lack of accessibility to the 19.2 acre retaiUoffice lot located in the southwest corner of the proposed subdivision. Staff recognizes that the combined acreage of the office/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 imerconnected with the principal use via shared access points or pedestrianlbicycle paths. The 19.2 acre lot at the northeast comer of the Linder and McMillan Road intersection and the 18.6 acre lot at the northwest comer of the Meridian and McMllan Road intersection do not adhere to the MCC's required findings for excepted uses. Staff cannot recommend agproval of this portion Staffrecommends that the public hearings for the Paramoum annexation, preliminary plat and conditional use permit be continued 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- streetsand 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. JOANN C. BUTLER SANDRA L. CLAPP KELLY M. GAR RITY MICHAEL T. SPINK " Y LJL //11 (208) 388-1093 JBUTL ER` EBC-ATTORNEYS.COM March 20, 2003 Jill Holinka White Peterson 5700 E. Franklin Road, Suite 200 Nampa, Idaho 83687-8402 1tE: Paramount Subdivision SBC File No. 21592.7 Dear Jill: ~.,^~R 2 0 2003 CITY OF y~it1LL~1:~ Via facsimile 466-4405 As you are aware, the Pazamount Subdivision site was not posted with notice of tonight's Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing as required by Meridian City Code § 11-15-5 (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 April 3, 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, c~it~n n~ ~ T~ JoAnn C. Butler JCB: sg cc: Dave McKinnon, via facsimile Mike Wardle, via facsimile 251 E. FRONT STREET SUITE 200 P.O. BOK 839 BOISE, 10AH0 83701 208-388-1000 208-388-1001 (~ NMNV.SEiO-ATTORNEYS.COM .... -....... vv.. ~~.....r. vv.VV LV'~ Or GOW W~-IITB PETERSON WI31rE, PETERSON, Molutow, GI(31tA,Y, ROSSMAN, NYE & ROSSMAN, P.A. Rn~ RL6a+F)sC.f~t Ww F C 1 ATtORNEYS AT LnW CANYON Pn-Y ATTHQ IDAROC QA`15fOW®t 4. NY5 PIOdAPB7ffiscN . . roMY. 0 i. Our HnLLnN" Jw 4 HocaNRA 5700 E. I•T.9NF.IJiJ RD., SL7lL 2 Nnntvq RU~FW 83687 ,^•~~j~ I~n ER7ea s. Am.Lrvs EkIC S. Rass+fax . . D. S4M116L JoiNeoN 7¢L (208)46(A2T2 ~ TonDAROasteau 7YRRatS. R. wRRI'Q" ~~F~J~ fAacaos~dceaaos MAR 2 ~ 2~3 NKaousl..R'OI,L6fa •Alae m~mikRl in OR David McKinnon Meridian Planni ,~ ~ Zoning Depatlmerrt 660 E. Watertowerlane Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Paramount Subdivision Dear David: City Of Meridian ••ALroedmim+dinWA City Clerk Office March l9, 2003 [?A FASIMLGE' 2'RANSMISSIUN It is my understanding based upon out telephone conversation this morning that notice was not properly posted upon the applicable property for the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission's March 20s` hearings concerning the proposed Paramount Subdivision (Items AZ 03-308, PP 03-004 and CtJP 03-008). Meridian City Code §11-15-5 (Ax2) requires that prior to such hearing before the Plamting Bc Zoning Commission, the Applicant is required to post notice of hearing upon the property under consideration one week prior to the hearing date. Further, Idaho Code §67- 6512(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, ~ % /~ ~'~~~~6~/ // /L~ cc: Meridian City Clerk Nicholas L. Wollen Associate Attorney, City of Meridian 7 i7 ahHrl SC1bhGQtrR(17.i:XH-I Nf1C?lal~~l 71i41M:RT ~r~~r rn. arirn no~•oN ~~r.a bb d:Jt7d SMJ77D77Dtn7C L LD : L L Lb , b L rJt1W WH[TE PETERSON Wi~11tE, Pl?TERSON, MORROW, GIGRAY, ROSSMAN, NYE & ROSSMAN, P.A. ~Vpd DwnB A'rrVENEYS nT LnW GSWSrOPn6R 4. Nra MID KLfiW Rua~F t.ANYnN pARa ATTHE IDAtioCExlsE RmwA. PoILRSON wM. F. C;uateAV. I¢ 5700 C. FRnNRLm RD. SI¢tE Z00 E'sten s. Auuma T. GuvHa.Uw • Jac s xau ww~ , Nro4vA, IDAH083687 EWC 5. Rnb6Miw . . U sAMUEL JOIWSON TEL (2061466.9272 anon. Rossww 7BRR¢NL'G R. Wiriy w4.ttAMA)4dkRVW Fait (201h 466-x405 NR:HOLAt L. WrnI.GN Wn~LW F.JJ1eHe1,E• •Alm admitoad is OR FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION bate: March 19, 2003 rn: wiu Berg, city clerk City of Meridian Fsx No.: 888-4218 Froth: Nicholas l.. Walleo/da Phone: 208-466-9272 No. of Pages: 2 x (inclradrng crrverrheet) COMMENTS: Paramount