Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutI-84 Power Center AZ CUPOFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888.4433 • FAX (208) 887.4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAXYERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COM E MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITYOF To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning &I Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700 000 square foot retail nro'ect BY: Langly Associates Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of I-84 and Eaale Road Interchan e JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORNEY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: i 1: Zj1 March 27, 1995 Shari L. Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: 1-84 Center Annexation and Zoning and Conditional Use Permit Dear Shari, We have enclosed the necessary information to initiate the process of Annexing and Zoning the approximately 73.5 acres in the southeast quadrant of 1-84 and Eagle Road. We are also submitting an application for a Conditional Use Permit for this property. It is our understanding that the City of Meridian will annex the adjacent portion of the Interstate and the Eastbound on-ramp to the Interstate that was not annexed when the St. Luke's property was annexed. We still need to work with the City and State to determine the appropriate legal description for the entire annexation. We will commence the Traffic Impact Study as required by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) in time to have the ACHD report to you by May 5, 1995. Because we are working on a relatively tight time frame with ACHD it is possible that they will not have responded by this date. We would like to be on the May 9, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda even if the ACHD report is not complete. We have discussed with Jeff Hall of St. Luke's Hospital, the hospital's concern that the properties on and near the Eagle Road interchange be developed in a manner that will be complementary to their quality medical campus. We anticipate selling from one-third to one-half of our acreage to major retailers. We will develop and retain the balance of the stores. Consequently, we are very concerned about the quality and aesthetics of the 1-84 Center. Langiy Associates. !Nc. 999 Laks Drive :Udh :i 4 (',27 Page 2 March 27, 1995 To assure a quality development, the center will be governed by a nonprofit corporation having a board of directors and operating under a detailed set of recorded covenants which assure quality maintenance and operation of the center as well as governing the appearance and quality of the improvements. The corporation, essentially an owners' association similar in nature to the owners' association of a condominium complex, has the power to assess its retail members for operating and maintenance costs. In addition to meeting city requirements, retailers will be required to submit their designs to the association through its architectural review committee. The committee will have detailed written design guidelines. Architecture must be consistent with the design intent of the center and be harmonious with other buildings within the center. Lighting for the building and parking areas will be specified to be consistent with other areas and provide a defined level of illumination. Landscaping will be reviewed for size and species of materials, irrigation design and maintainability. Building signage will be required to be individual channelized letters with internal lighting and will be reviewed for size, type and color. Common area signage such as traffic directional signs must be consistent throughout the center. Service areas must be screened and located in areas as inconspicuous as possible. Increased levels of landscaping will also be required to screen service areas. We look forward to working with the City of Meridian to create a retail center that will be an asset to your City. Sincerely, Russell C. Keithly Principal enclosures Enclosure WORD\RCK\STILES CITY OF MERIDIAN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Langly Associates, Inc. PHONE 206-391-6600 NAME:-- ADDRESS: 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300, Issaquah, WA 98027 GENERAL LOCATION: Same DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: A retail project of approximately 700,000 square feet ZONING CLASSIFICATION: General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) PLAN: A plan of the proposed site for the conditional use and showing the location of all buildings, parking loading areas, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces, landscaping, refuse and service areas, utilities, signs and yards. LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to established procedure, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a Public Hearing in the Meridian City Hall on at The purpose of the Hearing is to consider a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT submitted by for the property generally described as located at SUBDIVISION BLOCK LOT NUMBER TO CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION 1-84 CENTER SE CORNER, EAGLE ROAD AND 1-84 The following information is provided as a portion of the submittal of the Conditional Use Application to the City of Meridian for the subject property. The information is organized in the sequential order established in the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 1. Applicant: Langly Associates Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 206-391-6600 (fax 206-391-9030) Contact Person: Russell C. Keithly 2. Owners: Attachment I 3. Legal Description: Attachment 2 4. Proof of Ownership Of Subject Property: Attachment 3 5. Description of Existing Use: The property is predominantly utilized for agricultural purposes. There is one single family home on thewest a of t e propeal rty (the Rackham mated residence). The approximately entry road crosses the eastern most portion of an acreage that has one single family home (the Delores Hartman residence). 6. Present Use of Subject Property: See number 5 above. 7. Proposed Use of the Subject Property: It is proposed that a retail center of approximately 700,000 square feet be developed on this site. The type of center proposed is a relatively new concept called a "Power Center." Attachment 4 is a generic description of a Power Center prepared by the international real estate consulting firm of Jones Lang Wooten. The categories of tenants anticipated to be located in the 1-84 Center are found in Attachment 5. The examples of specific stores are for explanatory purposes only. Conditional Use Application Page 2 8. Vicinity Maps: Attachment 6. 9. Characteristics of subject property which make the conditional use desirable: The property is located at one of the most prominent intersections in the area. 1-84 currently has approximately 63,000 trips per day at Eagle Road. Eagle Road north of 1-84 has approximately 23,000 trips per day. State Highway 55 becomes Highway 95 and is the major North/South highway in the state. Eagle Road/Highway 55 is currently five lanes from Overland Road to Fairview Avenue. During 1995 this highway will be expanded to five lanes from Fairview north, past the City of Eagle. At the completion of that construction, Eagle Road is expected to become the major North/South thoroughfare in Treasure Valley. The above facts are acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan by prioritizing the commercial development of the property in the immediate vicinity of and including the subject property. Section 5.15V of the Comprehensive Plan states: The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/Eagle Road/1-84 interchange is a priority development area. 10. List of Mailing addresses of property owners within 300 feet: Attachment 7 11. Fee Calculation: $275 + (40 X $1.29) _ $326.60 ATTACHMENT 1 OWNERS OF RECORD The Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust Virginia Jennison Trustee 4511 North Linda Vista Boise, ID 83704 (206) 375-1070 Rackham L.L.C. c/o Lawrence H. Rackham 1260 South Eagle Road Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 888-1383 Dolores M. Hartman 3520 East Overland Road Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 888-1642 ATTACHMENT 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OLIASON PROPERTY North one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, in Ada County, Idaho; together with all water rights and ditch rights thereunto belonging including Certificate No. 2254 for 60 shares in the New York Canal Company; EXCEPTING THEREFROM the property taken by the State of Idaho for the construction of Interstate Highway Project No. I -80N-1 (28) 45 between Station 2428+40.52 to Station 2455+60.04 described in that Judgment and Decree of Condemnation dated July 29,1965, recorded August 20, 1965 as Instrument No. 619430, records of Ada County, Idaho; and EXCEPT THEREOF the property taken by the State of Idaho for the construction of that a certain public highway known as Interstate 84, Project IR -84-1(12)45 between Highway Station 2423+86.30 to 2448+64.82, described in that Second Judgment and Decree of Condemnation dated June 25, 1990, recorded July 2, 1990 as Instrument No. 9034963, records of Ada County, Idaho. RACKHAM PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1 A parcel of land in the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in T. 3N., R. 1E., B. M., and 1,325.8 feet North of the Section Corner commons to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence South 88037' East, 740.5 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence South 88037' East, 599.0 feet; thence South 0°12' West. 363.6 feet; thence North 88037' West, 599.0 feet; thence North 0012' East, 363.6 feet to the real Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 5.00 acres. Attachment 2 Page 2 Parcel No. 2 A parcel of land in the SWuarter of the S#W quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in T. 3 N., Rs 16, , and 0 and 2 8 thence feet North of the Section Corner common to Sec on South ° East 755.43 feet; thence South East, 28.24 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence South 88037' East, 570.76 feet; thence South 0°12' West, 504.55 feet; thence North 79059' West, 284.06 feet; thence North 75020' West, 197.68 feet; thence North 60034' West 112.37 feet; thence North 363.64 feet to the Real Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 5.92 acres, more or less. PARCEL NO. 3 A parcel of land in the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in Township 3 NmtSections 16, 16, 17 n 0 and 21;ad 1.100.8 feet thencerth of the Section Corner common South 78003' East, 755.43 feet; thence South 88037' East 28.24 feet; thence South 50.96 feet' thence North 88037' West, 28.14 feet; thence North 78003' West 77.43 feet; thence North 51.11 feet to the Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 0.9 acres, more or less. Attachment 2 Page 3 PARCEL NO.4 A parcel of land in the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise, Meridian, in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in TownshNorth of he Section Corner comme 1 on to Sections Meridian, 0 nd 1,325.8 feet and 21; thence South 88037' East 740.5 feet; thence South 0°12' West 363.6 feet; thence North 78003' West 755.43 feet; thence North 225.0 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 5 A parcel of land in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 16, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B. M., in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, in T. 3 N., R, 1 E., B. M., and 887.0 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence North along the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, a distance of 162.69 feet; thence South 78003' East, 755.43 feet; thence South 88037' East, 28.14 feet; thence South 312.68 feet; thence North 60034' West, 72.07 feet; thence North 77059' West, 209.34 feet, thence South 74013'West, 103.96 feet, thence North 83008' North 50039' West, West, 102.65 feet, thence 385.0 feet to the Real Point of Beginning Said parcel containing 5.00 acres, more or less. Attachment 2 Page 4 HARTMAN PROPERTY The east 140.00 of the following described property: Commencing at the southwest corner of the southwest quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., thence South 88°34' East 1102.57 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence North 0010' East 492.65 feet; thence South 79159' East 234.23; thence South 0°12' West 458.75 feet; thence North 88034' West 230.1 feet to the Beginning; except the South 30 feet thereof for County Road. ATTACHMENT 3 PROOF OF OWNERSHIP 1733000336 R DEED FOR VALUE RECEIVED, RECEIPT OF WHICH IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED, DORIS KATHLEEN OLIASON DOES HEREBY AND HEREWITH GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL AND CONVEY UNTO DORIS KATHLEEN OLIASUN AS TRUSTEE OF THE DORIS KATHLEEN OL"ASON FAMILY TRUST, IN TRUST, THE FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY, TO WIT: HER INTEREST IN: AT %IRT OF THE Ni OF THE SW: OF EC. , T3N, RlE, OF B.M., LYING SOUTH OF INTERSTATE BO N., AND EAST OF EAGLE ROAD AND THE ON RAMP TO INTERSTATE 80 N. AT EAGLE ROAD, � ALL !NADA COUNTY IDA DATED: (Vst;�:K lk ( DORIS KATHLEEN OLIASON _ STATE OF IDAHO > COUNTY OF ADA ON THIS DAY OF 0C 1991, 1991, BEFORE ME, A NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO, PERSONALLY APPEARED DORIS KATHLEEN OLIASON, KNOWN TO ME TO BE THE PERSON WHO EXECUTED THE ABOVE . SIGNATURE, AND SHE ACKNOWLEDGED EXECUTING THE SAME. µf { DATED: /D - 16 - IDAHO NOTARY PUBLIC' „ ' / •'� a COMMISSION EXPIRES:8�4 Uq]k411 � m, !-7) z `t0�%t�t3 9`4046656 �„uCi� J .%E �•, r, , J.O..z,. � J - S'i f irir2�iS ► nix,, i3 , t'; 3 FEEFEE O RECOi.__. - �= -- r...... _ST t v RECOR:;_. o t7 ti1 C ,' rr ry o -i Q -n G, .�z0 4MUsZ,; -� Zl ti133 M..4 O 9 If 0 '1 r 1, ,, 1:1 J 0 U J. L r PERSONAL, REPRESEN'TATIVE'S DEED The undersigned, VIRGINIA JENNISON, as surviving Personal Representative of the Estate of. Emelia L', oliason, deceased, pursuant to_the Decree of Dis!ribution dated May r 1994, does hereby grant and convey, _without warranty, 60% thereof to Doris O1?.ason of 603 E. Pine, Mere Ian,a o 83642, 35$ thereof to Virginia Jennison of 4511 N. Linda Vista Lane, Boise, Idaho 83704, and 5% thereof to Kenneth E. Oliason of 5110 Hill Road, Boise, Idaho 83703, all ofdecedent=-s—ons=lu]f interest in and to the following described_ real property situate in Ada Count:-, Idaho: North One-half .;f the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1. East of the Boise Mei idian, in Ada County, Idaho; together with all crater rights and ditch rights thereunto belonging including Certificate No. 2254 for 60 shares in the New York Canal Company; EXCEPTING THEREFROM the property taken by the Sta_e of Idaho for the construction of Interstate Highway Project 11o. I -80N-1(28)45 between Station 2428+40.52 to Station 2455+60.04,. described in that Judgment and Decree of Condemnation dated July 29, 1965, recorded August ;0, 1965 as Instrument No. 619430, records of Ada County, Idaho; and EXCEPT THEREOF the property taken by the State of Idaho for the construction of that a certain public highway known as Interstate 84, Project IR -84-1(12)45 _ between Highway Station 2423+86.30 to 2449+64.81, described in that Second Judgment and Decree of Condelrl- nasion dated June 25, 1990, recorded July 2, 1C90 as Instrument No. 9032249631, records of Ada County, Idaho. DATED this /J Gf� day of May, 1994. _ �f�C.c.J/✓121-c1J �G .--� VIR( I1 A JEN?7IS0-1 /as Survivi.iq Personal Repres ntative of the Estatt of Emelia P. Oliasc", AS at'! ll - FI ..... ....,_ _ . ...._.._ ....__.... ham^ _ i' tip ;�' ' - ...j }1 t1 • - ['I:RSOtif�! 1.L!'Ri:SI::� t ��"I [�'L•'S DEED e k:. I1 0UU1(;;3U STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this /29 day of May, in the year 1994, before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for said State, personally' appeared VIRGI14IA JENNISON, Surviving Personal Representative of the Estate of Emelia P. Oliason, deceased, known or identified to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same as such Personal Representative. III WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the dal and year in this certificate first above written. ,,rrrrrrrrrrr V) A ��, NC, y ublic� for Idaho �-, Z o = ResiJing at Boise, Idaho L -442!z = My Commission Expires: v 99 n PERSONAL RFf'RFSEN"T'ATIVFS U}'I"I) - WARRAN'T'Y DEED 9009868 For Value Received ROY L. VANCE and NORMA G. VANCE, husband and wife, NELSON D. REYNOLDS and DELORES REYNOLDS, husbanu andwife, KEITH C. CHASE and TRUDY CHASE, husband and wife, and BURTON L. WAITE and JERRILYN L. WAITE, husband and wife, the grantors , do hereby grant, bargain, .ell and convey unto LAWRENCE H. RACKHAM and J'DEANNE F. RACKHAM husband and w-Ife, the grantee s ,whose current ad(lrecs is x•260 South Eagle eta. ,ieridian, Idaho 33642 the followin described premises, in ADA County Idahn, to -wit: A parcel of land in the.SW 1/4 of the SWI/4 of Section 16, T. 3 N., R. 1. E., _ B. M., in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as foi:ows: Beginning at a point on die Section Line common to Sections 16 an.j 17, �n T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B. M., and 887.0 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence North along the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, a di;:::ice of 162.69 feet; thence °oeth 78'03' East, 755.43 feet; thence Sosth 88037' East, 28.14 feet; thence South 31) 68 feet; thence 1 North 60V334' West, 72.07 feet: thence North 77059' West, 209.3.1 feet; thence South 74°13' West, 103.96 feet; thenca North 830OS' West, 1102.65 feet; thence North 50039' West, 385.0 feet to Che Real Point of Begin^ Said parcel containing 5.010 acres, more or'-ess. / - 1 1 i TO HAVE ANI) TO HOLT) the ,.:J {rrm::c\. With "r.tl..:r••I:::r. -,:. thr / h[•:rt anJ J\,aww::c for::cr. :\nJ •.. .o \.I,d tir..rt..rg '.I,:r'•y Willi the \at.e rJntCr1 th:l( 1.::ti'.�t3 t'�r 11N n'.•:j1:1 :r\I r n:p1 .•i (nit all incunllirana•, a\cCpt t:.\Cs for 19-1'9 and t1:�TC3ft�r. ant: that 01y VIII tract int and ,lett^,! tr,r \Jr. t :rmn as la [C::I S : t r :a.:t: tiatc.tt Noyc'mber 21, 1978• ST\TF: OF IU.\HO COUNT) OF Ada ATF. OF It >:ii•. :'NT1' Of Un the ;Z 7 Nov. l!,7S I h•...lt. n r::' a• • Ir.•t ry t .a. ^ '�rcoyd f;J „�r�/ h, ralr me, a nn:ary public ut and r..r,a,d Star, p: rs••r.a i; �• ..r r..;ue•t r-t<:.�..ti11 �����✓t�,/GAi �'�"%�= .,pyrire•i Roy L;..Vancc, Norma G. Vance, Nelson llt r Ae itol&0. lows Remolds, a z Kcith Gi ;f .iaa,g.�e,r -Trudv Chase, Burton L. r • - ! J,` L. •Waite, my nF:�'� du'y r,•rnrdrd r. "!. ` z i�aitc:�Vc{J� f y ; �•. n ' . •• .. .•f '1 do at DaFr i i,nc ;i�:J•me�o�tjt�r.h"Ist, _'`%; - "Fe narn are ¢• . id\A lhiq ins 3•amrnq and ac:no-iedcrd to m'e that .-✓' Nev., _ , earcu:r,t the [ame. <. Notary Pubic Boise Idaho JJHN BASTIDA Es-01.1rio ttrrnrder Fees S / Mall tc. r,!� .. .. -.. � Vii,,. ��.4s' -.'�.: �.F tdlr, Y\[=•� 70 ITS LCG�.w t✓�v, .�`. WA NtY btED E f sm; For value ltmlvod JOIIN L. I:SKULIN, )K, and 17ONA J, USKIMIN, huldwind and wlfo, the OWN" , do herelw ItreNk IMt1111IN Nil and eeNvv uNM. LAWHUNCH 11. 14AUKIIAKI and PURANNIJ It, KA(MIAM, tuilim"3 mid wltu, the INAW " , whore current address i1 P. O. Om 8823, Boise, Idaho 83707, the followint described pnmlae4 in ADA County Idaho, to -wit: legal attached r 70 HAVE AND TO HOLD the eai' Nmuheq with their apportenamm unto the said Grantees , their belra and &Ukm fortier. And the said Grantees do hereby covenant to and !r m W lsaid��se �Y r1 oweas In fee simPle of Said promises; that they are free except razes for 1976 and thereafter, and that t bey will warrant and ad"d tM Same from all IswfW claims whatsoever Dated: June 22, 1976. MAIN �.Ojl U#Irr alp V ;W >_. t+.b.ri me, aal.r Juno , tr76. "'ea �M�dtn L.Us eOW H"kelln an aw `l 130nS ). Skvlln, Jr. anJ t,'i. �llsi%�■i►r ---�z:..s arc— - •they -SWAW dw am& 0 ar-t 'R or IOAtitl, CQUNn 0r 1 U.Mr .Vats " 40"W" l W WoeWoes"Mad t�.d a Woes" of I it %4*4 t,,, of ' "leen Poo it 1I„ tolee+ day of is Apt. is ms 611m, eM der "Whw in 5 AMIN& at Pa" I; J DASTIDA � 4 x P P., 7 . r 70 HAVE AND TO HOLD the eai' Nmuheq with their apportenamm unto the said Grantees , their belra and &Ukm fortier. And the said Grantees do hereby covenant to and !r m W lsaid��se �Y r1 oweas In fee simPle of Said promises; that they are free except razes for 1976 and thereafter, and that t bey will warrant and ad"d tM Same from all IswfW claims whatsoever Dated: June 22, 1976. MAIN �.Ojl U#Irr alp V ;W >_. t+.b.ri me, aal.r Juno , tr76. "'ea �M�dtn L.Us eOW H"kelln an aw `l 130nS ). Skvlln, Jr. anJ t,'i. �llsi%�■i►r ---�z:..s arc— - •they -SWAW dw am& 0 ar-t 'R or IOAtitl, CQUNn 0r 1 U.Mr .Vats " 40"W" l W WoeWoes"Mad t�.d a Woes" of I it %4*4 t,,, of ' "leen Poo it 1I„ tolee+ day of is Apt. is ms 611m, eM der "Whw in 5 AMIN& at Pa" I; J DASTIDA � 4 x P 77! vf 711 V4 ��� � ugh � r•. • • • Aqp PARCEL No. l: A parcel of land In the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, 8. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly i described as follor�e: ttit.innin ilt a point on the Sxtion "'no eotnmon to 800110110 16 and 17 m n 3 ec on I i3., tl. M. and 1, 325,8 foot North of the Section Corner cumu ;. mon to Sac South l 17 20 and 211 dwnty mouth 88037iasn4t-40. b mouth 88°87'9990 feet to thea R 1Point d Beginning; thence 0"' feet; thence 363.6 t r ' dwnce South �rdi 88�7WWeze4s 5".0 ff�, thence North 0012 Ease, 363.6 feet to the Real Point of Beginning. Salt parcel . P contains 5.00 acres. PARCEL NO. 2: Township 3 No th,R at�o it East,, S. quarter., ds of a SW quarter Idahor of Soaclon 16, cu descrilidd an follows tY ,mato particularly Ourinnin ata pp�int on the Section Lino common to Sections t o n S N.; It. 1 �r 8. M., and 1,100.8 teat North of tate Section�Cornernc.om- y 11011 to Sections 1 17 20 and 21: thence �. South 78 ' gast 755.43 feet; South 88° t th 37'a t, 28 Z4 feet to the heal Point of Beginning; thence " South 880j?, East, 375 76 feet thence i. &0th 0" West, 504. SS foot; thence North 7959 West. 284.06 feet thence . • North 75°20' West, 197.68 feet thence l North 60034' West, 112.37 feet thence North 363.64 feet to the Real Point of Beginning. : • Said parcel contains 5.92 acres, more or less. PARCEL NO_ 3_ ;t • A parcel of land in die SW Ran quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North described as follows: 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to y In Township 3 North, R. 1 E. 8. M. and 1 100.8 feet Norte g�u�17 • 1. Corner common to Sections la, 17, 25 and 1 thence South 780°03 East, 755.43 foot; n j+ South 88 37 East, 28.24 feet tthehencece &uth 50�96 fear thenco Nardi 88�37� West, 28.14 foot; thence North 78 03 West 755.43 feet, thence North 51.11 feet to the Paint of Beginning. Said parcel contains 0.9 acres, more or less. I W WARRANTY DEED For V11111r It,•ceived111.110 A. 111111EK and ,III -maty 11. IIl11tCR, huslland and wife, the gtantnrs , du her.:by grant, bargain, sell and convey unto IAWRL iACKIIMnddahoDLAIRIE F. RACY.HAM, husband and wife, of 1260 South kq Road. Meridian, the grantee s, the following described premises, to•wit:..........Adi1. ••..._.......••.•••••••• •County Idaho, to wit: A parcel of land in the Southwest quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16. Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise, Meridian, in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise, Meridian, and 1,325.8 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21, thence feet;South 880371 East 740.5 thence South et North 78003' West 755.43fact;thenceNorth 0 012' West 3� 225.0 feettotheePOINThOFC3 BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH all and singular the tenemen+s, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining and SUBJECT to all easements for ditches, irrigation purposes, roads and other utilities or easements appearing on said land and subject to recorded covenants and restrictions on said real property. SUBJECT to a Mortgage to secure an indebtedness of $35,000.00, recorded June 4, 1971 as Instrument No. 772327, Official Records. Dated June 3, 1971. Mortgagor: HOME FEDERAL SAVINGS JOH;l L. ESKELIN, JR. and DONA J. ESKELIN, husband and wife; MortgaS AAD LOAN ASSOCIATION OFeNAMPA, a ^ corporation. THP' r '� ! ' CG r 1 r nR LG'.: hi t•rr�i:ib �.i :t TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenort w unto the sale •+wave— • AM their Mein atlldtlw yanar r e the owner nd thes said fee simple of sad prromisw�thate am with the said Grant" S, premises are free from all incumbrances sed that the y wW warrant and defend the some from oN lawful elaime what"OV41r. Dated: August S. 1975- / i ' ► A 'ff Y A. QOBER STATC Of IUAI10. COUNTY Oy Ada 00 Iso • .. r i . day of August • 1e 75 Mfere no. a nMarl' VvNte In sad r•► •eId stele. V•"eeelly oppeied HEHP.Y A. HUBER and SHERRY R. HUBER husband an! wife. W b• IM PROW.,► S wbe so 11606 f aro we«011#411 I. Ike 0oin 10,04rweeel, ■nd aheewa/red to ,we Ike, , t 114 eeesvled the "me X@,W144 04 Ifu I Se , Id.he sTATH or IDAHO. COUNTY OF «4"4- 1 hereby certify that this ineirameat wu AMd for roeerli et ON vq-;ti .: ► M1a)A#a Md C • eil.el Q. a � f Myr CC` .