Subdivision Please see attached letter dated March 19, 2003 from Nicholas L. Wollen. •• nJw vJmind in wA This facsimile transmission (andlor the documents accompanying it) may contain corJfidetJtial information belonging to the sender which is protected by the ATTURTIEY-C1.iENT P)LIVII,EGE. Tbis information is intended only far the use of the individual or emity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of arty action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in enor, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the dowments. [f you do not receive all pages, please call 1>onna (a~ 1 I8 as sooD as possible at (208) 466-9272. 7'he original of this faced document wBl not be sent unless requested by the recipient. 7 iT ~~1Hrl Ql1bhQQbRNr: KH-I Nf1CN~ I a~ ~ I f NM: Ri 7R: !.T Rfl. RiiR(1 (1A7' oN a'1i ~ Mesaorandum Meridian Police Department March 19, 2003 TO: Dave McKinnon and Wendy Kirkpatrick FROM: Capt. Bill Musser 1~,ECEI~EI~ MAR 192003 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office P{z N{~. Mcus?~ 2o,2cU~ l}Cuv~S 11,12, 43 CC: Chief Worley RE: Review and Recommendations for AZ 03-006, PP 03-004 & CPU 03-008 Requests for Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat Request & Conditional Use Permit Application by Paramount, LLC for the proposed Paramount Subdivision. Hearing Date: 03!20!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 Pazamoum Subdivision, and I have the following recommendations from the Meridian Police Department: ~a Traffic Concerns: The traffic concerns I raised in the proposed Lochsa Subdivision development (see attached) are still valid in regazd to this subdivision plan. Especially given the proximity of a proposed high school lot adjacent to Linder Rd. between McMillan and Chindea The major rural 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 Plan (Goal II, Objective A; Goal IU, Objedive B: 2; and Goal IV, Objective A). The iss<re of transportation and roadways in particular 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. •r Future School Growth: The proposed Paramount 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 roadway 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 ofthe 2002 Comp Plan. The Police Departmem recommends not approving the applications at this time as a preliminary plan for the High School ingess 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/Pubtic Safety Assessment Response tunes for law enforcemem 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 fiinge 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 azea of the City of Meridian will impact the response of officers assigned to area I as this deuelopment is over two miles out of the current core. Area I officers currerly cover from west of Main St. to west of Blackcat ]td. and from north of Victory ]td. 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 staffing is optimum. The only options available for response to or from the north end developmems are going to be along the existing nual 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 currerrt conditions as police staffmg is just now starting to approach levels consistent with a population base of forty-thousand spread over an area of 28 to 30 square miles. The Paramount developmern proposal coupled with developmeruts already 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 currem approved developmema 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 developmem." 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 VII, Goal IV, Objective C). Wlvle the Council has already approved other developmems such as Lochsa in the north and Tuscany in the south, the addition of further developments in the outer regions of the impact area will exceed current police staffing levels. Public safety will be affected if large developments 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 developmems 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 square miles of area in terms of coverage and to help reduce response times within the City. Currem 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 residemial dwellings that are "alley-loaded" attached and arranged in blocks of up to four units or detached. In reviewing the current plan the developmem proposal as diagramed would be contrary to the precepts of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTF.D). The currem proposal places the garage and vehicular 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 adjacent to public roadways. "Guardian" presence can be described as the perception you are being watched -that your actions can be seen by others or have the distinct potential to be; in planning terms it may be known 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 are problematic in regards to traffic. They also tend to presem 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 opporiwuty for theft or other crime. The police department 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 poternial crime impact inherent in the current design. 3. 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. Wiule the 2002 Meridian Comp Plan in Chapter VII does set multiple objectives under Goal TV for: • the adoption of land use designations which allow for housing opportunities for all income levels (Objective C: Action 9); • supports a variety of residemial 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 irEcome groups in a variety of locations suitable for residemial developmem (Objective A: Action 4). The 2002 Comprehensive Plan, in Chapter VII provides for an assessment of law enforcement needs (Goal ]lI, Objective A: Action 4). In the Paramowrt proposal applications we find the current design to be lacking in crime prevemative elements, especially in the south east portion of the proposed development plan. The Meridian Police Department recommends the applications not be approved as wrrently submitted in the currem plans. JOANN C. BUTLER SANDRA L. CLAPP KELLY M. GAR RITY MICHAEL T. 3PINK - YJL (208) 388-1093 J B U T L E R~ 3 BC-ATTO R N E V S.CO M March 20, 2003 Jill Holinka White Peterson 5700 E. Franklin Road, Suite 200 Nampa, Idaho 83687-8402 RE: Paramount Subdivision SBC File No. 21592.7 Dear Jill: ,,,,;~ 2 0 2003 CITY OF l~li;itiuLa:~ Via facsimile 466-4405 As you aze aware, the Paramount Subdivision site was not posted with notice of tonight's Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing as required by Meridian City Code § 11-15-5 (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 SUTE 200 P.O. Box 639 BOISE, IDAHO 83701 208-388-1000 206-388-1001 (~ W W W.SBC-ATTORNEVS.COM .... ..,.....~ w.. ~~. va...r 4v •4Y LG~ 0Y OOW W~-u~r~ PERSON Wx1rE, P1~1tSON, MORROW, Glal:,ax, ROS5Mr1N, Nxe & ROSSMAN, P.A. ~~ Dounis 1tA ~ KLI ~ PSG ATiORtiEYS A7 Lnw ' QAStOP1®t 5. NYb . . wM.F.GmxnY.1E T. Cnn Nuwd• CeNt aN Pn9x atTJ1E ~AHO CEN~~ STW$.FRMTQAJRD.,SlrtiE2 Nnbtt fu H 8368T ~~` ICED Pim.sAPafsesor+ ETJCas.Am.tms IIuc 5 RossMgw Jw. s. Hocrtncn q n 0 . D. 54MU6i. JaQ9ar TEL (201~d5G•9272 - TonnAROasw,~u TaFRauc~R.wplre^ wat1AMA.MORRav w3tUNF.M4lDLS• Fa7t(208)446dd05 MAR 2 fl ~ Tncem.nsL'waus+ 'Alm •dmitRd iv OR David McKinnon Meridian Planning & Zoning Department 660 E. W atertower lane Meridian, ID 83642 City Of Meridian ••AlnadmiebdinWA City Clerk Of(ice March 19, 2003 VL4 FASIMILS TRANSMISSION ]lie: Paramount Subdivisioa Dear David: It is my understanding based upon ow telephone conversation this morning that notice was not properly posted upon the applicable property for the Meridian Plamung and Zoning Commission's March 20a' hearings concerning the proposed Paramoum Subdivision (Items AZ 03-308, PP 03-004 and CUP 03-0OS). Meridian City Code $11-15-5 (A)(2) requires that prior to such hearing before the Plam:ing & Zoning Commission, the Applicant is required to post notice of hearing upon the properly under coasidetation one week prior to the hearing date. Further, Idaho Code §67- 6512(b)mandates that similar notice be posted. If it is the determination of the City of Meridian that notice was not properly posted one week prior to the March 20`~ hearing, it would be my advice to postpone aay and all public hearings concerning