•..a•�' . Iva , W '� 't ISM Sfte, aed ply IPIW d la tieeli .I ,.d• .1 pe. se•OAt•Io Meerier I Y, Ica / / ` •' � , WARRANTY DEED 9009868 For Value Received ROY L. VANCE and NORMA G. VANCE, husband and wife, NELSON D. REYNOLDS and DELORES REYNOLDS, husband and wife, KEITH C. CHASE and TRUDY CHASE, husband and wife, and BURTON L. WAITE and JERRILYN L. WAiTE, husband and wife, he granters . do hereby grant. hargain, %cll and lonvey unto LAWRENCE H. RACKHAM and J'DEANNE F. RACKHAM, husband and wife, the grantees , whose currfnt address is 1260 South Eagle Nd. Meridian, Idaho $3642 r y the following described gensism In yW r^ `y v ADA..r a County Idaho tyo-wltt 'f^rx- 'av A parcel of land in the. SW 1/4 of the SWI/4 of Section 16, T. 3 N., R. 1. E., B. M., in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly descriLed as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, in T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B. M., and 887.0 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence North along the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, a distance of 162.69 feet; thence South 78003' East, 755.43 feet; thence South 88037' East, 28.14 feet; thence South 314 68 feet, thence North 60 34' West, 72.07 feet; thence North 77059' West, 209.34 feet; thence I South 74013' West, 103.96 feet thence North 83008' West,' 102.65 feet, thence North 50039' West, 385.0 feet to the Real Point of Beginning. I Said parcel containing 5.00 acres, more or less. �r TO HAVF kvn TO HOLD :�c .yid... .ch :`ca lipuricnan,;m unto the said Grantees their heirs and assigns forever.' And the vud Grantors do herchy covenant to and with the said Grantees . that hlya8he owners ut lec,imple nl vld premia: that they are free from all incumbrances except taxes for 1979 and thereafter, and that they will warrant and defend the ume from all lawful : m Itatwev . t Daae ' , Novegiber 21, 1978. X-C STATE OF IDAHO, COUNTY OF Ada On this A % day °r Nov. . 1478 . Woreme, a notary public in and for said :Italy, per•..nally app.. I Ro Uzi Vance, Norma G. Vane rATF. OF IDAHO. COUNTY I h—by r. rtnfth.1 thi+ in at 4elsofi D . ey"ld4; Delores Reynolds, u' nutea -/y •' Celt; Qt `- II ,' ,Trudy Chase, Burton 1.. u-. 7 d•r •r •13>la ; i L Waite, t y y(/ to mr ° T, coir reeerdid is 'G T j• rf Ly ' •l!: ^ .,f at pane nsm.s are JOHN QASTtDA {Ituqusestj and aek—imicad V mi chit ..�"• IStR: t. i>:eevt•d the owe. a•OTeM Mcar" w 8 }t"J `�.,,,;.✓��l �'- Netarr 11tbr;e -� w:a+;ta�•f 9F ,.� - Boise t..h. Fees mail In: INSTRUMENT No. QUITCLAIM DEED 8930313 For Value Received Dolores M. Hartr^an do hereby convey, release, remise arid forever quit claim unto Willian E. and Dolores M. Har.=an the fc•:Ming described premises, to -wit: 35%D Z. Gvs.la-d Road, Ma idian, 10 33642 CO'_•i SW COR SW QTR. SEC 16 3N IE,TH S 88*34'E 1102.57 FT TO ?22; TE N 0*10' E 492.65 FT,TH S 79*59'E 234.23 FT,TH S 0*121W 453.75 FT,TH N 88*34'W 230.1 FT TO BEG TM,s 0"'Y IRAN THS C3 r,..,i7p C. r; of F _.j It`d Together with their appurtenances. Dated: r _ , SMkT : �coLN-:z of On th ✓ `!% dap c: J/:'rte . .,efore rne, a notary public in and for said State, persona appeatea •k!'o•.%Ptn me tu'cc the Gerson who name � eAtb t::6 wat4m in_:rt.::a-t. and acnnow'C! -__ to t:.wt lic �• t �' �.J .�3 G EiATE OF ID P0. COL'\"i" OF e: /2 ✓ I Hereby cera`.- that t;.i� ..._:rumen: w'as ied for :eco... a: n the request of at �:� minutes past �:. ' o'ckck . 'he in :^}• office. and dui.: reco: de= of needs 3t z ---_e JOHN A SIMS � Ex•0� ,ao "e':cyder.-, �. � By. n I'D .�i ✓ . fawv IR -ANY HER, 19 jqj 4777 fr aA WF 314 . fawv IR -ANY HER, 19 jqj 4777 fr aA WF 461 1891 in SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Section 16. )rrx1 Ri:e.r A tract of land located the T. 3 N., R. 1.E.I'M. laying in Ada County, State of Idaho more particulary described as follows;: Commencing at the section corner -cm m the -Section. -16, f 17, 20 and 21. T. 3 N., R. 1 E.,`B.M: thence.S 880 34' E. �;f Y along the south boundary Iino,ofiSection-l6►:.T. 3 N., R..l E., •• M: distance of 1102.57 feetto the real point-of'beginning; a F ' ; thence N 0° 10' E. a distance of 492:65 . feet:;to: a.::point; thence 1.; S 79. 59' E. a di stance 'of 234.23 to. a .point;' thence S 0• . , .feet, ;'�`'•'. }j `12 ' W a distance of 458:75 feet; to a point;,thence: N.88. 34' W. it a distance of 230.10 feet to the .real: point of. beginnings .�.�•�•••: a ,•:� 1 IkM L �• v7�y. �> r.i r . . } ± ` y5 LS � {, \. it � I i� 1 T •: Zwf �� at `n • -,j: t� �:i: r. .,. _i..S,':w .ti,k, .',: �,iL`, a.{�ili�_,�£6':it.r�►�._i.i ..tea, ,� � �C i ' ::_. .. ,..a.,... :tr ._ li.....::�...! = r,�,.., ... M tqM ^.) .moi.♦ *l• +III i�'7 �r .F awl .•• �, (... i r 1.1 i>ti T.J,•r "�'1 :• VAtt V 104 =0 w AM tl !•iii r T 14� '' -fN�dfwtxANN1IN114ndN ..�. ,�.. . )rrx1 Ri:e.r PLO* ' •• it 4 �t k'�•j�t' �; wT^1.= cZ.•�{�}.•n!`.f�: ._ .. �� at `n • -,j: t� �:i: r. .,. _i..S,':w .ti,k, .',: �,iL`, a.{�ili�_,�£6':it.r�►�._i.i ..tea, ,� � �C i ' ::_. .. ,..a.,... :tr ._ li.....::�...! iu�► 1 i 2� , WARRANTY UEEI) ' %dSi�reU J! �• day 7r c���q7� in the of THIS INDENTURE, Made this ..%�' � between GARRYL H • year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and seventy MARION A eWWINES and IONA WINES, husband and wife, WINES and MARION WINES, parties of the first part► and husband and wife, and RUTH M • WINKLER, a widow, the Pa ' husband and wife, the parties of the WILLIAM E. HARTMAN and DOLOREg HARTMAN► X second part• WITNESSETH, That the said parties of the first part, for and in conslderatlon y� lawful money of the DOLLARS ($I().00), of the sum of TEN AND N0/100 - ; Yr i� States of America, and other valuable consideration to them in hand paid United acknowledged, the said parties of the second part, the receipt whereas is hereby these presents do grant, bargain, sell, have granted, bargained and sold, and by ;. itiee of the second part, and to their heirs and",, �.,,.. convey and confirm unto the said Pa 1 estate, situated in the County assigns forever, all of the following described res `i, of Ada, State of Idaho, tc-wits A i the SWC of the SWC Section 16,.x' to A tract of land locate n Qouaty. State of 8. M• laying in.Jlsla �� Id 3 N., R. 1rtticularlY described as iollowst Idaho more pa .�'i ; f `4 Commencing at the section o 8 e� o h�rce 8 88. 341 g 6along . TO and 11, T. 3 N.1 1 g., 8. M. e 3V this south boundary line of section 16, frit of beginnings thence 9 i. a distance of 837.67 foot to the real Point , thence S9 ` das* to , along said south obOUA r toot to a Point:id ion 16, 9� 3 ,._ R. 1 E., 8. �. a distaninti thence N 7; p• 10' C. a distance of 492.65 foetie athonoe N 75. 20' W. a W. a distance of 49.33 feet tc a po t W. a distance distance of 197.68 toot to a pointt thenoe N 60. 31 . a distance of 209.3 of 184.44 feet to A points thenoe N 77• S9' W toot to a points thence 8 746 distance of 02 65 toot to a a distance of 103.9 6 tpofnt s y° pointt thence N 83 08 W. point; thence thence 9 1. 13' W. a distance o! 110.10 foot tl a a distance of 261.30 feet to a points thence S 36. 66 03 C. pint of beginning. E. a distance of $17.00 feet to the real p f Ada I `,%. drainage easement recorded in the records- County, 'l'a County, Idaho, a171 and futurNo, Years,SO' and accruing tax+s and assessments for 9 WARRANTY,DECD A' vT 1(1: 1'726 TOGETHER, With all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof; and all A estate, right title and interest in and to the said property, as well in law as ini-, �« equity, of the said parties of the first part. i` •' TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, All and singular the above mentioned and. h described premises together with the appurtenances unto the parties of the second ' •'i c I t part, and to their heirs and assi Ins forever. :' -41' �. E And the parties of the first part, and their heirs, shall and will warrant and by these presents forever defend the premises in the quiet and peaceable ' P ossession of the parties of the second part, their heirs and assigns, against the parties of the first part, and their heirs, and against all and every person and persons whomsoever, lawfully claiming the same shall and will WARRANT and by these presents forever DEFEND, IN VV.TNESS WHEREOF, The said parties of the first part have hereto ;.:.a► �i -41 set their hands the day and year first above written. CARRYL H. WINES10 Ve MARION WINES MARION A. WINE IONA WINES RUTH M. WINKLER WARRANTY DEED - Z 1t A 7 1 i Ij. 102 , t STATE OF County of ) i, I Ion t On this day of in the year 19 71 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public In and for said State, personally appeared CARRYL H. WINES and MARION WINES, husband and wife, knmim to me to be th6'.� persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged.. � me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. �A Notary Public for the State of M' Re aiding Woommmwngomden.l$3e7v STATE OF ) County of On this aPlWday of �t� in the year 19 71 , before me-- e'the theundersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared: ^s MARION A. WINES and IONA WINES, husband and wife, known to me to be the %Cns�� i. whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that: they executed the same.; IN WITNESS W K.REOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my offi`6.31, seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public foAhe State of r• ` , C, Residing at; W*RRANTY DEED - 3 , a t STATE OF. Td Ni County of, iqdqm -1 On this 9 day of r t.&.m,6 e i- in the year 19 71 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared RUTH M. WINKLER, a widow, known to me to be the person whose name is isubscribed. to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that she executed the iame'6.. "4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my offlcial�*- seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for the State of =d~ Residing at: &4AWC11-i j! t. "TATE OF IDAHO, COUNTY OF Ab,,, Filed for record otthe request ofm-.4---I V*ske—KW1Z--dsy d.0 -1t J®r p CuARMU A. RAW haft. 00- j WARRANTY DEED - 4 Xt ny SitYl—CODt1fUN= PROPERTY AGREEMENT tm.w "d ro...�. b as.� t..ti C --"-T- a... '. 893031 - ,� y3 / CODIMLINITY PROPERTY. AGREEDSENT 'BE TWEEI6, HUSBAND AND WIFE 29th June E, �T'HI3 AGRN t SENT. Mar :and entered into this day of , usband and yby and betwee^ Nilliam E Hartman ,•.max .,s,.MDolores H. Earttoan. wife, relative to community property sand disposition thereof es hereto as provided by Section 1x-6.201, Idaho Code. r upon thadeatt of either of the paY.t p kx _ �'+. a a,�..n},• y•j I�-. 11A'nat E .Ci.t ii ' s Novemberl2l 1948 gnd ever parties were married -. Ancu have been and now are husband and wife. - r 2: We certify that the following described real and personal property was acquired by us from our joint efforts while married and while living together as husband and wife is a community property State, and that no part of said property owned by either of us prior to this marriage, or which :'either of us have acquired mince by gift, devise or as an heir at law of any person and that the same is the community property of the parties hereto S. The legal description of said real property covered by this agreement is as follows: 3520 E. Overland, Veridian, 1(:aho 83642 COH Sw CCH Sw.M SEC'16 3N 15, TAS 88.YO E 837.67 FT TO HPBiTH S 88.34' E264.90 >•r,Tx N 0.101 E 492.65 FT,TH N 79.59' w 49.33 'Tt 'ni N 75.20' w 197.68 FT, TA N 60.34' w 184,44 FT, TH It 77'59' w 209.34 :r. -H S 74.13' w 103.96 FI',TH N 83.08' w 102.65 �,TH S 1.13' w 140.10 FT,TH s 66.03' E 261.30 :FT,TH s 36'041 E 517 FT TO iG and COIL Sw COH Sw fTR SEC 16 3N lE,TH S 88.341E 1102.57 FT TO ?73; TK N 0.10' E 492.65 Fr,TH S 79.591E 234.?, FT,TH S o•12'w 458.75Fr , 1: 88.341w 230.1 �' -10 = s 4. The personal property affected by this agreement is described as follows: All personal property, in eluding but not limited to, automobiles, furniture and other househzld goods, bank accounts of any kind, stocks, bonds and investments of any kind, and all manner of chattels whatsoever, now in the possession of the parties to this agreement or each of the, or acquired by them or either of them in the future, is now and will remain community property and shall Lass under this agreement. 5. That upon the death of either of the parties hereto the property described herein shall vest in the survivor absolutely subject to thelabtlities imposed by Section 15.6.201, Idaho Code. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The parties have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. AM CouM.y,*!14L.o1TIME DATE / // ✓ H Jot+N aAST1aA RE DER (% tt,se beouty STATE 0: IDAHO, ss. County of } On•this-1:"� ,, ��- -�1 day oL 19 J %% before me the un_ dersigne3, a / Notary Pgb_lie.iin_and for said State, personally appeared '*t hugliand `d � t- S A. ' te-e� m''4IJ Rife, known to a:e to be the persons whose namca t .�� "•ecuted the same. are subsaribed�to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they ex Notari Public for Idaho, t. 1� r..,�,�.L;.�•'i �CC'Y IS FUR, -- AS AN Reaiorng a* �'<,%� Idaho A.` �O4TS EFFECT, ki �:i�ci�.P•s'��iEOPvt� �C�N— 771 �Z 71 1111 3 10 re 6 3 (0 MAR 2 7 1991 State of Idaho tp;l�.,JUN 15 Pel 12 50 CERTIFICATE OF DEHI fl -State File No 146" +. .<v.c •nrc�r.•u.•.r:w.•.s•+'[n y+.r.r.rr..,...r.w...rr."•,.:.r.,,.cu....•.. Local Reg. No. OECCDEN, - —1 car • •••• �•w•. • • st. cwt a oEaN.r>« a. w. -. 10iLLiam 'Qi u'7 �l6est HaiEi7un , /f6Ce Ech !8 1991 TNfE a R[rT w SOCu iECUw N'W&A•GE . Eu a..,r.. uvp[R , .E w v.oEw . O•r ':AiE O awrh .uanw 0.[• +rr! anl..e�.cE R:a1 rr 3r >'>rV' C—, PERMANENT !"•! a.CR er . 519-12-75,x' 70 - , l►lut �, !94 (• tio.L(:dau, A+.i ssoual eo�� f[LT TI.RM ✓•ls mcf0c., EVER. Us•.Eo rl.•CA •OSer4 . •J:,1tR sr(2) yy o` aATN It) •Inpatient EPVOutpatient (3) CDOA ,,,,Licensed Nuninq ?:rvste (6) r License^ Seerer No1ne ( Cy Yes ❑No:'� IE) Noma t5) Reswe-..e f71 L Other r ' ' C y ..Cxav N+.IE .No ti�ow[ss 1. a . n.w> .+. n.nr s a>.. Nw w vns>! iaT..cwh a[ tcue« [�. a c•. i'.;+.ti•• v :,e - i _ Lio.ide Samaaia n V.iUo4e a e eniea // S,cwwyze Qk&e B-,iee 4. Ada f .ear 1K 0..Is- W.. SUN\I.S SPouS[ .E.• r^'. w..r+•>wi oECE;RNr S us..s[ xcur•: rrr Lr. are>..+so. ll_S..ESS r[<'— p.rc- r5...h1 - a, ly ays aoce/Ey�#one ani Lb•loaea :nvut RtSOENCE Sra7F CDUNr♦ . Gn :puh Ow IOCA'K`N 5'w[Er .._ NJVBER I1 �'n �E 1,f..h���w �id<an I.. 35X7 caj# Overtda� &ad �', 80Y 1 s, �.. he r .. _ :•r<« .r•,,,.c+•N w e r. ,.y r+..s.✓. C-7 « Yio w« < ;s.rn. I r U:IJ(h• S Ea<:w: 7. �s ❑Yes r-XNO Ir ❑des 10 �Eumwma•.Secon:aq •o7! COT" / '• r•irtR -- hu+E — 6rwa-.N.E s --Fw r.ta u•'X •. '..uE 5•c'.s..:E TAi2&p i'6f,£ zj �a ^#^nn I., Mi44ou&i .+ lenrtle S&ne�ouiu w..Owu•h1 S h+uE ••q.r•n� ,rv0 •:`onF SS •1�> ..e h..•V� + V.. �• ....•�[.• 'i• 0 1� • <.. '� .v + 75X fg4 # ..[:..,yyo a eves.,:.•. R_Kf :,E �sEvs•c.....:.'•r.. _•.-.•�. •. >r...... ....-.•. _ :,. ,. h- s.. M -�• N r . l ,•. CDDndlgn ('.er 15E[ecrr) _, 54h•"uRF O<.,,ht•' R>.CE:�CE:`[MP[ws�h ,. �h^, •s S:.c•_[t.5f h..reER >a• wt,•U(•- �•i Se :• "- _--._.— ____ Accp,# Fw7eTa/ Se,avice.j f•ome 1 fur Df .a w('W. :iJ tt..:.uu.+:� wL .wSf wtr[::•f:=:.:P]w[w. :(� s'� .. ..,..• -. ., .. .. r. S. .e _ eI �L _ _ el [:a�,,:a [+c -•r •.•e• - c' - =e^• !:/3 P.-*,. w�a/EUL /L�r !Qi! I "es ;t:c re-a.n� Ps:^ata^ Co,;• +Se :r'r••'^e3' . 21 VARY [ Er.. tee *: r 1 minas r ":.rr[ rat :,,w ae Cram Ci 111 Feer Ife •'\Ord !v:^ \S Ci'^. Y. Y'^S: 'd':'s f^N' a;; •;. -i'r 'Y•. sn«[. r nears V '�•s E•A Ont• Or.e <.ur e^ Iscn Oro X+' � 'ae' lei IMMEDIATE CAUSE 1frul '[...['-••[ :a'sE / ane �ef�^ er.0 n Imran ► � \�, ^ • S~ ­ay 1Kt coMnM.. / ./ a1ry. yad�ny u �mmwo+Ir b _ cause Ent. UNDERLYING CAUSE loll.. r _T "I—Nd w -'.C nnwR.np n de.m1 LAST art n:.r .r. �e-w.•.. a1 - . -- d 27 PART a Enn. Slenc�enl Condmom cwnsm.•y m eel^ -nut •n -.p . v .•-.e.•.�q ca v y.en .,' ^+` .. �-.=• _ .... -- '•i -i :. - _ _--..t yyX4, V C[N..nw•C .«n:.v MI MYSICIAN-R1^e tvs'a. mya r. ;e tie-x<v y. a: •ne ^^•r asr s _. •.e arc n.r1 +<a.,ws a . .-.a.. r 40 4121:11 L CURONER — O= ou s n A ao-adv .•w s•pavo- • a • c- a, r. a: .. . . . _ r . 7T•.R ry. S•ihEt w[u.a .',E :`r •.t+•r E4 - h+uE .U.o +.%+RE SS ;V :tR•. (w 5:. .. Ea,r..r lldrd f. i9i6eq. /%Q.c,4o .. _ ❑Yes i�No � _ •r_Fasse,ser . _.• e1 . _.._.._ .. rvf ATTE (+n re♦ State of Idaho. . . . County of k.da . . . . ) C:. :'' ....:::7 "TQ Oa THIS IS TO CERTIFY *At this is a€€ Lie fix_ Idaho y of a certificate R 1 OEPa''tr7eE+t of Neaith an;3 l:elfare u Code. -,,r, ,,•• t APR 6,0 19.2 e •a � � � u'='v -.; Date Is�aed State keg-,strar of I'-,I'Stat st:cs ATTACHMENT 4 3 N M 0ON 70%F -I til Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors SECTION I THE POWER CENTER During the past several decades, the shopping center industry has grown to about 39,000 centers encom- passing an estimated 4.7 billion square feet of gross leasable area and registering an estimated $750 bil- lion in retail sales. Traditionally, four basic definitions have categorized these thousands of centers: neigh- borhood (supermarket -anchored), community (dis- count department store -anchored), regional (full -line department store -anchored), and super -regional (four or more department stores). Definition More recently a form of center has emerged that has attracted the attention of consumers, retailers, investors and developers alike - the "power center". Most closely resembling a community center in its physical design and merchandising emphasis, the power center has not yet been formally defined by the real estate industry; however, a workable definition would likely include these elements: A power center is a grouping of retail stores that: ■ collectively totals at least 250,000 square feet; includes at least one major anchor containing 100,000 square feet or more, that is either a dis- count department store or warehouse club; 1 includes at least four smaller, category specific anchor tenants of 25,000 square feet or more. These anchor stores will typically have a narrow focus but deep selection in specific merchandise lines such as building supplies/home improve- ment goods, consumer electronics, off-price apparel, sporting goods, books, personal computer hardware and software, office supplies, toys, pet supplies, deep discount drugs, bulk foods, or tapes and records; ■ should contain a minimum of smaller shop space (10 percent or so of the center's total gross leasable area); and ■ will typically be configured in an open-air strip, "L" or "U" shaped layout. While discount stores and open-air centers have been around for a long time, the power center introduces some unique characteristics to non -regional mall retailing: ■ a very clear merchandising emphasis on the two 5 retail formats alluded to above: - the price -oriented discount department store or warehouse club and - the very narrowly focused but deeply merchan- dised "category killers"; ■ the introduction of large space layouts for certain categories of retailers which had previously relied heavily upon smaller formats in regional malls for their real estate needs. These include book stores, sporting goods stores, and record and tapes stores: and ■ significant size: power centers containing 500,000- 600,000 square feet of gross leasable area are not uncommon, and some are larger than that. Physical Profile The profile of a typical large, institutional -grade power center can be seen in Table 1 (on Page 6). Trade Area The size of a power center's trade area will be influ- enced by the same factors which define any shopping center's market: ■ type, size and scale of the center; ■ number and size of anchor stores; ■ size and location of nearest "sister" units of anchor stores; ■ road systems, accessibility patterns, travel times and major geographical features. A new power center in the range of 300,000-350,000 square feet would be expected to serve a trade area (i.e. the area from which 70%-80% of its sales origi- nate): ■ extending roughly six miles in any direction; ■ containing 60,000-70,000 households; ■ having 200,000+ residents; and ■ with income levels in excess of $35,000/per house- hold. Larger centers and more mature centers would typi- cally have trading areas containing more residents than this. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors 6 Table 1. PROFILE OF A LARGE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT GRADE POWER CENTER. ELEMENTS Anchors Discount department store or warehouse club Building supply/home improvement store Consumer electronics store Off-price apparel store Bookstore Deep discount drug store Warehouse food store or super grocery store Sporting goods, office supply or computer hardware/software store Anchor Subtotal Large In -Line Shops Auto parts Home fashions Subtotal Small in-line shops (8% -10%a of total space) Total Space TYPICAL SIZE RANGE (SF) 100,000 - 170,000 90,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 30,000 25,000 - 30,000 15,000 - 30,000 25,000 - 30,000 50,000 - 80,000 25,000 355,000 45,000 515,000 10,000 - 15,000 10,0_00 _ - 1_5,000_ 20,000 - 30,000 40,000 - 45,000 415,000 - 590,000 Comparative Analysis Although the power center evolved from the com- Table 2 delineates some points of comparison munity center, and is similar in scale to some region- between power centers and other types of centers. al malls, it has become distinctive in its own right. Table 2. Power Center Neighborhood Community Regional Mall Center Center Size Range (SF) 250,000- 30,000- 1001000- 400,000- 700,000 150,000 350,000 2,000,000+ Merchandise Deep Convenience Convenience Current fashions Emphasis assortments goods and goods and and accessories services general merchandise Anchors "Big Box" discount Supermarket Discount Full -line stores and and drug department department "category killers" stores store stores Site Size 25-80 acres 3-15 acres 10-35 acres 40 - 200 acres Typical Design Open-air "L", Open-air Open-air "L", Enclosed mall "U", or strip "L" or strip "U" or strip Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors The power center most resembles the regional mall in terms of its size and general type of merchandise offering, and specific points of comparison between the two appear in Table 3. Inventory and Pace of Openings The National Research Bureau (NRB), publisher of the Census of Shopping Centers and The Shopping Table 3. 7 Center Directory, estimates that at the end of 1992 there were 217 shopping centers in the U.S. designat- ed as "power centers"; they contained about 78 mil- lion square feet of GLA (gross leasable area), or an average of 360,000 square feet per center. During 1993 a reported 16 new power centers opened, adding about 7,000,000 square feet of GLA to the nation's power center inventory (see Table 4). Comparative Elements Power Centers Regional Malls Merchandise Emphasis Commodities; value -oriented goods; Current fashion and accessory items for moderate -price general merchandise; person and home. deep, narrow assortments of specific goods. Cross -Shopping Minimal Extensive; facilitated by enclosed, climate - controlled environment. Small Shop Tenant Space 8% -12% of total center GLA 40% of total GLA Anchor Operating None 10 years for new malls Covenants General Range of Rents Anchors $4.00-$10.00 per square foot versus Many anchors o%%m their own stores and 2% - 3% of sales. sites; others pay rent in the S3.00 to S5.00 per sf range versus 2% of sales. Small Shops $12-$20 per square foot versus 4% of Rent levels are tvpicalh 525-$30 per square sales. foot in new centers, versus 6% of sales; CPI adjustments or steps are common. Cash on Cash Returns 9.0%-9.5% 7.0%-8.5% Total Projected Returns 10.5% - 11.5% 10.5%-12% (IRR) Nature of the Investment Primarily an investment in the "credit' Investment in the performance of the mall income created by anchor tenants, shops as supported by the stability and sales whose rents constitute 80%-90% of of the anchors. Mall shops generate 80% - the power center's net income. 