the Par~aarount application until such time as the aforementioned code sections are fully complied with. It is my understanding that the Applicant will be notified of this by your office. if you have any question or comment, please contact me. Sincerely, /f /~ a; Meridian City Clerk Nicholas L. Wollen Associate .Attorney, City of Meridian i~ a~ti~ Ql1bbG4bRlU.i:XHa NfTC?I71~~1 71iIJM:rtT ~c:ir i(1. FT/G'f1 l1Q7'ON 7'1Ta ~e a:ma sevrryyvt+ec~ WH[TE PETERSON av:t,t ~e. t,~ aces WHITE, PETERSON, MORROW, GIGRAY, RGS$MAN, NYE & ROSSMAN, P.A. to3vw Dbn~m g K>Bw ~~ M A'rIURNEYS AT1AW twtsroFe~K s. xrR ' wN. F. Gx+Rwr ta CANYON FARIC AT TItE mgRO CrxtErt Rmtp n Petr4esm+ , T. Dur xN.ui. • 6700G. FRa+toaN RD.. StntE 200 duce 5, Pwl.css !a1 S. HOLQVKA NAtwFq IDnlio83687 ERIC S, ROSSMAN U ShLAI®I.row+soN TEL (208)466.9272 TtmDA. ROSSFI/JJ 7~p,,apgy R. wFT,g.. WatWaA MGWRgW R'nSUN F, xrcRrns• Fa~(208J d6G-4405 NR7cOLnt L. Wrn~.F?I •AIRO Rdmilmd'w OR FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION Dates March 19, 2003 To: Will Berg, City Clerk City of Meridian Fax No.: 888-4218 From: Nicholas L. WolleNda Phone: 208-466-9272 No. of Pages: 2 x {rnclxding crn+ersheerJ COMMENTS: Paramount Subdivision Please see attached letter dated March 19, 2003 from Nicholas L. Wollea. " A4o Rdminod in WA This facsimile transmission (and/or the documents accompanying it) may comain esnfidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the ATTORNEY-CI.IENNT 1?RfVII,EGE. ]'his information is intended only for the use of the individual or emhy named above. If you are not the imeaded recipient, yes are hereby notified that any disclosure, espying, distribution or the taking of arty action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission In error, please immediazely notify us by telephone to amnge for return of the documents. If you do not receive all Pages, please tall Donna Q 118 as soon as possible az (208) 4ti6-9272. The original of this faxed document will cot be sent unless rogaated by the recipient 7 /T a~H~l Q(1hhQQDRN.r: kH-I Nf1C?lal~ri 711wM:R1 7.R: J.t R(1, F1/F(1 (1Q7.'oN a'li-I Memorandv~n Meridian Police Department March 19, 2003 TO: Dave McKinnon and Wendy Kirkpatrick FROM: Capt. Bill Musser ~,ECENED MAR 192003 city Of Meridian City Clerk Office Piz M{~. Ma~.+~ 2o,2cU~ l+e~ns 11, t2, 13 CC: Chief Worley RE: Review and Reeommendationsfnr AZ 03-006, PP 03-004 & CPU 03-008 Requests for Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat Request & Conditional Use Permit Application by Paramount, LLC for the proposed Paramount Subdivision. Hearing Date: o3~a2otls 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 proxiatity of a proposed high school lot adjacent to Linder Rd. between McMillan and Chinden. The major rural highways providing the egress and access need to be updated and improved to meet urban standards as part of this developmern now -not later. This is also consistent with the precepts outlined in the 2002 Meridian Comp Plan (Goal II, Objective A; Goal ID, Objective B: 2; and Goal IV, Objective A). The issue of transportation and roadways in particular 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. ~ Fatare School Growth: The proposed Paramount development includes a lot for a high school. It is understood that this would be a Meridian School District item and a separate developmern 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 particular 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 developmern plan. Memorandum Meridian Police Department Mazch 19, 2003 •~ Law Enforcement/Public Safety Assessment 1. Response Mmes for law enforcemem 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 Bh-ckcat 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 staffing is optimum. The only options available for response to or from the north end developments are going to be along the existing Waal 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 resuhing in response times in excess of 5 minutes. The addition of the proposed Pazamount development will exacerbate current conditions as police staffing is just now starting to approach levels consistent with a population base offorty-thousand spread over an area of 28 to 30 square miles. The Paramount developmem proposal coupled with developmens already 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 aurern 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 developmem 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 1; Objective A) and attempt to inf~ll as much as possible before extending services (Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A: 3 and Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C). While the Council has ah-eady approved other developments such as lochsa in the north and Tuscany in the south, the addition of fiuther developments in the outer regions of the impact area will exceed current police staffing levels. Public safety will be affected if large developments continue to be approved as they have in the past. The Meridian Police Department 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 area 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. ]a reviewing the current plan the developmern proposal as diagramed would be contrary to the precepts of crime prevernion through environmental design (OPTED). The current proposal places the garage and vehicular access at the reaz 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 adjacent to public roadways. "Guardian" presence can be described as the perception you are being watched -that yow actions can be seen by others or have the distinct potential to be; in planning terms it may be known 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 are problematic in regards to traffic. They also tend to present themselves as an attractive musance in that they draw children, who tend to play in them. Alleys usually prohibit, by the nature of the construction, cleaz vision of the alley way by residerns 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 department 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 pote~rtial crime impact inherent in the currem design. 3. The proposed but yet to be designed section adjacern 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. Tins 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 irlcome groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development (Objective A: Action 4). The 2002 Comprehensive Plan, in Chapter VII provides for an assessment of Iaw enforcement needs (Goal III, Objective A: Action 4). In the Paramount proposal applications we Snd the current design to be laclang in crime preventative elements, especially in the south east portion of the proposed development plan. The Meridian Police Departme~ recommends the applications not be approved as currently submitted in the current plans. MR/R-13-2003 f 01:04P FROM: Sant Lary Ser~icesr I 208-BBB-5052 ~1.AYOR Ruhcn D Conic TO: Meridian Clerk P:5~7 w..~~ i'; r NN ~ R T .•- carrov t`frrl`:I~F' , ~~ri~i~n ~.f ..`. v In.\HC) ~~ , ~ d LEGAL DEP.{RI'~~ItN I' goal Iaa-~.+~~~ • FJR IAN'I]III M11RI:j ~ RCCRQATIUN Ilne saaas-n, r,. A•w•ssol Pl al Ir-ooel.v (IfINl 99S•.SS(N)•Fo, 3a7 I'0' CITY COl'tiCtt, tIL•Ma[RS Tammy dc~~'ccrd W'ilh,lm L M nary CtICTIC ~tCCinOIL'S% I:,•nh ninl 6l.ILUIN(i ULYAR'1'SIISN'r (IO$1 SBi•III I • Yhz Y87.139? PLANNING .AND ZONING I IUM)XX~-553~• Fuz NXN•RX51 TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submh your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Clenc's Office Attn: WIII Berg, City Cleri(, by: March 13, 2003 Transmittal Date: February 10, 2003 Hearing Date: March 20, ZI File No.: PP 03-004 Request: Preliminary Plat approval of 764 building lots and 37 other in arooosed R-6, R•40, L-O ~ C-G zones for orooosed Para Location of Property or Projeq: west of North Melidlan Road and north on 392.17 acres pavid Zaremba, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Jeny Centers, P/Z (NO VAR, VAC. FP) t.eslle Mathes, P2 (NO VAR, VAC, FP) Michael Rohm. P2 (No VAR. VAC. FP) Keith Borup, P2 (No VAR, VAC, FP) Robert Come. Mayor Bill Nary, C(C Tammy Oeweerd, C/C Keith Bird, C/C Cherie McCandless, C/C Water Depanment ewer Department ~aniiary SeNlce (No VAR, VAC, FP) Building Depanment Fire Department Police Depanment City Attorney City Engineer City Planner Parks Oeparunent RECEIVED MAR 1 Z 2003 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office 33 EAST IAAUU • MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 I?08) 888.0533 • File (ZOS) 881-6813 City Clcrk Omtt Fit (208) 988.1218 Hwnnn Rcsourccs Fax (208) 268-r 193 Meridian School Dlstnct (No FP) Meridian Post Oiflce (FPiPP OMy) Ada County Highway D~SInCI Community Planning Assoc. Genlrel Distdct Health Nampa Mertdlan Irt1g. District Settlers Irrigation Dlstnct IdahOPOwerCO. (FPiPPonry) U.S. West (FPiPPony) Intermountain Gas (FP?PonryJ Bureau of ReGamation lFPiPP only) Idaho Transportation Department (NO FP) Ade County (AnnexaCon onry) Meridian Development Corporation - Historical Preservation Commission RECEI~TEi~ FEB 2 4 2~C3 City of Meridian City Clerk Officc i'2a~tfia & 7~~ ~~x;~yatiatc 2~ca.~icct 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 February 13,2003 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Will Berg, City Clerk City of Meridian 33 East Idaho -- _ . ~3"$3542---- -- - ---- - _ _ - ---- - - Re: PP 03-004 Preliminary Plat approval for proposed Paramount Subdivision Dear Commissioners: The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the above-mentioned application as it is out of our District. Sincerely, Bill Henson, Asst. Water Superintendent NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT BH/dll Cc: File -Shop File -Office Water Superintendent APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 NLavoR Ruhert D. Carrie CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Tammy dcWecrd William L. M. Nary Cheric McCandless ,,. • ~,; ~ ~ ~y k,~~ I ciTV or- 1 ~ ' ~~ C~ri~icn~ -~~ ~~`, IDAHO /~ ~ ~ ~ LEGAL DEPA RT~tENT QOS) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 PARKS & RECREATION (208 388-3179 • Fas 593-5501 PUBLIC W"ORKti (2081 39R-5500 •Fax 837-1297 BUILDING DEPARThIENT 1'208)887-2211 • Fax 387-1297 Keith Bird ~~ ` ~ sixes PLANNING AND ZONING - ~~ 190 (303) 88J-5533 • Fax 588-6851 TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Clerk's Office Attn: will Berg, City Clerk, by: March 13, 2003 Transmittal Date: February 70, 2003 Hearing Date: March 20, 2003 File No.: PP 03-004 Request: Preliminary Plat approval of 764 building lots and 37 other lots on 392.'17 acres in oroaosed R-8, R-40, L-O & C-G zones for proposed Paramount Subdivision By: Paramount, LLC Location of Property or Project: west of North Meridian Road and north of West McMillan Road David Zaremba, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Jerry Centers, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Leslie Mathes, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Michael Rohm, P/Z (No VAR, VAC, FP) Keith BofUp, P2 (No VAR, VAC, FP) Robert Come, Mayar Bill Nary, C/C Tammy deWeerd, C/C Kekh Bird, C/C Cherie McCandless, C/C ter Department Sewer Department Sanitary Service (No VAR, VAC, FP) Building Department Fire Department Police Department City Attorney City Engineer City Planner Parks Department Historical Preservation Commission City Of Meridian CITY ®F MERIDL~IV City Clerk Oflfice WASTEWATER. DEBT. Meridian School District (No FP) Meridian Post Office (FP/PP only) Ada County Highway District Community Planning Assoc. Central District Heakh Nampa Meridian brig. District Settlers Irrigation District Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP only) U.S. West (FPiPP only) Intermountain Gas (FPiPP Dory) Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP ~~ty) Idaho Transportation Department (No FP) Ada County (Annexatrononly) Meridian Development Corporation 33 EAST IDAHO • MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887.4813 City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888.4218 Human Resources Fax (208) 288-1193 FEB i 1 2003 ~ ' ' ` ' PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE March 20, 2003 ~cE~D MAR 2 0 2003 CITY OF iV1ERIDIAN PROJECT NUMBER PP 03-004 PROJECT NAME Paramount Subdivision NAME FOR AGAINST