90% of a typical regional mall's net operat- Limited upside potential in rents due ing income. to extremely high breakpoint sales levels in anchor tenant percentage rent lease clauses. Ease of Replicability/ Medium to high; numerous retailers Low; most major markets and submarkets Vulnerability to New potentially available to co-anchor are well served by regional malls. Competition new power centers; relatively few power centers have been built to date. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors 8 Table 4. Number 1992 Inventory 217 1993 Additions 16 1993 Total 233 U.S. Power Center Inventory Thus power centers account for about six -tenths of one percent of the nation's inventory of 39,000 shop- ping centers, and they account for about 1.3 percent of the nation's total GLA. Power centers seem to be opening at a pace of about twenty per year, and large power centers - those exceeding 400,000 square feet on opening day, exclu- sive of peripheral pad development - account for 40% - 60% of these openings. Safes Trends The 217 power centers reported to be in business by the NRB registered estimated sales of $18.0 billion, or $231 per square foot in 1992. This sales figure equates to 2.4% of the nations $747 billion in shopping center sales. Large power centers - those exceeding 400,000 square feet in size - achieved 1992 sales estimated at $8.8 billion. These sales were 3.9% of the estimated $225.8 billion in large center sales registered that year. Power center sales appear to be growing by $2-3 bil- lion per year - 6% to 10% of the total sales growth being registered in the nation's shopping centers, according to NRB. Large power centers account for about $1.5 billion of this growth - or about 17% of large center sales growth. Development Trends A few patterns emerge from examination of recent power center development activity: ■ new power centers are being developed at a pace of about 20-25 per year, and 10-12 of those are large - scale (exceeding 400,000 square feet of GLA at opening); ■ the year-end 1993 estimated inventory of 233 power centers is about one per metropolitan area - leaving ample opportunity for the development of additional power centers during the next few years; ■ the power center is growing. NRB, as noted above, estimates that the average size of all power centers in 1992 was 360,00 square feet. NRB further esti- Area in Average Size in Square Feet Square Feet 78,200,000 360,000 6,700,000 419,000 84,900,000 364,000 mates that those opening in 1992 averaged 390,000 square feet, while those opening in 1993 averaged 420,000 square feet; ■ most power centers are being developed new. Typically they are located adjacent to or near a regional mall in order to take advantage of estab- lished shopping patterns and the presence of retail critical mass; ■ several power centers have emerged from commu- nity shopping centers that have been repositioned into power centers (or at least re -merchandised to accommodate power center retailers); ■ some older regional shopping centers are being recycled into power centers (or are being consid- ered for such), including: Thomas Mall, Phoenix, AZ Anaheim Plaza, Anaheim, CA Westland Mall, Denver, CO Shoppers World, Framingham, MA Meyerland Plaza, Houston, TX ■ some downtown department stores are being con- sidered for adaptive reuse as power centers. A few - the former Goldblatts' building in Downtown Chicago (now home to Filene's Basement and oth- ers) and the former Hecht Company store in Silver Spring, Maryland - already accommodate a power center retailer or two; the Alexander's store build- ing in Downtown White Plains, NY is currently being redeveloped as a major urban power center. Jones Lan, «Voonon Rcalty ,advisors ATTACHMENT 5 CATEGORIES OF TENANTS Categ ry Membership Warehouse Discount Department Store Hareware and Garden Store Major Grocer Major Clothing Minor Clothing Electronics Computer Furniture Shoes Sporting Goods Pets Books Music/Video Catalogue Store Crafts Drugs Home Supplies and Linens Restaurants 1 For explanatory purposes only Sample Tenantsl Costco, Sam's Club K -Mart, Wal-Mart, Target, Shopko Home Base, Home Depot, Eagle Hardware and Garden, Ernst Home and Nursery Cub's Food, Waremart, Albertson's Marshall's, T.J.Maxx, Burlington Coat Factory, Ross Clothestime, etc. Future Shop, Circuit City, Good Guys, Smith's Comp USA, Computer City, Office Max Smith's, Levitz, IKEA Payless Shoes, Volume Shoes Gart Sports, Sportmart, Sports Authority Petsmart, Petco Barnes & Noble, Hastings, Crown, Tower Books Virgin Records, Blockbuster Music, Hollywood Video, Tower Records Best Ben Franklin, Michaels, Fabricland Walgreens, Drug Emporium Home Express, Cost Plus Imports, Linens and Things. TGIFridays, Red Robin, Olive Garden, Red Lobster T j ) .�'.�.1 FNRMONT P ✓(. :—i...._� r DE CU•1 'UE ' PIT01 tlClt� tush nes Sr \.� ^-v�••r. Ata Hsau 049CAISr Ill. A ,.'."t. i Z __51 BOISE VA.LEY a m"_'_��i-1�FAE•EMt�d.G •:1 - `�' _ I_is_ T, 5e SDA ACADEMY CLEM AIE r[ - to�;J�Ay[, :;Al — 1 — .� of .19TEt,'t I - � � � V - -�— J- _- �l s•, `-u-tA 1`. rEt"'t• Il n nt. ' SIII iDt 4H MFPoDMN i �3r7� - - ,.// 9T. IS AMRTI'TE At ST' _ �: _ _ Itt i _ .,. _ AIDHON6Vf WEST ■ .19 HIGH = uT rIf 1 _ •:x ."� Tern sr 1[1 r�.,:r � TOhN d _ TAYLOR AVE, ttc ST It t sr tIt T .r ANKL IN R 0 1 0 LJ- BISHOP KELLY M� (( � I "t r, HIGH -1 �� ADZE ISR r •,,•i! 4: sr. e 9 t I- ELEM. _< 4r- t 1 BOISE it CEITR4 €f k'� r • r r < MERIDIAN �--- s i �.t „t , _-- n' R f ` ''ei HIGH pP,W. COT TEMPLE B �� l.IY:YiNL ELENA. i OV E R L AN^ ROAD - _ '■ x� �� Li CPPIN6 ! D • "I ♦< 1 % ` IPI FLL' .i +'A S, ox'f AO 69 .6y _� Ary IT irw J Lu -/ cc Cc - J VICTORY ROAD xae e• s/�/�/ 1 1/2 U 1-84 CENTER SCALE IN MILES c1:29,816 - 1 Inch VICINITY M A P LANGLY ASSOCL ATTATCHMENT No. 6 ATTACHMENT * 3 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND. DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed or to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment 3 Page 2 This appointment and designation -shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the -7 day of `� �� , 1995. RACKHAM L.L.C., a limited liability company STATE OF TbAR ) COUNTY OF pa ss. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that RACKHAM L.L.C. is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. Dated this Ti4 day f I AKC 14 , 1995 (Signature of Notary) ,,,•• III INEAR *# (Legibly Print or Stamp name of Notary) •.•� w� "'n Notary public in and for the State of �•�y �'pTAp, residing at c-, I -s H o 13 Ls r0 My appointment expires 'Zoo E OF 1n �'4►t: e. ttlk ATTACHMENT t 3 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed or to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment ? 3 Page 2 This appointment and designation shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the day of )1995. By Dolores M. Hartman STATE OF IDA 90 ) ss. COUNTY OF ADA ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Dolores M. Hartman is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. Dated this j 3�' day of (A-fijZg.4 , 1995 (]� P . ignature of Notary) • A I�IEi T�IORNAJ (Legibly Print or Stamp name of Notary) -•- Notary public in and for the State of i D p AUBUS0 residing at BOi SE !D r�E of %00p My appointment expires $ - I? -=-L000 ATTACHMENT 2 3 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING' AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed or to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment Page 2 This appointment and designation shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the ��day of 1995. DORIS KATHLE N OLIASON FAMILY TRUST By / y,�Cz.l ZLGYLL/(� /►�cGr9 irgi i ennison rus ee STATE OF� ss. COUNTY OF I certify t at I know or have satisfactory evidence that Virginia Jennison is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. Dated this day of 1995 (Signature of Notfiry) (Legibijy Print or Stamp name of Notary) // Notary public in and for the State of residing at ./Y� w, - /y e-� My appointment expires EAGLE ROAD s In's O� v ��r r 1 _5 3 i n na = r r) m z mmim M o r x x r o APPLIATION FOR ANNEXATION APPROVAL & ZONING OR REZONE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FILING INFORMATION I. GENERAL INFORMATION I-84 Center (PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION) SE Corner of I-84 and Eagle Road Interchange (GENERAL LOCATION) Attachment 3 ti (LEGAL DESCRIPTION - ATTACH IF LENGTHY) { Attachment 1 (OWNER(S) OF RECORD) (NAME) (TELEPHONE N0.) (ADDRESS) Langly Associates, Inc., Russell C Keithly (2061 391-6600 (APPLICANT) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300, Issa uah, WA 98027 — (ADDRESS) Baylis Brand Wagner Rich Wagner (206) 454-0566 (ENGINEER, SURVEYOR OR PLANNER) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) i nQni nla; n Ctraat _ RPl l P_vue. WA 98004 (ADDRESS) City of Meridian and Ada County Highway District (JURISDICTION(S) REQUIRING APPROVAL) Commercial (TYPE OF SUBDIVISION - RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) +50 73.5 ACRES OF LAND IN CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP. (FEE) (ACCEPTED BY:) ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST 1-84 CENTER SE CORNER, EAGLE ROAD AND 1-84 The following information is provided as a portion of the submittal for the application to have the City of Meridian Annex and Zone the subject property. The information is organized in the sequential order established in the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 1. Applicant: Langly Associates Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 206-391-6600 (fax 206-391-9031 Contact Person Russell C. Keithly 2. Owners: Attachment I 3. Notarized request for zoning amendment: Attachment 2 4. Legal Description: Attachment 3 5. Legal Description of public roads and easement abutting the property: Attachment 4 6. Present land use: The property is predominantly utilized for agricultural purposes. There is one single family home on the west side of the property (the Rackham residence). The approximately 400 lineal foot entry road crosses the eastern most portion of an acreage that has one single family home (the Delores Hartman residence). 7. Proposed Land Use: It is proposed that a retail center of approximately 700,000 square feet be developed on this site. The type of center proposed is a relatively new concept called a "Power Center." Attachment 5 is a generic description of a Power Center prepared by the international real estate consulting firm of Jones Lang Wooten. The categories of tenants anticipated to be located in the 1-84 Center are found in Attachment 6. The examples of specific stores are for explanatory purposes only. Annexation and Zoning Request Page 2 8. Present District: SW corner of site is designated Commercial in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Balance of the site is designated Mixed/Planned Use Development. The entire property is designated Rural Transition (RT) by Ada County. 9. Proposed District: General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G). 10. Characteristics of subject property which make the zoning amendment desirable: The property is located at one of the most prominent intersections in the area. 1-84 currently has approximately 63,000 trips per day at Eagle Road. Eagle Road north of 1-84 has approximately 23,000 trips per day. State Highway 55 becomes Highway 95 and is the major North/South highway in the state. Eagle Road/Highway 55 is currently five lanes from Overland Road to Fairview Avenue. During 1995 this highway will be expanded to five lanes from Fairview north, past the City of Eagle. At the completion of that construction, Eagle Road is expected to become the major North/South thoroughfare in Treasure Valley. The above facts are acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan by prioritizing the commercial development of the property in the immediate vicinity of and including the subject property. Section 5.15V of the Comprehensive Plan states: The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/Eagle Road/1-84 interchange is a priority development area. 11. Necessity or desirability of development pertaining to the zoning amendment and its harmony with adjacent development: A unique opportunity exists for the City of Meridian and the Boise Trade Area in general in having such a large, contiguous undeveloped parcel of property available at such a key intersection. This property is ideally situated to not only serve the immediate Meridian trade area but to also serve the entire region. It is projected that this development will serve a trade area of approximately 500,000 people. And because the vast majority of these people will utilize 1-84 to access this development, it will have relatively little impact on the local streets in the area. Annexation and Zoning Request Page 3 Relative to adjacent development, three sides of the site are bounded by an interstate freeway and major arterials. This use is very compatible with the proposed St. Luke's Medical campus immediately across 1-84. It will provide significant shopping and dining opportunities for the patients and the families of patients utilizing the St. Luke's Medical facility. The value of these services to the St. Luke's Medical facility will only increase as full hospital facilities are added to the St. Luke's campus. There are large lot single family residences abutting the subject property to the East. Almost without exception, the houses are a significant distance from the subject property with pastures adjacent to the subjects' boundary. A solid, privacy fence will be constructed along all property lines which abut residential properties. 12. Map at scale one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet of the property concerning the zoning amendment: Attachment 7. 13. Vicinity maps: Attachment 8. 14. Mailing Addresses: Attachment 9 Fee = 40 X $1.29 = $51.60 15. A statement of how the proposed zoning amendment related to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: See number 10 above. 16. Fee Calculation: $400 + ($15 X 71.3) = $1,469.50 ATTACHMENT 2 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). ). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed or to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment 2 Page 2 This appointment and designation shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the Zeday of 91995. DORIS KATHLE N OLIASON FAMILY TRUST ByaJ irgi en son rus ee STATE OF� ss. COUNTY OF I certify t at I know or have satisfactory evidence that Virginia Jennison is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. t Dated this day of , 1995 (Signature of No ry) (Legi Print or Stamp name of Notary) Notary public in and for the State of residing at My appointment expires ATTACHMENT 2 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed or to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment 2 Page 2 This appointment and designation shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the 3 day of , 1995. RACKHAM L.L.C., a limited liability company A 17 STATE OF TDA a ) ) ss. COUNTY OF A bA ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that RACKHAM L.L.C. is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. Dated this T� day 1995 (Signature of Notary) ,,,',••������•• • (Legibly Print or Stamp name of Notary) • AQIJ K. �'... ••...••..••r�, •,, Notary public in and for the State of TJ�A N w , .•'y.•oTAr� residing at • - My appointment expires '•. '••....••' +Z+es. T8 OF 1� ,'••••NaeesIIa��� ATTACHMENT 2 REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, ZONING AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DESIGNATION OF AGENT The undersigned ("Owners") are the owners of certain real property in Ada County, Idaho legally described in Attachment 3 attachedhereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the "Property"). The Owners have entered into an agreement to sell the Property to Langly Associates, Inc., a Washington corporation, or its assignee ("Langly"), and Langly intends to develop the Property for retail purposes. The obligation of Langly to purchase the Property is contingent upon annexation of the Property in to the City of Meridian, a zoning amendment to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes (as permitted under the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property), and a conditional use permit for the retail development proposed by Langly. To facilitate the transaction between the Owners and Langly, and to permit the Property to be developed for retail purposes, the Owners hereby request the following: 1. Annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho. 2. A zoning amendment to permit the Property to be used for retail purposes (as permitted by the comprehensive plan currently applicable to the Property). 3. A conditional use permit to permit retail development on the Property in accordance with the retail development plans proposed- or roposedor to be proposed by Langly. The Owners hereby appoint and designate Langly as their agent, representative and attorney-in-fact to seek annexation of the Property into the City of Meridian, Idaho, a zoning amendment to permit retail uses on the Property, and a conditional use permit to approve retail development in accordance with the development plans proposed by Langly. By this appointment and designation, Langly is fully authorized on behalf of the Owners to file applications and requests with Ada County, Idaho and the City of Meridian, Idaho with respect to the above -referenced matter, to appear before, meet with and negotiate the terms and conditions regarding such matters, and to otherwise proceed on behalf of the Owners to obtain the annexation, zoning amendment and conditional use permit. Attachment 2 Page 2 This appointment and designation shall remain fully effective until such time as the Owners have revoked this appointment and designation by written notice delivered to the appropriate planning agencies of Ada County and City of Meridian. Until revocation, Ada County and the City of Meridian and its agents, representatives, employees, and public officials may rely on this appointment and designation and the powers and authority of Langly hereunder without further consent, approval or acknowledgment from the Owners. In connection with the foregoing, the Owners certify that they are the true and lawful owners of the Property and are fully authorized to sign this appointment and designation. Effective as of the day of By Dolores M. Hartman 1995. STATE OF IDA N0 ) ss. COUNTY OF ADA ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Dolores M. Hartman is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated- that tatedthat said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the owner of the real property described in Attachment 3. Dated this j 3 day of Mf,9&9 11995 P. tignature of Notary) )AMeX7 R. �tl01R1�"t�A1 � (Legibly Print or Stamp name of Notary) z� .cc �pTA11Y _dp. Notary public in and for the State of IDA 40 AU81.�G residing at 601SE, I S"41T OF �� My appointment expires $ -17-,-000 q4VAITo 40 ATTACHMENT 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OLIASON PROPERTY North one-half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, in Ada County, Idaho; together with all water rights and ditch rights thereunto belonging including Certificate No. 2254 for 60 shares in the New York Canal Company; EXCEPTING THEREFROM the property taken by the State of Idaho for the construction of Interstate Highway Project No. I -80N-1 (28) 45 between Station 2428+40.52 to Station 2455+60.04 described in that Judgment and Decree of Condemnation dated July 29,1965, recorded August 20, 1965 as Instrument No. 619430, records of Ada County, Idaho; and EXCEPT THEREOF the property taken by the State of Idaho for the construction of that a certain public highway known as Interstate 84, Project IR -84-1(12)45 between Highway Station 2423+86.30 to 2448+64.82, described in that Second Judgment and Decree of Condemnation dated June 25, 1990, recorded July 2, 1990 as Instrument No. 9034963, records of Ada County, Idaho. RACKHAM PROPERTY PARCEL NO. 1 A parcel of land in the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in T. 3N., R. 1 E., B. M., and 1,325.8 feet North of the Section Corner commons to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence South 88037' East, 740.5 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence South 88037' East, 599.0 feet; thence South 0°12' West. 363.6 feet; thence North 88037' West, 599.0 feet; thence North 0012' East, 363.6 feet to the real Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 5.00 acres. Attachment 3 Page 2 Parcel No. 2 A parcel of land in the SWuarter of the S#W quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in T. 3 N., R. 1 E, BB. M., and 1,100.8 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17 20 and 21; thence South ° East 755.43 feet; thence South W East, 28.24 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence South 88037' East, 570.76 feet; thence South 0°12' West, 504.55 feet; thence North 79059' West, 284.06 feet; thence North 75020' West, 197.68 feet; thence North 60034' West 112.37 feet; thence North 363.64 feet to the Real Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 5.92 acres, more or less. PARCEL NO. 3 A parcel of land in the SW quarter of the SW quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in Township 3 North, R. 1 E., B. M., and 1.100.8 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence South 78003' East, 755.43 feet; thence South 88037' East 28.24 feet; thence South 50.96 feet' thence North 88°37' West, 28.14 feet; thence North 78003' West 77.43 feet; thence North 51.11 feet to the Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 0.9 acres, more or less. Attachment 3 Page 3 PARCEL NO.4 A parcel of land in the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise, Meridian, in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17 in Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise, Meridian, and 1,325.8 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence South 88037' East 740.5 feet; thence South 0°12' West 363.6 feet; thence North 78003' West 755.43 feet; thence North 225.0 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL NO. 5 A parcel of land in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 16, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B. M., in Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, in T. 3 N., R, 1 E., B. M., and 887.0 feet North of the Section Corner common to Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21; thence North along the Section Line common to Sections 16 and 17, a distance of 162.69 feet; thence South 78003' East, 755.43 feet; thence South 88°37' East, 28.14 feet; thence South 312.68 feet; thence North 60°34' West, 72.07 feet; thence North 77059' West, 209.34 feet, thence South 74013'West, 103.96 feet, thence North 83°08' West, 102.65 feet, thence North 50039' West, 385.0 feet to the Real Point of Beginning Said parcel containing 5.00 acres, more or less. Attachment 3 Page 4 HARTMAN PROPERTY The east 140.00 of the following described property: Commencing at the southwest corner of the southwest quarter of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., thence South 88034' East 1102.57 feet to the Real Point of Beginning; thence North 0010' East 492.65 feet; thence South 79059' East 234.23; thence South 0°12' West 458.75 feet; thence North 88034' West 230.1 feet to the Beginning; except the South 30 feet thereof for County Road. ATTACHMENT 5 190, 2 1 96 i""W Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors SECTION I THE POWER CENTER During the past several decades, the shopping center industry has grown to about 39,000 centers encom- passing an estimated 4.7 billion square feet of gross leasable area and registering an estimated $750 bil- lion in retail sales. Traditionally, four basic definitions have categorized these thousands of centers: neigh- borhood (supermarket -anchored), community (dis- count department store -anchored), regional (full -line department store -anchored), and super -regional (four or more department stores). Definition More recently a form of center has emerged that has attracted the attention of consumers, retailers, investors and developers alike - the "power center". Most closely resembling a community center in its physical design and merchandising emphasis, the power center has not yet been formally defined by the real estate industry; however, a workable definition would likely include these elements: A power center is a grouping of retail stores that:. ■ collectively totals at least 250,000 square feet; ■ includes at least one major anchor containing 100,000 square feet or more, that is either a dis- count department store or warehouse club; ■ includes at least four smaller, category specific anchor tenants of 25,000 square feet or more. These anchor stores will typically have a narrow focus but deep selection in specific merchandise lines such as building supplies/home improve- ment goods, consumer electronics, off-price apparel, sporting goods, books, personal computer hardware and software, office supplies, toys, pet supplies, deep discount drugs, bulk foods, or tapes and records; ■ should contain a minimum of smaller shop space (10 percent or so of the center's total gross leasable area); and ■ will typically be configured in an open-air strip, "L" or "U" shaped layout. While discount stores and open-air centers have been around for a long time, the power center introduces some unique characteristics to non -regional mall retailing: ■ a very clear merchandising emphasis on the two 5 retail formats alluded to above: - the price -oriented discount department store or warehouse club and - the very narrowly focused but deeply merchan- dised "category killers"; ■ the introduction of large space layouts for certain categories of retailers which had previously relied heavily upon smaller formats in regional malls for their real estate needs. These include book stores, sporting goods stores, and record and tapes stores; and ■ significant size: power centers containing 500,000- 600,000 square feet of gross leasable area are not uncommon, and some are larger than that. Physical Profile The profile of a typical large, institutional -grade power center can be seen in Table 1 (on Page 6). Trade Area The size of a power center's trade area will be influ- enced by the same factors which define any shopping center's market: ■ type, size and scale of the center; ■ number and size of anchor stores; ■ size and location of nearest "sister" units of anchor stores; ■ road systems, accessibility patterns, travel times and major geographical features. A new power center in the range of 300,000-350,000 square feet would be expected to serve a trade area (i.e. the area from which 70%-80% of its sales origi- nate): ■ extending roughly six miles in any direction; ■ containing 60,000-70,000 households; ■ having 200,000+ residents; and ■ with income levels in excess of $35,000/per house- hold. Larger centers and more mature centers would typi- cally have trading areas containing more residents than this. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors 6 Table 1. PROFILE OF A LARGE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT GRADE POWER CENTER - ELEMENTS Anchors Discount department store or warehouse club Building supply/home improvement store Consumer electronics store Off-price apparel store Bookstore Deep discount drug store Warehouse food store or super grocery store Sporting goods, office supply or computer hardware/ software store Anchor Subtotal Large In -Line Shops Auto parts Home fashions Subtotal Small in-line shops (8% -10% of total space) Total Space Comparative Analysis Although the power center evolved from the com- munity center, and is similar in scale to some region- al malls, it has become distinctive in its own right. Table 2. TYPICAL SIZE RANGE (SF) 100,000 - 170,000 90,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 30,000 25,000 - 30,000 15,000 - 30,000 25,000 - 30,000 50,000 - 80,000 25,000 - 45,000 355,000 - 515,000 10,000 - 15,000 10,0_00 - 15,000_ 20,000 - 30,000 40,000 - 45,000 415,000 - 590,000 Table 2 delineates some points of comparison between power centers and other types of centers. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors Power Center Neighborhood Community Regional Mall Center Center Size Range (SF) 250,000- 30,000- 100,000- 400,000- 700,000 150,000 350,000 2,000,000+ Merchandise Deep Convenience Convenience Current fashions Emphasis assortments goods and goods and and accessories services general merchandise Anchors "Big Box" discount Supermarket Discount Full -line stores and and drug department department "category killers" stores store stores Site Size 25-80 acres 3-15 acres 10-35 acres 40 - 200 acres Typical Design Open-air "L", Open-air Open-air "L", Enclosed mall "U", or strip "L" or strip "U" or strip Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors The power center most resembles the regional mall in terms of its size and general type of merchandise offering, and specific points of comparison between the two appear in Table 3. Inventory and Pace of Openings The National Research Bureau (NRB), publisher of the Census of Shopping Centers and The Shopping Table 3. Comparative Elements Power Centers 7 Center Directory, estimates that at the end of 1992 there were 217 shopping centers in the U.S. designat- ed as "power centers"; they contained about 78 mil- lion square feet of GLA (gross leasable area), or an average of 360,000 square feet per center. During 1993 a reported 16 new power centers opened, adding about 7,000,000 square feet of GLA to the nation's power center inventory (see Table 4). Regional Malls Merchandise Emphasis Commodities; value -oriented goods; Current fashion and accessory items for moderate -price general merchandise; person and home. deep, narrow assortments of specific goods. Cross -Shopping Minimal Extensive; facilitated by enclosed, climate - controlled environment. Small Shop Tenant Space Anchor Operating Covenants General Range of Rents Anchors Small Shops Cash on Cash Returns Total Projected Returns (IRR) Nature of the Investment 8% -12% of total center GLA 40% of total GLA None 10 years for new malls $4.00-$10.00 per square foot versus Many anchors own their own stores and 2% - 3% of sales. sites; others pay rent in the $3.00 to $5.00 per sf range versus 2% of sales. $12-$20 per square foot versus 4% of Rent levels are typically $25-$30 per square sales. foot in new centers, versus 6% of sales; CPI adjustments or steps are common. 9.0%-9.5% 10.5% - 11.5% Primarily an investment in the "credit' income created by anchor tenants, whose rents constitute 80%-90% of the power center's net income. Limited upside potential in rents due to extremely high breakpoint sales levels in anchor tenant percentage rent lease clauses. 7.0%-8.5% 10.5%-12% Investment in the performance of the mall shops as supported by the stability and sales of the anchors. Mall shops generate 80%- 90% of a typical regional mall's net operat- ing income. Ease of Replicability/ Medium to high; numerous retailers Low; most major markets and submarkets Vulnerability to New potentially available to co-anchor are well served by regional malls. Competition new power centers; relatively few power centers have been built to date. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors Table 4. U.S. Power Center Inventory Area in Average Size In Number Square Feet Square Feet 1992 Inventory 217 1993 Additions 16 1993 Total 233 Thus power centers account for about six -tenths of one percent of the nation's inventory of 39,000 shop- ping centers, and they account for about 1.3 percent of the nation's total GLA. Power centers seem to be opening at a pace of about twenty per year, and large power centers — those exceeding 400,000 square feet on opening day, exclu- sive of peripheral pad development — account for 40% - 60% of these openings. Sales Trends The 217 power centers reported to be in business by the NRB registered estimated sales of $18.0 billion, or $231 per square foot in 1992. This sales figure equates to 2.4% of the nations $747 billion in shopping center sales. Large power centers — those exceeding 400,000 square feet in size — achieved 1992 sales estimated at $8.8 billion. These sales were 3.9% of the estimated $225.8 billion in large center sales registered that year. Power center sales appear to be growing by $2-3 bil- lion per year — 6% to 10% of the total sales growth being registered in the nation's shopping centers, according to NRB. Large power centers account for about $1.5 billion of this growth — or about 17% of large center sales growth. Development Trends A few patterns emerge from examination of recent power center development activity: ■ new power centers are being developed at a pace of about 20-25 per year, and 10-12 of those are large - scale (exceeding 400,000 square feet of GLA at opening); ■ the year-end 1993 estimated inventory of 233 power centers is about one per metropolitan area — leaving ample opportunity for the development of additional power centers during the next few years; ■ the power center is growing. NRB, as noted above, estimates that the average size of all power centers in 1992 was 360,00 square feet. NRB further esti- 78,200,000 360,000 6,700,000 419,000 84,900,000 364,000 mates that those opening in 1992 averaged 390,000 square feet, while those opening in 1993 averaged 420,000 square feet; ■ most power centers are being developed new. Typically they are located adjacent to or near a regional mall in order to take advantage of estab- lished shopping patterns and the presence of retail critical mass; ■ several power centers have emerged from commu- nity shopping centers that have been repositioned into power centers (or at least re -merchandised to accommodate power center retailers); ■ some older regional shopping centers are being recycled into power centers (or are being consid- ered for such), including: Thomas Mall, Phoenix, AZ Anaheim Plaza, Anaheim, CA Westland Mall, Denver, CO Shoppers World, Framingham, MA Meyerland Plaza, Houston, TX some downtown department stores are being con- sidered for adaptive reuse as power centers. A few — the former Goldblatts' building in Downtown Chicago (now home to Filene's Basement and oth- ers) and the former Hecht Company store in Silver Spring, Maryland — already accommodate a power center retailer or two; the Alexander's store build- ing in Downtown White Plains, NY is currently being redeveloped as a major urban power center. Jones Lang Wootton Realty Advisors ATTACHMENT 6 CATEGORIES OF TENANTS ate or Sample Tenants1 Membership Warehouse Costco, Sam's Club Discount Department Store K -Mart, Wal-Mart, Target, Shopko Hareware and Garden Store Home Base, Home Depot, Eagle Hardware and Garden, Ernst Home and Nursery Major Grocer Cub's Food, Waremart, Albertson's Major Clothing Marshall's, T.J.Maxx, Burlington Coat Factory, Ross Minor Clothing Clothestime, etc. Electronics Future Shop, Circuit City, Good Guys, Smith's Computer Comp USA, Computer City, Office Max Furniture Smith's, Levitz, IKEA Shoes Payless Shoes, Volume Shoes Sporting Goods Gart Sports, Sportmart, Sports Authority Pets Petsmart, Petco Books Barnes & Noble, Hastings, Crown, Tower Books Music/Video Catalogue Store Crafts Drugs Home Supplies and Linens Restaurants 1 For explanatory purposes only Virgin Records, Blockbuster Music, Hollywood Video, Tower Records Best Ben Franklin, Michaels, Fabricland Walgreens, Drug Emporium Home Express, Cost Plus Imports, Linens and Things. TGIFridays, Red Robin, Olive Garden, Red Lobster MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: NOVEMBER 8 1995 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 13 REQUEST; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST OF 73.5 ACRES TO C -G BY LANGLY & ASSOCIATES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FINDNGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OFLAW CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Al! Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL LANGLY ASSOCIATES, INC._ ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE NE CORNER OF OVERLAND AND EAGLE ROAD SOUTH WEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on October 17, 1995, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner appearing through Russell C. Keithly, and the City Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having duly considered the matter, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT A. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing scheduled for October 17, 1995, the first publication.of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that this application was heard before the Planning and Zoning on May 9, 1995 and was tabled to June 13, 1995, and at the June 13, 1995, meeting additional comments were received and the Commission moved to have Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared for the July 11, 1995, meeting; at the July 11, 1995, meeting the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 1 matter was tabled again because the Ada County Highway District Commissioners would not be acting on the matter until the end of August, 1995; the ACHD comments were finally received on August 24, 1995, and the matter having been duly considered at the May 9, 1995 and June 13, 1995, hearings and the public having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and copies of all notices being available to newspaper, radio and television stations, the City Council hereby takes action on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. B. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 73.5 acres in size. C. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County as R -T (Rural Transition); that the Application requests that the property be zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) and has requested a conditional use permit to allow retailers; that the Applicant has stated in its Application that it is proposed that a retail center of approximately 700,000 square feet be developed on this site; that the type of center .proposed is called a "Power Center"; that Attachment 4 to the Application is a generic description of a Power Center; the Applicant listed the categories of tenants anticipated to be located in the center in Attachment 5; the Application is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. D. Adjacent to this development is the I-84 Interstate freeway and major arterials of Eagle and Overland Roads; that to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 2 the north, across the freeway, is the proposed St. Luke's Medical campus; that to the east and abutting the subject property are large lot single family residences; to the south is land used agriculturally; and to the west is land used for an interstate on and off ramp. E. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. F. That Langly Associates, Inc., is the Applicant; that the owners have consented to the application and have requested this annexation, zoning and conditional use and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. G. That the owners are the Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust, Virginia Jennison, Trustee, Rackham L.L.C., a limited liability company, and Dolores M. Hartman, who have granted permission for the annexation and zoning request. H. That the Applicant's annexation and zoning application stated that the present use of the land is agricultural; there is one single family home on the west side of the property, the Rackham residence. An approximately 400 lineal feet entry road is proposed to cross the eastern most portion of an acreage that has one single family home, the Delores Hartman residence. I. That the proposed use is for a commercial retail center, called POWER CENTER; that the Applicant lists the following as a characteristic that make it desirable to be zoned C -G: "The property is located at one of the most prominent intersections in the area." I-84 at Eagle Road, and Eagle Road/Highway 55. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 3 J. That Russell Keithly, the Applicant's representative, testified at the Planning and Zoning hearing that Overland Road would be five lanes at their property; that there would be ra e that the larger tenants would be in the v eastern portion of the project; that there would be an architectural committee and guidelines; that the Meridian codes would be exceeded; that there would be a two to four foot berm with a four to six foot fence; that there would be as much buffering as they could put in; that there would be a wall so that there would be no view of Interstate 84; that the entry road would be 400 feet long with a three to four foot berm plus a rock wall; that the wall along Interstate 84 would be at least six feet high; the highest building would be 30 feet, except for parapet walls; he showed pictures of the concept of the buildings; there would be metal siding, an agrarian theme, roofs and masonry would have varied colors; that this was a mixed/planned use development area which had a priority for development in the comprehensive plan; that traffic projections were submitted to the Ada County Highway District; that traffic would be from a four mile radius, but they will pull from a large trade area; .that Overland would be five lanes, but not to meet their schedule; their intersection would be signalized; that there would be no access to the site from Eagle Road; that they would put in what the Meridian Fire Department a5 wanted and would pave I*f- required; that they had no concerns with the Meridian staff comments; that construction would be started by spring; that there would be stores by Christmas of 1996; that they FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 4 have no tenants now but they would be lined out before construction commenced; that it was likely that there would be no firm commitments and no names would be released until annexation and zoning were completed and commitments signed. He specifically stated, in part, that most of their property is designated mixed planned use development area, that there is a great variety that is allowed and we believe what we are doing is probably the least impactful and economically most beneficial to the community. K. That Mr. Keithly testified before the Council that the traffic analysis done by Bell Walker, and their traffic engineer, are convinced that a single point of access will handle the traffic but that it is not their choice; that a second point of emergency access into the site which is a road running parallel with Eagle Road, will remain as an emergency access, although the turning movements conflict; that with regards to his earlier testimony he included items that were specifically related to the conditional use; he stated that extensive hydrologic studies will be done and that ground water conditions can be dealt with accordingly; that the developer felt that more space being converted from retail to office was not a viable solution in combating the traffic issue; nn that while retail puts more total trips on your streets it puts far `.fewer trips versus none during the a.m. peak; that if the spaces were to be made for offices, there would be a tremendous amount of conflicting trips during the a.m. and p.m. peaks; that a retail center during the critical periods provided less traffic than an FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 5 office center. L. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified at the May 9, 1995, hearing before the Planning and zoning Commission about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: 1. Robert Cox testified that he was a fifteen year resident; that he lived in Jewell Subdivision; that there was insufficient infrastructure in Ada county; that Five..Mile Creek cuts the property; that emergency service was inadequate; traffic was too high; that sidewalks should be required; that reduced speed limits were needed; power lines were inadequate; sewage could be a problem; private well and septic systems should be protected; that the lands drains to Jewell Subdivision; that lighting is a problem; that police and fire were insufficient to handle the development; that the costs for infrastructure would be prohibitive; that he had negative connotation of the property; that the southwest or southeast quarters of Overland and Eagle would be a much better location; that this parcel should be City park instead. 2. Jim Rogers testified that he represented about 40 residents on the Rolling Hill/Jade/Onyx/Topaz area; that a petition and written statement were presented to the Commission; that the neighbors who signed the petition are united in their opposition to Langly Associates, an out of state developer; that the negative aspects of this kind of development is vandalism, gangs, mall rats, bomb threats; that this will certainly place an additional workload on the Meridian City Police as well as other emergency response groups; that the objective stated in the Comprehensive Plan of the preservation of the Meridian Old Town Business District will be only devastating to this existing infrastructure; that the massive impact of traffic, light, noise and air pollution; that the suggested buffer is not of significant distance and the residents believe there to be a better place where this development can be located. 3. Karen Gallagher, of the Ada County Highway District, testified that the District had just received the traffic study from the Applicant on FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 6 May 5, 1995 and requested the Commission to table it until the Commission's next regularly scheduled meeting, June 13, 1995. At the June 13, 1995, hearing, Ms. Gallagher stated that the District had not acted on this application, that it was tabled in order to accommodate people from the public who would like to speak but she did have staff recommendation update. 4. David Lewis testified that he is in support of the I-84 Power Center; that the Center will produce commerce for the City of Meridian and offered his written testimony to be included in the record, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 5. Katherine Mooney testified that she represented Mr. Griffen, owner of the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Overland Road, consisting of 80 acres, and offered Mr. Griffen's written support of this development,which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 6. That Pam Haynes testified that this development borders her property which was purchased 11 years ago and believes this annexation will have a definite impact on her and the developer is only out for a profit. 7. Cameron McGough testified that the section of Overland Road between Locust Grove and Cloverdale, those two (2) miles, are not in the 5 year plan; that the draft of the Ada County Highway District's transportation study needs to be thoroughly looked at and at this time accesses are inadequate and obvious spin off will occur. 8. Virginia Jennison, trustee of Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust, .owner of the North 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 16, testified as to the history surrounding the land/farm her parents had started on in 1919 and that she is in support of this development and believes it will help the tax base in Meridian and do a lot for the community. 9. Kenneth Higgs testified to being in favor of the Center; that the taxes raised by this Power Center will help the City. 10. Bob Mitchell, former general manager of the Boise Town Square Mall testified in support of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 7 proposed development; that this broadens the tax base; that he suggested that by the creative use of landscaping as in the Town Square Mall, that the impact to the residents in this area will not be as bad as they think. 11. Randy Schindel and Kimberly Keller testified regarding the crime issue that comes to a facility of this size; that although they are in favor of seeing growth, with growth comes crime; that Ms. Keller testified that one entrance won't handle the traffic. 12. Jim Ballantyne testified that development is certainly coming and sympathizes with those residents who see their lives impacted by this development; that a wise decision needs to be made regarding the traffic patterns and the least impact possible on the community. 13. Richard and Barbara Lavender, land owners at Overland and Eagle Road, Fred and Molly Nakaji, residents of Wilton, California, and Christopher Kepus, a resident of Elk Grove, California, but a former resident of Boise and a current land owner in Meridian, submitted written testimony in favor of this project, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. M. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified before the City Council about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: 1. That Robert Nelson testified before the City Council stating that he has no problem with the Oliason's developing their property, but that he does have a problem with a shopping center with a single entrance; that something with less traffic impact such as an office complex, light industrial, would be more ideal; that he would like to see this tabled until plans can be compared as to which location would serve Meridian the best. 2. That Larry Strow, of the Transportation Department testified that there are some concerns at the Eagle interchange; that a condition be made of the Council's approval that the installation of another signal and possibly in the distant future another left turn lane be instituted to help work out some FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 8 of the congestion problems; he indicated that these opinions are based on Bell Walker's projected traffic report but that the Idaho Transportation Department has done no work at all in looking at what the potential build out for this project in this area might be or how it would affect the interchange. 3. That Jim Rogers testified- before the Council adding to his earlier testimony before the Planning and Zoning Commission; he stated that that he is a registered professional geologist in the State of. Idaho with 20 years experience; he addressed the storm water run off; that since the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District will not allow non- treated run off to be placed into the Five Mile Creek that a retention basin will most likely be required; that at the present time the static ground water level in the property just east of the development, is at a high elevation area at 25 feet below ground surface; that in the lower areas to the south of the development the ground water surface is at about 10 feet below ground surface; that if the developer puts in a retention basin that means in some cases there will probably not be more than 5 feet of soil between the bottom of the basin and the regional ground water table in that area; that since no detailed studies of ground water hydrology have been made in this area, there is no idea which way groundwater moves which means if the developer retains the water in a storm water basin such, as in Fred Meyers at Five Mile and Overland, a real potential exists for parking lot contamination to enter the ground water system; that real property located on the east, south and west of this proposed development all depends on water wells for their local water supply and regardless of which way the water table moves a very real danger exists for water pollution to enter the domestic wells, which in the upper part of the Rolling Hills Subdivision are about 90 feet in depth and in the Jewel area some wells are a bit deeper; that the property owners in the Rolling Hills and Jewell Subdivisions request that the developer be required to have a complete hydrological study completed as well as a series of ground water monitoring wells be placed around the east, south and west side of the proposed development to facilitate long term monitoring; that the Jewell and Rolling Hills Subdivisions are on septic tanks and currently have a good buffer FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 9 between the tanks and the water table. 4. That Betty Bermensolo, spokesperson for the Southwest Ada County Alliance, whose boundaries are south of the freeway all the way to Runa, east to Cole/Curtis area and west to Ada County/Canyon County line testified at length and her testimony, which is in the minutes of the meeting, is incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that her testimony included that the developer of this project was asked to present this propo"sed development before the Alliance's board of directors, but had not done so and that the area would lend itself better to the use of medical office space. 5. That James Ballantyne testified that he is in favor of this project; that it is a way for the school system to get more tax dollars to build much badly needed schools. 6. Pam Rogers testified stating that the reason Meridian's bond issues have been defeated is that the taxpayers telling Meridian City to slow down development; to let services such as schools and roads catch up; that the development of more subdivisions brings in more students indicating a need for a higher tax base such as this proposed development. 7. Jack Miller testified that progress is something nobody likes, but it's here and it isn't going to change; that this mall proposal by Langly and the mall approved at Fairview and Eagle will be beneficial to the City of Meridian by bringing in some tax revenues before it's too late to do something about it. N. That the Meridian Police. Department, Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and the Idaho State Transportation Department submitted comments; that those comments are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. O. That the comments of the Ada County Highway District, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 10 have been incorporated herein as if set forth in full, but the Facts and Findings included the following: 1. From the Facts and Findings, general Information, it is stated in paragraph d. that the site's exposure to the Interstate Highway makes it highly desirable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or More) arterials instead of one. In paragraph G. it is stated that this project is forecast to cause 13,145 trips per day on Overland Road east from the Eagle Road intersection and 13,217 trips per day west of Eagle Road. Although the traffic volumes are within maximum desirable thresholds on the roadways, the inordinate number of turning movements at the site's driveway and the Overland/Eagle intersection require special intersection design. 2. The report stated several alternative actions, which included alternative G. and I. Alternative G. was to accept the project with the regular impact revenue that _will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. This action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish for the four square mile area a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development projects into the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. And Alternative I. was to require the developers of all property in the impact area (and District wide) to replace a pro -rata share of the then available unused capacity of all intersections and roadways. The unused capacity would be quantified, including a reserve for background District wide traffic and adjusted downward as each property in the effected area is developed, so there would be no unused capacity in the system when the area is 100 percent developed. 3. The ACRD staff recommended that a combination of G. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 11 and I. be adopted for this and future applications in the area. Accept the development(s), requiring the developers to make whatever improvements to the system are necessary to mitigate their site related impacts and replace any unused capacity in the system that their development uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to make needed capacity improvements as funds are available and the commission budgets funds for the improvements. This will result in the public having to cope with deficient levels of service in some cases until revenue is available to make the required improvements. 4. The report included Site Specific Requirements, that included the following: a. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two northbound traffic lanes. The existing (southbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes, and one right turn lane. b. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road. The owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way. C. None of the above roadway improvements described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or reimbursement. K. The Assistant City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, commented that an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site be submitted and it shall include all portions of the adjacent Public Rights -of Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits; that one half (1/2) of all other adjacent right-of-way shall be included in the perimeter legal description; that any existing irrigation or drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance; that any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems shall be removed from their domestic service except for purposes such as landscape irrigation, per City Ordinance; that off-street parking shall be provided and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements per City FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 12 Ordinance; that paving and striping, lighting, and signage shall be in accordance with City Ordinances; that a drainage plan designed by a licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas; determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist; that water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by computer model; that a 100' x 100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site and shall meet all the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and the City of Meridian; that the Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Road and Eagle Road to and through the proposed site creating a "loop" crucial to the water serviceability of this site; that sewer service will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center and that Applicant will be responsible to construct any lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site and that assessment fees for water and sewer. service shall be determined during the building plan review process; that "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the installation. L. That the Idaho Transportation Department commented that the developer be aware that no access will be permitted to I-84 or Eagle Road, both of which are full control accesses. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 13 M. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. N. That the parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. O. That the property could be physically serviced with City water and sewer, if applicant extends the lines. P. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots and other uses. Q. That the following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are specifically applicable to this Application: 1. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17 Retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided. Various commercial activity centers are designated on the generalized land use map. Planning policies pertaining to commercial activity centers are presented in the land use chapter of the plan. MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17 Mixed use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as specialty FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 14 retail/commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, and public and semi-public uses. Certain areas have been designated for mixed -planned uses. The development of mixed and planned compatible land uses should be carefully guided through specific project plans, in accordance with the mixed-use policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the Plan. Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 18 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.6 It is the policy of the city of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into neve or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. (Emphasis added.) 2. Under LAND USE EXISTING CONDITioNS, Page 21 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. Area of Impact, Page 22 Comprehensive Plan May The proposed future land use delineations for the impact area are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map - Generalized Land Uses, . . . The land use element FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 15 is based upon these objectives: 1. Mixed -planned uses along the I-84 corridor, which are attractive and compatible with high- volume traffic corridors. (Emphasis added.) COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25 In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: 1. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands 8. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. Internal Circulation Design 13. Drainage COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to locate at arterial intersections and near high -traffic intensity areas. (Emphasis added.) , Page 27 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 16 5.10 Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed. 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of. development should be harmonized with previously -developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental. impact on residential areas, including noise and traffic reduction. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be required. 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. 5.15U The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/ Eagle Road/I-84 interchange is a priority development area. (Emphasis added.) Rural Areas, page 29 Land covered by this policy section has characteristics which generally allow for agricultural and rural residential activity due to the existence of irrigation systems, soil characteristics and relative freedom from conflicting urban land uses. Where community growth creates pressure for new development, it must be recognized that agricultural land can no longer economically continue to be identified or used as agricultural land to the exclusion of orderly city growth and development." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 17 3. Under TRANSPORTATioN, Page 43 Existing Conditions a. Eagle Road, North of Overland,,is listed as a principal arterial b. Overland Road, East of Linder, is listed as a Minor arterial. 4. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 70 Community Identification Goal Statement Create visual quality and functional identity for the City of Meridian and its surrounding environment. Policies 1.1 All commercial and industrial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning. 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement 2.1U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. 2.5U Encourage the use of attractive open space, landscaping, lighting, and street furniture for the benefit of the public. Entryway Corridors Entryway corridors are arterial roadways entering the community that introduce both visitors FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 18 and residents to Meridian. City -designated gateway arterials include the following streets: a. I-84 (East and West entrances) f. Eagle Road (North and South entrances) g. Overland Road (East and West entrances) Entryway corridors are a community's front door. It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site character provide the first, and oftentimes the most lasting,. impression of the entire community. Therefore, the entire community and, most specifically its governing bodies, have the right and the responsibility to guide the development and redevelopment that occurs along entryway corridors. Entrance Corridors Goal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically -pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. Policies 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. Ouality of Environment Goal Statement Policies 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. Neighborhood Identify Goal Policies, 6.4U Limit the conversion of predominantly FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 19 residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through conditional use permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. R. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area and a commercial designation is just to the southwest of the parcel. S. That the requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C -G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: "jC-G) General Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose of the (C -G) District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development."; that although not requested by Applicant, Regional Shopping Center Business District is defined in 11-2-408 10. as follows: "(RSC) Regional Shopping_ Center Business District - The purpose of the (RSC) District is to provide for and permit the establishment of general and retail business uses that are intended to, and will serve, the entire region of the Treasure Valley; to permit business uses that would be of a larger scale than in the Community Business District; to permit the development of a regional shopping center or mall with adequate off-street parking facilities and associated FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 20 site amenities to serve customers and employees; to prohibit strip commercial; and encourage the clustering of regional commercial enterprises. All such districts shall be located in close proximity to major highway or principal arterial streets. All such districts shall be connected to.the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian." T. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that.Shopping Centers, Community, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district; that Shopping Centers, Neighborhood, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district; that individual department stores, retail stores, restaurants, and storage facilities, indoors or outdoors, are allowed uses in the C -G district; that planned commercial developments, are an allowed use in the C -G district and are listed as a conditional use in the Regional Shopping Center district. U. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows: "An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely residential, industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space or type of residential,, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or more created districts or this Ordinance." and a Planned General Development is defined as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 21 "A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which the proposed use of interior and exterior spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD classification applies to essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or industrial uses." . and a Planned Commercial Development is defined as follows: "Any development in which the principal use of land is for commercial purposes." V. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 22 increase in population, and the housing for that population, does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient.tax base to provide for school services to current and future students; that the industrial and commercial developments do provide taxes for providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation] services for people that are here, and which will come here. W. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. X. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide.." Y. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 23 residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." Z. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" AA. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi -improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value., especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to ,the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." AB. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 24 "Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments." AC. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses." AD. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD, Rrovided such exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section." AE. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 25 1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this Ordinance. 8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall post financial guarantees for all approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C." AF. As stated above.in Paragraph Cr the Applicant submitted materials on the conditional use.application for location of buildings, parking and loading areas, service roads, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces, storm retention areas, utilities, signs and yards; that such material on the conditional use is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; that the Applicant submitted materials on the conditional use request but did not specifically address the conditional use at the public hearing. AG. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS A. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 26 B. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. C. That the City Council has judged these annexation, zoning and conditional use applications under Idaho Code, Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. D. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. E. That the Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. F. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. G. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant with the consent of the property owners, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 27 H. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). I. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply.with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. J. That this Application has been difficult for the Commission and City Council to decide because of opposition to the Applications; that the Commission and City Council understand the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis; that the duty of the Commission and City, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns; that the duty of the Commission and City Counsel is to assess the applications on the basis of the overall good of the City and its citizens; that the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinances of the City have measures to try and insure that adjacent property owners are impacted by development as little as possible; that it is with this duty and background that the Commission and City Council has undertaken to make these Findings and Conclusions. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 28 R. That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. L. The Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to construct and operate a 700,000 square foot retail shopping center and has stated that the area is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area which requires planned use development; the Applicant has requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), which does not allow for a community shopping center but does allow for a commercial planned development; the Applicant has requested a conditional use for a retail project of 700,000 square feet. M. That the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, but has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan; thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the use. N. That the Comprehensive Plan calls for Mixed/Planned Use Development at the northeast corner of the intersection of Overland and Eagle Roads; that a shopping center could be allowed in the C -G district under a Planned Development procedure; that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 29 the Applicant suggested that it would develop the area of the property planned for a shopping center under a planned development procedure, when it applied for a conditional use permit. O. That it is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it C -G but the Applicant could still not construct a community shopping center, because under 11-2-409 a community shopping center is not an allowed use; but under C -G zoning, a Planned Commercial Development is a permitted use, which would allow the Applicant to develop a 700,000 square foot commercial center. P. That it is concluded that since the Applicant has suggested that it would develop the property as a planned commercial development and since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed -Use Area at Franklin, Overland/I-84, in 5.14U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permit processing, and the City should have -control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it is therefore concluded that the development should be conditioned on being developed as a Commercial Planned Development, which is allowed in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district. Q. Therefore, it is concluded that since the Applicant has FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 30 stated that it is agreeable to developing the property as a retail center under a commercial planned development process, the property should be annexed and zoned General Retail and.Service Commercial (C -G), but only capable of being developed as a Planned Commercial Development. R. That, as a condition of annexation and the zoning of C- G, with development under the Planned Commercial Development standards and guidelines, the Applicant is required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: 1. Inclusion into the development, including but not limited to, the requirements of 11-9-605 a. C, Pedestrian Walkways. b. G 1, Planting Strips. C. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. d. K. Lineal Open Space Corridors. e. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. f. M, Piping of Ditches and 11-9-606 a. Bicycle Pathways. b. Storm drainage. (See Section S. 3. below.) C. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways. d. Greenbelt. e. Pressurized Irrigation. 2. The concerns of the owners of property in Jewell Subdivision concerning sidewalks, drainages, lighting, noise, and buffering; that also of concern to the City is having lights, particularly automobile headlights, shine into the yards and homes in Jewell Subdivision and other adjacent homes and measures shall be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 31 undertaken prevent this. 3. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fees, adopted by the City, as agreed to by the Applicant in statements by its representative during the public hearings. 4. Addressing access linkage, screening, and buffering. 5. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City. 6. Appropriate berming and landscaping. 7. Submission and approval of plats for the property. 8. Submission and approval of individual buildings, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans under the Planned Development guidelines. 9. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the existing residential development. 10. Establishing a 35 foot landscaped setback and landscaping the same. 11. Addressing the comments of the Planning Director. 12. The sewer and water requirements. 13. Agreeing that. the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is applicable to the land and any development. 14. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. 15. Meeting the representations made as part of the application and hearing process. 16. And any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing as required under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 32 S. That also as conditions of annexation, the Applicant shall submit to the City and have approved by the City Council prior to submitting any plats, conditional use applications, or building plans, the matters set forth below; it is to be noted that some of these items below have been dealt with, or partially dealt with, in the paragraph above but the below paragraph shall be controlling: 1. A plan, with dates of completion, for buffering all adjacent residences. 2. A hydrologic study, with dates of completion, for the area included in the annexation and zoning request. 3. A plan, with dates of completion, for storm water runoff, dispersement and/or storage and a drainage plan designed by a licensed architect or engineer for all off-street parking areas. 4. A plan, with dates of completion, for location, drilling and construction of ground water monitoring wells and well houses, one for each of the fours sides of the development. 5. Submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist to be submitted before submittal of any plats, conditional use applications, or building plans. 6. Prior to submittal of any plats, conditional use applications, or building plans, donate to the City of Meridian a 100, x 100, well site at the proposed site and meet all the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and the City of Meridian. T. That as a condition of annexation and zoning the Applicant shall plat the property and submit applications FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 33 therefore to the City, submit conditional use applications for all development on the property, that all buildings and/or structures shall be subject to design review, and that Applicant shall meet all of the comments of the staff of the City. U. Also, as a condition of annexation and zoning, the Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the Ada County Highway District and the Idaho Department of Transportation. V. That Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance states that a development agreement should be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. That it has been the experience of the City that development agreements are difficult to enter into prior to the annexation ordinance being passed; that it is concluded that the development agreement shall be entered into prior to the preliminary plat being approved. W. That it is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian and should be enacted. X. That regarding the conditional use permit request for retailers, it is concluded that Russell Keithly, a representative of the Applicant, stated that Applicant desired to develop the retail center under a commercial planned development; that the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 34 Planning and Zoning Commission concluded that if the Applicant agreed to develop the all of the property as a commercial planned development and enter into a development agreement, the.property would then be annexed and the Applicant could pursue the development; that it is concluded that under a conditional use and a development agreement, the same controls on the retailers could be had by the City as under a planned unit development for the developer. Y. That it is concluded that 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the City Council shall review applications for Conditional Use Permits; that upon a review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the conditions of the area, the City Council concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, not constitute a conditional use as under the Meridian Zoning Ordinance planned commercial development is a permitted use in the C -G district, but since the Comprehensive Plan states that all development requests in the Mixed Use Areas on Franklin, Overland and I-84 will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility, the conditional use application is deemed to be appropriate, as is the granting of such conditional use. b. The use should be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, if the requirements in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are met, but the Comprehensive Plan requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 35 C. The use apparently would be designed and constructed, to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of the general vicinity as long as development is undertaken to meet the representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses as long as development is undertaken to meet the representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. e. The property will have sewer and water service available if the Applicant extends the lines. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use will be required and the parking ordinance shall be met including the preparation of a parking plan and landscaping plan. i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Z. It is concluded that the conditional use permit should be granted, but as a condition of the conditional use permit a development agreement should be entered into regarding the development of the retail uses and such is hereby made a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 36 AA. That the requirements of the Meridian City Engineer's office, Meridian Fire Department, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met and addressed. AB. That Applicant and the City should address the requirements and policies listed on Page 27 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan for the of mixed -planned use development and all proposed uses shall obtain conditional use permits and all buildings and structures shall be subject to design review. AC. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de -annexation. AD. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement. AE. That proper and adequate access to the property is a problem; that the Ada County Highway District has approved the development with only one road for ingress and egress; it is concluded that this one road will allow development, but at least one more access for ingress and egress would make the development more acceptable to the City and Applicant should take all FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 37 measures to obtain additional access; it is concluded that this additional access should not be a condition of annexation, but that all efforts to obtain the access should be undertaken and performed. AF. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. AG. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), and the issuance of a conditional use permit would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. AH. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall either not be annexed and the conditional use permit shall not be granted or the property shall be de -annexed and the conditional use permit revoked. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN CORRIE COUNCILMAN TOLSMA COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON COUNCILMAN MORROW MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED PAGE - 38 DECISION The Meridian City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application is approved for annexation and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) with a conditional use permit issued, under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. There shall be no development'or use, whatsoever, of the property for anything other than a Planned Commercial Development with conditional use permits required for the specific uses. MOTION: APPROVED :& DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 39 RECEIVED Ada Planning Associ.466*171995 CITY OF MERIDIAI 1413 W. Idaho, Suite 100 Boise, ID 83702 (208) 345-5274 Fax (208) 345-5279 Date May 15, 1995 The following is APA's response to Application # Retail at Eagle/1-84 Traffic Analysis Zone 284 APA Planning Area Meridian Description of Application: 700,000 ft.2 retail center on Southeast corner of Eaale and 1-84 Findings Road/Street. Classifications and Traffic LOS: Eagle Road is a principal arterial with a capacity of 34,000 ADT and 1993 model traffic counts of 17,000 ADT. Overland is a sub -standard minor arterial with a capacity of 15,000 and 1993 model traffic counts of 13,000 east of Eagle Road. 184 has a capacity of 90,000 East of Eagle and 1993 model traffic counts of 60,000 ADT. This development will generate between 21,000 - 41,000 ADT. Pathways ITD is constructing a Bike/Ped bridge over 1-84 on the Eagle overpass. Transit Planned Improvements ACHD has plans to improve Overland Road between Eagle and Locust Grove in 1997. Comments There is some concern over the issue of a single access into a development of this size At this point it is difficult to determine the impacts this development would have on the regional transportation system. AP_ A has not had the opportune to review the traffic study. We need to have a better understandin of the relationship of how this development fits into the city's comprehensive plan. Recommendation APA will defer recommendations until further analysis of the traffic study. Ada County Highway District, Ada County, Cities of Boise, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, and Meridian Boise Auditorium District, Boise Independent School District, Meridian Joint School District, and Boise State University Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Printed on Recycled Paper December 22, 1994 Shari L. Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: S.E. Corner I-84 and Eagle Road Dear Shari, I have enclosed the marketing package we are sending out to national retailers. We are very encouraged by the response we are getting at this very early juncture. While the site plan is still quite preliminary, it was created by Bud Johnson, an architect in San Francisco who is widely recognized as the country's foremost planner for this type of center. Baylis, Brand, Wagner is an excellent Seattle area designer who have simply hardlined Mr. Johnson's conceptual plan at this point in time. We are extremely interested in any comments you have on the plan at this stage. As I mentioned when we met, the plan will undoubtedly change as we site specific retailers, particularly the anchors. However, it is important that we not have any major flaws in this preliminary design. Sincerely, Russell C. Keithly Principal RCK/mw Enclosure Langly Associates, Inc. 999 Lake Drive Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 (206) 391-6600 FAX 391-9030 BOISE 1-84 POWER CENTER FACT SHEET THE PROJECT ° 665,000 square feet of big boxes, category killers and national and regional tenants on a 72 acre site ° 5 parking spaces per thousand square feet, more for high draw anchors ° Six lane, signalized access off five lane arterial TIMING ° Construction start in fall 1995 ° Occupancy in early summer, 1996 THE AREA 500,000 population in Retail Trade area ° 334,000 population in immediate two county area (all within 15-20 minutes of Center) ° Approximately half of the trade area population is west of the Center and half east of the Center ° Average family income: $44,000 ° Average Household Income: $38,000 Page 1 LOCATION ° Entire southeast quadrant of the intersection of 1-84 and State route 55, the state's major east -west and north -south highways ° Full clover leaf interchange constructed in 1990 ° First interchange west of only regional mall in Boise ° 1/2 mile of freeway frontage ° 63,000 vehicles per day on 1-84 ° 23,000 vehicles per day on SR 55 (Eagle Road) ° SR 55 currently five lanes from Center north to Fairview Avenue (two miles). SR 55 to be widened to five lanes from Fairview past the City of Eagle (six miles) during 1995. DEVELOPER ° Langly Associates, Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300, Issaquah, WA 98027 ° Langly principals have been involved in all types of retail development for 25 years ° Just completing the 550,000 square foot Pickering Place Power Center at intersection of 1-90 and SR 900 in Seattle suburb of Issaquah, WA. ° Mini, in -fill Power Center of 70,000 SF under construction in Olympia, WA. ° Retailers in these projects include: Costco, Eagle Hardware and Garden, PetsMart, Future Shop, Olympic Sports, Barnes and Noble, Ballard Computer, Act III Theaters, Blockbuster Music Plus, Good Guys, Boaters World, Cucina! Cucina! and Red Robin. Page 2 F� N N C O p _cc ^s CL O a le a) r n 90 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 13 1995 APPLICANT: LANGL Y AND ASSOCIATES AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 3 REQUEST: RE VEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 73.5 ACRES TO C -G AGENCY CITY CLERK: COMMENTS CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. r N ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - I-84 Power Center Meridian The applicant is requesting approval for a rezone from RT to C -G and a conditional use to construct a commercial project of approximately 700,000 -square feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the southeast side of I-84 and Eagle Road with a narrow portion or the site abutting Overland Road. This development is estimated to generate 24,885 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by this development: Eagle Road - Principal arterial with bike route designation - Traffic count 9,094 (1993 estimate by APA) Overland Road - Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown - Traffic count 5,290 in 1993 Issues to be addressed: 1. Traffic study results (trip generation rates) 2. Number of access points needed and access widths and locations 3. Right-of-way requirements on Overland 4. Roadway improvements to Overland 5. Staging of Roadway Improvements 6. Access to ACHD's park-and-ride lot 7. ACHD drainage facility FAIRVIEW 3300 AVE. V 12000 ?� I MW �'rt eoo < Sao 10M I 9MUJ .. 0J W W W EMERALD ■ ® � g G`.�r c�7 8 FRANKLIN 8 RD.� $ FRANKUN $ RD. , e000 F iso0 4=8120W. loom 9W 9000 ® � SS � 4Q — 4s u -1 ORMN TRAIL HWY. ! o 6 � 8 LAND 12000 RD. 8000 ie0o Sao 4= 51TE lam $ ■ 0000 Im A+ ift%c- i 1 trxf�r sore Z1 I oil 4: son... a INAl" I OP 117 avom 319V3 ---------- 9. t t t a x ZR Im A+ ift%c- i 1 trxf�r sore Z1 I oil 4: son... a INAl" I OP 117 avom 319V3 ---------- 9. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: MAY 9 1995 APPLICANT: LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 8 REQUEST: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 73.5 ACRES TO C -G AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: COMMENTS FORTHCOMING CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: -rdto%,n, 1 '� All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY 0. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 8874813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIOJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER May 5, 1995 Re: I-84 CENTER -'(Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) I-84 CENTER - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: ANNEXATION & ZONING 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. CONDITIONAL USE ♦ GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. POWERCTR.Y&Z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 2 4. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414.D.4 and 11-2-414.D.5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91). 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 8. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist. 9. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 10. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 11. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. ♦ SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: 1. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated wastewater flows from the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the Sanitary Sewer serviceability of this proposal. 2. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the water serviceability of this proposal. 3. A 100'x100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site. The Well site shall meet all of the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and City of Meridian. Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Rd. (approx. 4,700 LF west), and Eagle Rd. (approx. 3,000 LF north) to and through the proposed site, thereby creating a "loop". This "loop" is crucial to the water serviceability of this site. P0%VMCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 3 4. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center. Applicant will be responsible to construct the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main and any necessary lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site. 5. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their current points. POWERCTR.P&Z. OFFICIALS GUAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY O. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-1433 a FAX (208) 88713 Public Works/Building Dep GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: Mav 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zonin of 73.5 acres to C BY: Langly Associates,Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of 1-84 and Eaale Road— Interchange oad Interchan e JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PR &FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES � �D YOUR CONCISE OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES. P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (108) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOEALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C BY: Langly Associates Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM 8t FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: r / APR 18 1995 Cl l 't Ut iV1lr.h1"19 cENTRAL REVIEW SHEET .. `�` Return 00 DISTRICT Environmental Health Division "~` `" to: HEALTH �� 2 � ��� ❑Boise ❑ Eagle DEPARTMENT " .�%rr✓p'�`...''` : _ [] Garden city Rezone # Meridian Conditional Use # ❑ Kuna Preliminary / Final / Short Plat ❑ ACZ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. 0 S. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ❑ high seasonal ground water ❑ solid lava from original grade 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ❑ 2 feet ❑ 4 feet 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ❑ central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage ❑ central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ❑ central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines ❑ central water D 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store �p AS /!9 "i �� /1�6/2 Date: dlj�13. �/VQ/770 G L- S c �O L-/f�►-T� 07✓ Reviewed By: J/rh (DHD 10/91 rcb, rev. 11/93 j CENTRAL C DISTRICT rHEALTH DEPARTMENT REVIEW SHEET Environmental Health Division Rezone # Conditional Use # Preliminary / Final / Short Plat L, .qtr -q /f-sjaG Return to: ❑ Boise ❑ Eagle ❑ Garden city Meridian ❑ Kuna ❑ ACZ ❑ I, We have Objections to this Proposal. ❑ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ❑ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ❑ 4, We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ❑ S. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more dam concerning the depth of: ❑ high seasonal ground water ❑ solid lava from original grade ❑ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ❑ 2 feet ❑ 4 feet �--7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we canapprovethis proposal for: }.central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community ❑ ell interim sewage SE4.central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water P�2—' 0. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: communitywater 119"central sewage F1 community sewage system [3 ❑ sewage dry lines central water Zff--9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ I I. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store 13. a® , 00tH on NS -iE T%i6- c ❑ child care center / G ,-00,-d G-�� Date: / Zb �— Yajd Reviewed By�� Sw*WS ARG NO114 GD F s R -,^f W4%L"t_ Ti25/fTi't�n�T' .S'6C A-77"74C/>�!� Tt4- I S P rop wa5� was a o �-�►° y �EVIls vJ wnu IUMIUM]3r � 7 "s 2EC-&'4"4 4D"D �W. CCCCENTRAL DISTRICT 9:—ff— HEALTH .707 N. ARMSONG PL e BOISE, ID. 83704-0825 a (208) 375-5211 e FAX: 327-M DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE TR To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS retreated through a grassy swale We recommend that the first one half inch nt st pact oe roundwater and surface water quality prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact g hitects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best The engineers and arc ater disposal and de sto management practices for stormwdat nManuals that managementt could be used for is preventing groundwater and surface water degra guidance are: 1) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL98 2 THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 1 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK ker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc. Prepared by Camp Dresserand dth McKee, o�wlt r Quality Task Force Resources Planning Assoc., 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Elmore County Office Elmore County Office valley County Office P.O. Box 1448 Ada I Boise County Office WIC Base - Meridian 520 E. etn Sheet N. of Environmental Health McCall, ID. 83638 707 N. Amstrong Po. lbpy Robert St. Boise, ID. 83705 . Home, ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. Mountain Home, ID. Ph. 634.7194 Boise, ID. 83104-0825 83647 Ph. 587.4407 Vm7 P Enviro, HeaBh: 327-7499 Ph. 334.3355 83647 Ph. 587.9225 Family Planning: 327.7400 Immunizations: 327.7450 324 Meridian Rd. Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrition: 327.7460 Ph. 8886525 'NIC: 327.7488 MAY 01 ' 9 HUD OF TREASURE VALLEY COULLCD.IIFJk6ERS RONALD R.TOLSMA OFFICIALS MAXYFRRINOTON A Good Place to Live ROBERT D. CORRIE Wlh LIAM o SERO. Jt., wlr Cts Clly &§'n JANELOAI;B.0 1Y�enr GARY O. SMITH, P.CITY OF MERIDIAN WALTW.MORROW E. eer P i COMMISSCON BRUCE & STUART. Water Werke SWI. JIM JOHNSON. Chalnnan JOHN T. SHAWCROFT. WAM9 WSW &*t. 33 EAST IDAHO MOI ALIOJANI DENNIS J. SUMMERS, P&k*61101.JIM SNEARSR SNARI s. STILES. P • Z Ad111. 1v�RID1iAN, IDAHO 83642 CHARLIE ROUNTREE KENNETH W. 6oWER1, Flro Cnlof phpng ( M 888-4433 a FAX MM 8874813 urr wt, 4 TIM HEPPER W. L "BILL" GORDON. Pelka CAlef public Work eWidinB DgWMent po 887.2211 �yi 0 V� I� WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. AII*M*V Lam! GRAM' P. KINGSFORD Mayor NAMPA TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELM�0ROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: Mav 2,19-95 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4117196 HEARING DATE:, 51919 REQUEST: exat onin BY: LanSIXASsoc' e LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: 8e JIM JOHNSON, P/Z ___ MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z .JIM SHEARER, PIZ CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT JNGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C „_WALT MORROW, CIC __ j6M YERRINGTON, CIC WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT IRE DEPARTMENT ,,,_POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT ,_)MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PREL.IM & FINAL PLAT) __—ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ___ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION ,CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT —IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL- PIAT) CITY FILES Nampa & Merid YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: District has no comment on the annexat C deve operty at the southeast Road. We will comment t. Nampa r' Trrigation '04"14"' P 13:46 2088886201 PAGE.07 OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (108) 888.4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of 1-84 and Ea le Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD T C/C SETTLERS DISTRICT BOB CORRIEIE, C/C C/C IDAHO POWERGATION CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: POLICE DEPARTMENT afE t- OA,' OjC CITY ATTORNEY T S72cLGT��/I ¢' 6L�TJZo,V<L CITY ENGINEER ssT CITY PLANNER �cnu�� �r-r �-o" = ZAI ,a s c A APR 2 7 1995 RECEIVED MAY - 5 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 - P.O. BOX 8028 - BOISE, ID - 83707-2028 - (208) 334-8300 May 1, 1994 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83647 Re: Langley and Associates application at Eagle Road and I-84 Dear Sirs, The Idaho Transportation Department has no objection to this annexation or zoning change. The developer needs to be aware that no access will be permitted to I-84 or Eagle Road both of which are full control of access. If you have any questions please, call Ed Pettinger or Larry Strough at 334-8339. Sincerely, JbIll L)?VV Gary W Moles, P.E. District Traffic Engineer GWM:LDS:Ids - An Equal Opportunity Employer - MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: MAY 9 1995 APPLICANT: LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 9 REQUEST: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PROJECT AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS COMMENTS FORTHCOMING "REVIEWED" SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clark JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 1. A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-433 a FAX (208) 887.4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER May 5, 1995 Re: I-84 CENTER - (Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) I-84 CENTER - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: ANNEXATION & ZONING 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. CONDITIONAL USE ♦ GENERAL COMMENTS: Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. POV;MCTR.P&z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 2 4. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414. D.4 and 11-2-414. D.5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91). 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 8. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist. 9. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 10. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 11. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. ♦ SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: 1. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated wastewater flows from the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the Sanitary Sewer serviceability of this proposal. 2. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the water serviceability of this proposal. 3. A 100'x100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site. The Well site shall meet all of the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and City of Meridian. Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Rd. (approx. 4,700 LF west), and Eagle Rd. (approx. 3,000 LF north) to and through the proposed site, thereby creating a "loop". This "loop" is crucial to the water serviceability of this site. POWERCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 3 4. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center. Applicant will be responsible to construct the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main and any necessary lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site. 5. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their current points. POWMCTR.P&Z OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail project BY: Langly Associates Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT O. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4117/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail project BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES�"— OTHER: / YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: s P t. A rJ c ju ,LLL1 JC Q - i -- J W Fl ca,- 541 S ' f �? 4)y, �+ w S x =,'2,� F9 A- f -e ✓'s RECEIAPR 18 1995 A; Z) o ss, s 7 -,Lx c ie', L1 i I tit 114f hllultiAA" J� CENTRAL •• DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT REVIEW SHEET Environmental Health Division Return to: A R 2 IT -715 ❑ Boise Rezone # Conditional Use # %02006-Z �,� 7zriG ,o/ �C i Preliminary / Final / Short Plat C ❑ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ❑ Eagle ❑ Garden city Meridian ❑ Kuna ❑ ACZ ❑ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ❑ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ❑ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ❑ S. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ❑ high seasonal ground water ❑ solid lava from original grade ❑ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ❑ 2 feet ❑ 4 feet �--7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: 149- central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage SEg.xentral water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage ❑ community sewage system 19'E]community water ❑ sewage dry lines ,.central water �- 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store Q 13. W E /4EEC01`f'Wt.r-0 XVO/✓i✓ 6YI NG /%,0 7 E q Date: / 26 l 65 „ri7'2�- 7'0 PE-7X-R�IV16" 'flit /�i9<, fo��.c� Reviewed By'— �yr1'fL�2 1 F S w,*WS ARC NOT ttS L D fDI2 STORM 14A+7iT+t_ •�,�.¢r,�e�.n- $'�'c �}-7TR•cN�O �Goi'JME�✓DA�'/d� , ® i `4 . -rT+ l S p rlopwe7� wA-S p c.c..upi 49D 6 y •'t Xe -R7 -<L 7? / -7 - �.Evle-vo fay P (" =r 's "c" De" , fDND 10/91 rcb. rev. II/93 jll CF, ENTRAL" DISTRICT HEUTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL • BOISE, ID. 83704.0825 • (208) 375-5211 • FAX: 327.8 0 To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECONE%lENDATIONS We recommend that the first one half inch of stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: 1) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Ada ! Boise Counly Office 707 N. Armstrong PI. Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Enviro. Health: 327.7499 Family Planning: 327-7400 Immun¢allons: 327.7450 Nutrition: 327.7460 WIC: 27.7488 Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties WIC Boise - Meridian Elmore Cordy Office amore County Office 1606 Robed St. 520 E. 8th Street N. of Environmental Healh Base, ID. 83705 Mountain flame. ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. Ph. 334.3355 83647 Ph 581.4407 Mountain Horne. ID. 324 Meridian Rd. 83647 Ph. 587-9225 Meridian. ID. 83642 Ph. 888525 Valley County Office P.O. Boz 1448 McCall. ID. 83638 Ph. 634-7194 MAY 01 195 01:02PM NAMPA MERIDIAN IRG OFFICIALS • WILLIAM G. BERG. Jr., CITY CIMS JANICE L. GASB. CRY 11'"Wfw GARY 0. SMITH. P.E. CITY Engineer BRUCE D. STUART.WSW Woke SURI- JOHN T. SHAWOROFT. Ww1e Welef SU01• DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Peft SUPL $HARI S, STIES. P j 2 Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS. Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Pollee Chief WAYNE O. CROOKBTON, JR., A"WMY HUD OFTRBASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF 1VIERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 8884433 • PAX (20t) 8874813 Public W orks/BuMne Department M11) 827-2211 GRAM P. KINGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN R§FCzjjf zD IS Q�� .,r;..., 0000ILMEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAXYERPIN6TON Room D. CORRIE WALT W. MORPOW ,�j2COMM ON JIM JOHNSON, Chalfmte MOEALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM 11EPPER DEVELOP "' - - iROJECTS To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17195 HEARING DATE: 519195 REQUEST: Conditional Usepermit for aRnmx 700L10010 -sauam foot Eetail njoiect BY: Langly Associates,I LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE Ismer of 144 and Eagle Road _I �n9e JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE AUDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM &FINAL PLAT) SHEARER, P/Z _ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT -JIM CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ---ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM NEPPER, PIZ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PIAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT _ BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES _.,__BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT OTHER' All laterals and waste wa s YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: POLICE DEPARTMENT must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must CITY ATTORNEY be Tetained on site. If anv surfacS drainage leaves CITY ENGINEER the site. Nampa & M ridian 'ga ion District must_ CITY PLANNER reeiew drainage D1aAS I1✓i n rennmme deA that Diqrrirr., irrigation I ho Made availiLble Ito—All day91=10-rits within Lhis Nampa A MaridianT '$nrinn nir"rirr requires DevalApmpn[ aRplirari -141-1884 fit Fnr rpview nrinr n_final ng�',�Lt_ i D_r_ a Mnnrp a nr 46 —78f+ i fnr further nf_ Nampa & Meridian. Irrigation District AECEIVE0 M AY 0 1 1995 C111A W tiii> D1ii<< 2088886201 PAGE. 02 April 17, 1996 Shari L. Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: I-84 Power Center Dear Shari: I wanted to advise you personally that Langly Associates has chosen not to proceed with the development of the subject project. Our options expired on April 15, 1996 and we simply have not found enough positive response from major retailers to justify purchasing the property and proceeding with the development. A number of factors have combined to lead us to this decision. First, the national retail market has softened substantially over the past two years and many of the potential retailers for this site are not expanding at all or have cut back their expansion plans substantially. Coincidentally, the economic growth in the Boise Valley has slowed substantially since we first conceived this project. Finally, many of the large retailers who are opening or have opened major new stores around the Boise Town Square Mall are retailers we hoped would locate at the I-84 Power Center. When we started working on this project approximately two years ago, the traffic conditions around the mall were poor at best. We felt that it was unlikely that significant numbers of new stores would be allowed around the mall for this reason. Unfortunately, we were wrong and many of our prospective tenants have located on Franklin or Milwaukee. We want to thank you for the time and effort you expended in helping us to develop a plan for a very high quality development. Please extend our thanks to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Major and City Council. Everyone associated with the City of Meridian dealt with us in a professional, fair and considerate manner. It is very disappointing to not be able to maintain those relationships while bringing this project to fruition. Langly Associates, Inc. 3633 136th Place SE Suite 205 Bellevue, WA 98006 (206)746-6700 Fax 746-6797 r Page 2 April 18, 1996 We continue to believe that this is a superb location for reasonably intense commercial development. The fact that the property has now been annexed and zoned should lead to the commercial development of the property in the foreseeable future. Sincerely, 1 Russell C. Keithly Principal RCK/dh cc: Bob Come, Mayor suiesisacls RECEIVED 0 C T 1 7 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN Tv 7i I 'J, .. ._. — ...J. _ T ✓ Z. a - ~'i . i r_ 'T . .. 1 _ . _t l_ r Y L - , _ ._ �� to _r i� j�ji r- 7. `i,^. .. _, _. r ,Ira_ C �_,'_• _ _... i - r - - -- - - - - ( ir, ,h �('1 ! —,:`• —. — — — — _ _ `l1.ti\. __ NAr rZ 7 ....i[. 7 :i D -i " tj Y 1 4 P P - .-I , � : , : - A RC j �7 77" L.- _.Z 71 17 iL '4t-1 f I L 4; 4U H ~UL � 7' D -i " tj Y 1 4 P P - .-I , � : , : - A RC j �7 WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL' GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER May 5, 1995 UPDATED 10/17/95 From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: I-94 CENTER - (Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) 1-84 CBS - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: h,!_ •I, Jr.,qr4oLlm 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. NO LEGAL DESCRIPHONHAS BEEN SUBMI77ED AS OF THIS DATE • GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches trussing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. POWERCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council May 5, 1995 Page 2 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. 4. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414.D.4 and 11-2-414.D.5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91). 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 8. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist. 9. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 10. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 11. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. ♦ SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS; 1. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated wastewater flows from the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the Sanitary Sewer serviceability of this proposal. NOT RECEIVED AS OF THIS DATE 2. Please Provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the water serviceability of this proposal. POWERCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council May 5, 1995 Page 3 NOT RECEIVED AS OF THIS DATE 3. A 100' x 100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site. The Well site shall meet all of the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and City of Meridian. Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Rd. (approx. 4,700 LF west), and Eagle Rd. (approx. 3,000 LF north) to and through the proposed site, thereby creating a "loop". This "loop" is crucial to the water serviceability of this site. 4. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center. Applicant will be responsible to construct the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main and any necessary lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site. 5. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their current points. POWMCT&P&Z JAMES E. BRUCE, Presiaenf SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice PresidenT SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary ECtEWED AUG 2 8 1995 CITY of m t1um' n" August 24, 1995 TO: Langly Associates. Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 FROM: Karen Gallagher. Coordinator Development Services Divisi SUBJECT: MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 I-84 and Eagle Road Power Center Your application for the above referenced project was acted on by the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District on August 23, 1995. The attached staff report lists conditions of approval and street improvements which are required. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 345-7680. KG cc: Development Services Chron John Edney Chuck Rinaldi City of Meridian Baylis Brand Wagner/10801 Main Street/ Bellevue, WA 98004 ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 . Phone (208) 345-7680 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 9 Development Services Division Preliminary Report MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - I-84 Power Center - Meridian The applicant is requesting annexation to the City of Meridian, approval for a rezone from RT to C -G and a conditional use to construct a commercial project of approximately 700,000 -square feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the southeast side of I-84 and Eagle Road with a narrow portion of the site abutting Overland Road. This development is estimated to generate 24,885 additional vehicle trips per day. A traffic study has been submitted for this application. Ada Planning Association (APA) has also prepared a special transportation study for the four square mile area including this site. Both studies indicate that the Eagle/Overland/Franklin corridors will be seriously impacted by this and other anticipated development in the four square mile area and that the planned roadway system will not be adequate to support the proposed level of development. Roads impacted by this development: Eagle Road - Principal arterial with bike route designation - Traffic count 9,094 (1993 estimate by APA) Overland Road - Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown - Traffic count 5,290 in 1993 ACHD Commission Date - August 23, 1995 7:00 P.M. rA'MView 33001T AVE. m ,zeaotim I 3 a 9000 72 600 } 4200 10910 9000 cc G p� J $ $ W R O T. J O EMERALD W J 8 FRANKLIN S RD. Est 8 FRANKLIN S RD.. 8 8000 600 8 3300 g 4200 8 12000, 10600 S ® 9800 90007. ■ F g C 46 o` J U 4s➢ Lu OREGON TRAIL HWY. I VERLAND 4200 12000 RD. 10600 � ■ 9000 a � 6000 1 500 3300 S ITE ACHD Commission Date - August 23, 1995 7:00 P.M. 40 =iiii Y� i - w W z W V 4 Z MAI , Ilk. 0 140 1 {\ Sot b e it Ax em • \�-� �ba� S sem►! tivire�c�a � -- - ad0?l 31Dd3 I • SET't,T T I O'T T ITS'L � o 0 F6Z'zT alEp.zanot� 4 O •• FEz`�z E6�`ZI 08E'9 •. 0WS u 0-44 4 E 04 Q %M4 co OLS•ST N • �o lanosf) Isn Ln co 0 L£'z uEippaw .. .. -o 4 1 9 co 1 ITS'L � o 0 F6Z'zT alEp.zanot� 4 O •• FEz`�z E6�`ZI 08E'9 •. 0WS u 0-44 4 E 04 Q %M4 co OLS•ST N • �o lanosf) Isn Ln co 0 L£'z uEippaw .. .. -o 4 1 9 I !ajtI L y� ant, 002`2t 009'et 000`9f! OOV6T 006`OT 0 0 Ur+ z U � O H .r+ OOV6T 006`OT 0 0 Ur+ 0 O U U a � 3 o OOz'9s O O d' lajEp.zanojD oos`sz 009`91 oos`tz 000`Ez ano.if) Isn3o t ,--+ Fulalplaaw cit Z 7 a Table 4 TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION TAZ Section I Land Use I Acres SQF GFA (000) Trip Generation 162 WE 1SF,R1, Ed eview ! 791 3,441,2401 2,580.93 754 162 INE SF,R8 251 1,089,0001 816.751 1,910 162 NE 1MF,R3 25 1,089,0001 816.751 716 162 INE Free Stanj7ing Retail 16 696,9601 174.24 7,086 162 INE Office 10 435,600 108.90 3,721 162 INE Canal, etc. 5 217,800 NA NA 162 1 NW SF,R1, Montview Park 301 1,306,800 980.10 287 162 1 NW SF,R3 201 871,2001 653.40 573 162 NW St. Luke's Hosoital 40 1,742,4001 475.20 7,974 162 NW Nursing Home,300 bed 5 217,8001 54.45 780 162 NW Office 1 40 1,742,4001 435.60 14,884 162 INW General Retail 1 21 914,760 228.69 9,301 162 NW Canal, etc. 1 41 174,240 NA INA 162 1 SU 1 320113,939-200 7-3251 47,986 284 SW SF,R1 40 1,742,400 1,306.80 382 284 SW Park and Ride 2 87,120 82.76 1,726 284 SW Power Center 73 3,179,880 714.40 24,885 284 SW Flood Plain 45 1,960,200 NA NA 284 SE SF,R1 80 3,484,800 2,613.60 764 284 1 SE SF,R3 44 1,916,640 1,437.48 1,261 284 ISE Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 284 S Canal, 1-84 Hwy 21 914,760 NA NA 2 41SUBTOTALI 1 320113,939,2001 6,3181 35,661 283 NE SF,R1 135 5,880,600 4,410.45 1,289 283 NE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NE Office 5 217,800 54.45 886 283 NW SF,R1 38 1,655,280 1,241.46 363 283 NW SF,R3 100 4,356,000 3,267.00 2,865 283 NW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NW Flood Plain, etc 12 522,720 NA NA 283 SW SF,R3 1 78 3,397,680 2,548.26 2,235 283 SW Industrial Park 1 15 653,400 163.35 1,139 283 SW Golf/Recreation 15 653,400 653.40 125 283 SW Retail 24 1,045,440 261.36 10,630 283 SW Office 12 522,720 130.68 1,718 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 16 696,960 NA NA 283 SE SF,R1 35 1,524,600 1,143.45 334 283 SE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 SE Retail 34 1,481,040 370.26 15,058 283 SE Office 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 283 SE Light Industrial 4 174,240 43.56 304 283 SE 1-84 R -O -W 67 2,918 520 NA NA 283 SUBTOTAL f 6401 27,878,4001 15,2681 47,493 T_�I_ i n- ...4 TAZ Section tluiG �yvl I��� ucuLIA,cres Land Use SaF GFA Trip 000 Generation 286 INE Retail 114 4,965,Z401 1,241.461 50,490 286 INE SF,R3 331 1,437,4801 1,078-111 945 ' 286 INE Light Industrial 13 566,280 141.57 987 286 NW SF,R1 , 39 1,698,840 1,274.13 372 286 I NW SF,R3 97 4,225,320 3,168.99 2,779 286 NW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7,004 286 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2,214 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 286 SW SF,R3 145 6,316,200 4,737.15 4,154 286 ISW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 1 SW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 2861SE SF,R3 117 5,096,520 3,822.39 3,352 286 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3,434 286 SE Retail 10 435,6001 108.90 4,429 286 SE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 286 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,4001 16,716 84,589 285 NE SF,R1 1 69 3,005,640 2,254.23 659 285 NE SF,R2 65 2,831,400 2,123.55 1,242 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696,960 NA NA 285 NW SF,R3 601_.2.613,60Q 1,960.20 1,719 285 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28,788 285 NW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 3,171 285 NW Flood Plain 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SW SF,R2 122 5,314,320 3,985.74 2,330 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 285 SW Office 15 653,400 163.35 2,033 285 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2,352,240 1,764.18 516 285 SE SF,R1 93 4,051,080 3,038.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 SE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 285 SUBTOTALI. 640 27,878,400 16,673156,847 GRAND TO AL 2560 11,513,600 62,300 272,576 Facts and Findings: General Information A. RT - Existing zoning C -G - Requested zoning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square feet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Overland Road Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown Traffic count 5,290 in 1993 140 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 108 -feet required right-of-way (54 -feet from centerline) Overland Road is improved with 28 -feet of pavement without curb, gutter or sidewalk. The roadway is elevated about three feet above the surrounding property as is common in rural roads and will probably require lowering when reconstructed as an urban roadway. B. The consideration of this application has been deferred by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission until September 12, 1995. C. Access to the site from Interstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of access that is proposed to be a private driveway connection to Overland Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 feet east of the Eagle Road intersection. D. The site is currently under agricultural production. Two single family residences occupy a portion of the site. It is inevitable that this site will develop for some highly intensive land use. The site's exposure to the interstate highway makes it highly desirable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or more) arterials instead of one. This report points out the problems that intensive development of this property (and others in the area) will cause the local transportation system in a rapidly developing rural area. E. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site and Eagle Road that currently serves a single family residence and an unimproved parcel owned by ITD. This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The ITD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 2 F. Eagle Road north of Overland Road is under the jurisdiction of ITD, having full access control on the Interstate 84 ramps and on Eagle Road between I-84 and Overland Road, therefore prohibiting access to this site from Eagle Road and I-84. The developer is required to submit application materials to ITD for the review and requirements of that Department. G. Excepting the approaches to the Eagle Road intersection, Overland Road is a 2 -lane roadway from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road. Both Overland Road legs of the signalized Eagle Road intersection have left turn lanes. A volume of 15,000 vehicle trips per day has been identified as Level of Service (LOS) C to be used for long range planning purposes for two lane roadways such as Overland Road. LOS C is the maximum desirable volume (not capacity) established by APA as a guideline in the 2010 Transportation Plan. The last measured traffic volume on Overland Road east of Eagle Road was 5,290 in 1993. The 1993 estimated volume west of Eagle Road on Overland was 7,265. This project is forecast to generate 7,855 trips per day east of the site on Overland Road and 5,952 trips west of Eagle Road, increasing the estimated traffic on Overland Road east of the site to 13,145 and to 13,217 west of Eagle Road. Although the traffic volumes are within maximum desirable thresholds on the roadways, the inordinate number of turning movements at the site driveway and the Overland/Eagle intersection require special intersection design. If intersections are "built -out" to an ultimate configuration in advance of the roadway segment between them, greater traffic volumes can be sustained before LOS C delays are experienced by the majority of the traffic. H. Currently, Eagle Road south of Overland Road is a 2 -lane roadway and north of Overland Road to the I-84 ramp transition lanes is a 4 -lane roadway. Eagle Road has single left turn lanes on both legs of the signalized Overland Road intersection. Traffic: A. The developer has submitted a traffic study for this project. Staff has reviewed and accepted the traffic analysis. The traffic study recommended a number of major improvements to the segment of Overland Road between the site's driveway and Eagle Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection. These improvements will add the needed capacity to the immediate system to accommodate the additional traffic from this project, but will not replace the unused capacity in the system that currently exists. Even with the roadway improvement proposed by the developer, there will be a net loss in intersection capacity at the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. The key elements of the developer's traffic study are as follows: On-site • The planned commercial center will include approximately 714,000 square feet of gross leasable area. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 2,324 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 24,885 daily vehicle trips. • A single access roadway from Overland Road is proposed to serve the project site. A secondary, emergency access road is planned on the west side of the site that will also connect to Overland Road. • The site access road will require three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be required at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 3 Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • Westbound Overland Road will need an additional right -turn lane at the site access road intersection. • The segment of Overland Road between Eagle Road and the site access road will require ultimate widening to seven traffic lanes; two eastbound through lanes, two eastbound left turn lanes, two westbound through lanes, and an added westbound right turn lane. • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require ultimate widening to three left turn lanes with the prohibition of pedestrian crossings or the accommodation for pedestrians with an over crossing. • The south and west legs of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require widening to match the added lanes north and east of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection. • The east leg of the site access road/Overland Road intersection will require widening to match the added lanes west of the site access road/Overland Road intersection. B. ACRD staff has analyzed the operation of the Overland/Eagle intersection and found that it currently operates at LOS B, with an average delay of about 10 seconds per vehicle, and uses about 15 percent of the intersection's capacity of critical volumes. (Critical volumes are the specific intersection volumes that conflict with each other, e.g., the southbound left turns conflict with the northbound through movements.) If this project is developed, and the recommended improvements have been constructed, the traffic will use 44 percent of the capacity of critical volumes of the intersection. Staff recommends that the developer be required to replace the 29 percent of capacity of critical volumes that the development will use over and above the capacity provided by the recommended improvements. This can be accomplished by adding a through lane to each of the four legs of the intersection. C. Based upon the submitted traffic study and District policy, staff recommends that the developer be required to make the following roadway improvements that are necessary to accommodate the site generated traffic in the short term, prior to the build out of the four square toile impact area. These improvements will replace the current unused capacity of critical volumes of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection: On-site • The access road will be constructed to include three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • A continuous right turn lane on westbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Eagle Road north of the intersection. • A continuous through lane on eastbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway and on Overland Road west of Eagle Road. • A second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate right turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. • A separate through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 4 D. No stub streets are planned for the project. All internal roadways are private. One additional site access is possible in the future as adjacent residential land redevelops and should be preserved along the eastern portion of the project site. If the adjoining residential area redevelops, connecting access to the site is possible. ACHD recommends to the City of Meridian that no buildings be allowed to develop along the southern 100 feet of the eastern site boundary, so the potential additional access road will not be blocked. Sub -Regional Transportation Study A. This application was before the Commission on June 14, 1995. At that meeting, the Commission deferred action on the application and requested Ada Planning Association (APA) to conduct a sub - regional land use/transportation analysis of the four square miles surrounding this site. That analysis was completed by APA on August 1; 1995. The volumes of traffic forecast by the APA study to be generated within the four square mile area are shown in Table 4, immediately following the maps at the front of this report and its findings have been summarized by District staff as follows: The analysis was requested by ACHD in response to the Power Center application, the St. Luke's project north of I44, the Bews application (north of I-84, east of St. Luke's), and other anticipated developments in the Eagle Road corridor. The conceptual plans for the referenced properties indicate a much higher level of development than is assumed in the Long Range Transportation Plan. The purpose of the transportation analysis was to determine the transportation impacts of these plans and determine the amount of additional roadway improvements that may be needed to accommodate those impacts. The conceptual planning area represents approximately four square miles (2,560 acres), including the entire area bounded by Locust Grove Road, Franklin Road, Cloverdale Road and Victory Road. Approximately 150 acres (6% of the total) are undevelopable, including the I-84 corridor, canals, and flood plains. The 2015 forecast trip generation from the entire area is estimated at 272,500 daily vehicle trips. This is roughly equivalent to 27,000 single family homes or seven Boise Town Square Malls. The forecast trip generation was based on a land use scenario developed by E.J. Smith and Associates under contract to APA and reviewed by ACRD staff, City of Meridian staff and some officials, and APA staff. The analysis assumed that the entire area would be built out by 2015. Maps 5 and 6 show the traffic in the study area now and in 20 years assuming full build out of the study area. This project will generate 9.1 percent of the total traffic in the study area by year 2015, but occupies only 3.1 percent of the land area and directs that traffic to the arterial system at only one location. APA's modeling effort used the Bench to Valley Transportation Study network which included the Five Mile Road interchange. The roadway volume forecast in the Eagle Road corridor will increase over the estimated traffic volumes in this report if the Five Mile interchange is not constructed. The Five Mile interchange was included in the network assumption because this system improvement would be necessary to support the proposed high level of development and its resulting traffic. The Bench/Valley network used in the analysis is the proposed network developed as a result of the March 2, 1995 community -wide meeting, and it is essentially equivalent to several versions that are currently under consideration. With respect to this area of the County, it is most important to note the Five Mile interchange assumption. It is not feasible to consider such an intense sub -regional development without a Five Mile interchange. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 5 Eagle Road and Franklin Road are principal arterials and Overland Road is a minor arterial. ACRD Traffic Services staff ran computer analyses of the operation of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection analyzing its current operation, its operation with this project but no other development, and its operation with this project plus the full build out of the four square mile impact area. The results of that analysis indicate that the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection currently operates at LOS B or better, having less than 10 seconds of average delay per vehicle and currently uses approximately 15 percent of its capacity of critical volumes. Both the Franklin Road/Eagle Road and Overland Road/Eagle Road intersections fall below Level of Service D using any conventional intersection and arterial roadway design with the planned level of development.. Assuming build out of the four square mile impact area without this project, the intersection will require additional lanes but will operate at LOS D, with an average delay of 34.5 seconds per vehicle. Adding the forecast traffic from the Power Center and the improvements to the intersection proposed by the developer, the intersection will operate worse than the described range of LOS F, with an average delay of 62.8 seconds per vehicle. Extensive roadway widening and some form of grade separated interchanges would be required to attain an acceptable level of service (D or better) at the Eagle/Franklin and Eagle/Overland intersections. ACRD staff has sketched a possible configuration of an interchange for the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. It shows a grade separated intersection with the north -south traffic on Eagle passing unimpeded beneath a structure on which Overland Road traffic would pass over Eagle Road. Two separate intersections east and west of Eagle Road would split the northbound and southbound turning movements to Overland Road and the traffic on Overland Road trying to access Eagle Road. The southbound leg of this split intersection would operate at LOS F (average delay of more than 60 seconds per vehicle) because of the high number of left turns by southbound Eagle Road traffic turning east onto Overland Road to the Power Center. The northbound leg would operate at LOS C because the predominate turning movement would be right turns from the Power Center going back to I-84 on Eagle Road. Alternative interchange designs are possible. The costs of the grade separated intersection improvements ($5 million to $8 million per intersection) would be the predominant extra -ordinary cost of the high level of development being considered in the area if right-of-way for major roadway widening is obtained with development and mitigation requirements do not escalate between the time of the adjacent development and the construction of the ultimate roadway section. The APA analysis indicates that Eagle Road will have 57,000 trips per day along the one mile plus segment from south of Overland Road to north of Franklin Road, requiring widening to a minimum of eight lanes. Overland Road will have a maximum of 30,400 and 24,600 trips per day east of Eagle Road, and east of the site driveway, respectively, and would require widening to four lanes for most of its length with special treatment at the Eagle Road intersection in order to operate at an acceptable level of service. The special treatment will probably require a grade separated intersection as described above. Left turn lanes would be necessary at other intersections of existing and future local roads. Overland Road would require six lanes from Eagle Road to the entrance to the Power Center (plus the westbound right turn lane to Eagle Road), because of the site related traffic. Overland Road west of Eagle Road will have 26,400 trips per day upon build out of the impact area, including the traffic from the Power Center. Franklin Road will have a maximum of 23,000 trips per day west of Eagle Road and 25,500 trips per day east of Eagle Road. Severe problems with left turns at the Eagle Road intersection (westbound to southbound) will also require some form of special intersection design similar to Overland Road described above. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 6 B. Prior to the receipt of this application, another traffic analysis was prepared for the District covering the area north of I-84 and east of Eagle Road in connection with the E. L. Bews annexation and conditional use application. Mr. Bews owns 80 acres of land east of the St. Luke's property. In contrast to the analysis conducted by APA, the St. Luke's/Bews, et al traffic analysis did not assume that a Five Mile interchange would be built, as the development of the projects north of I-84 seem to be likely regardless of the Bench -Valley outcome and results. Although that analysis did not include the Five Mile interchange, it used the previously assumed APA 2015 land use in the sub -regional area and the remainder of Ada County so the lower trip generation in the surrounding area somewhat counterbalanced the lack of a Five Mile interchange. Thus, the two studies yield similar and compatible results. The conclusions of the St. Luke's/Bews traffic analysis are summarized below: The provision of an east -west connection across the St. Luke's property to the Bews property provides a significant improvement to the operation of the Franklin Road/Eagle Road intersection. However, the added traffic from the east -west connection across the St. Luke's property would seriously degrade the operation of the St Luke's driveway intersection with Eagle Road. The addition of this roadway would delay the need for an interchange at the Franklin/Eagle intersection, similar to that described above for the Overland/Eagle intersection. The proposed intensity of development in the area will require unanticipated and unfunded inordinate widening of the arterials in the area. Alternatively, in order to maintain currently accepted Levels of Service and the avoidance of these inordinate widening requirements using more conventional roadway designs, limitations of development intensity will be necessary. C. Both traffic analyses indicated that, under long term conditions, the existing transportation system is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the developments proposed and anticipated in this area. The proposed project, expected spinoff projects and other known projects north of Interstate 84 are all unanticipated in the Long Range Transportation Plan. D. The build -out of this project, the ensuing spin-off development in the immediate area, and the anticipated longer term development in the four square mile impact area will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Program, if currently acceptable levels of service are to be maintained, and will create a need for transportation system improvements that are currently unanticipated and for which funding has not been identified. These findings must be established and adopted as a basis for the imposition of extraordinary impact fees. E. Based on the need for these unanticipated roadway improvements, it would follow that some form of extraordinary impact fee could be required to fund the offsite roadway improvements needed to make the system operate at the current level of service, or that the needed improvements be constructed by the developers of the impacting projects. Eagle Road, which requires widening to eight lanes, is not eligible for the expenditure of extraordinary fees that might be imposed by the District. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 7 F. Facilities Financing Districts are used in other states to finance a combination of state, local and private roadway improvements. This would be extremely helpful in this (and other) cases, but cannot be done without special authorization by the Idaho Legislature. G. An ironic twist to this application/site allowed by the impact fee ordinance is the developer's option to prepare an individual assessment and potentially obtain a substantial reduction of the regular impact fee, because of the usage of the Interstate Highway and State Highway systems by some customers of this project to make part of the trip to this development. Although much of the volume of traffic to and from the site will use I-84 for most of the length of the trips getting to the vicinity of the Power Center, the turning movements that are necessary to get to the specific site are the cause of serious degradation of level of service and exhaustion of existing capacity of critical volumes at the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. Alternative Actions: A. Adopt and impose an extraordinary impact fee for all development within the four square mile affected area. This may tend to drive the development to other locations, causing problems there. A disadvantage of extraordinary impact fees is that they are collected over a long period of time, when the improvement they are to pay for may be needed immediately. This would require additional accounting efforts, major commitments of staff time to administer contracts with developers providing the design and construction, and the provision of construction inspection and oversight. The extra -ordinary impact fee could be calculated by either of the following methods: i. Compute the total estimated cost of the off-site improvements that are required to maintain an acceptable LOS and divide by the total number of estimated trips in the four square mile impact area). The result would be applied to each land use as development was being approved as a fee for each forecast vehicle trip generated by the proposed use. A staff estimate indicates that the cost of needed improvements in the area is $27 million and the number of trips is 272,500, resulting in an extraordinary impact fee of $99.08 per trip. Relating this to actual land uses, a single family dwelling would have -an extraordinary impact fee of $990.80 in addition to the regular impact fee of $900 ($687 if smaller than 1500 square feet). A 30,000 square foot office building would have an extraordinary impact fee of $36,248 in addition to a regular impact fee of $102,060. A 3,000 square foot convenience store would have an extraordinary impact fee of $131,834 in addition to the regular impact fee of $27,729. This is the method used in the calculation of the regular impact fee and assigns the fee to the source of travel demand. ii. The cost of the off-site improvements could be divided by the number of developable acres of land in the impact area. The result would be assessed on each acre of land as it is developed. This would place an unfair share of the cost on residential development, or eliminate any land uses with low traffic generation rates. ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 / acre = $2805 / dwelling, at four dwellings per acre). MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 8 B. Require the construction by this developer now, of the off-site improvements that are needed to accommodate the traffic needs of the future development anticipated in the four square mile impact area that would impact Overland Road, since that is the only road to which the project would take access, then use regular or extra -ordinary impact fees over the long term of growth to reimburse the developer for his cost. The developer would be reimbursed for some or all of the construction costs, but may have to absorb the cost of carrying the expense until he is totally reimbursed. (Extra -ordinary impact fees would not be collected from the developer that constructed the improvements, but they would be computed for his development and subtracted from the total cost of the improvements to be reimbursed). This action would be in lieu of establishing an extraordinary impact fee for the area. A variation of this option would be to require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from regular impact fees collected within the impact area. This is allowed by the impact fee ordinance and is currently being used by the District to finance capacity improvements. Overland Road from Cloverdale to Meridian and Eagle Road from Overland to Victory are currently qualified by the Capital Improvements Plan for the use of impact fee revenue. Victory Road along the south boundary of the impact area is not currently eligible for the use of impact fee revenue to increase capacity because the CIP does not anticipate this level of development in this area. This would require less additional staff time and accounting than described in A. above. It would provide the needed improvements as development occurs and assess the costs of those improvements to the developments causing the need. C. Form a Local Improvement District (LID) to finance the construction of the off-site improvements and assess either extra -ordinary impact fees or the usual property tax liens to pay off the cost of the improvement. This would require the cooperation and cost of some landowners that may not have plans to develop their property and it would cost all owners the same per unit of land regardless of the ultimate use of their property. However it would provide all of the improvements needed to meet the anticipated impacts prior to all the development occurring. The cost to be financed would equal the cost of the extraordinary impact per acre under A.U. above ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 per acre). D. Accept the responsibility to meet the challenge created by the intensive development that is forecast in this area and fund whatever level of roadway improvements are affordable using the revenue currently available to the District and accept a deficient Level of Service until needed improvements can be funded and constructed. The regular impact fees from the forecast development will be a substantial sum, but will be collected as the traffic is being generated and will not provide sufficient time for project design, right-of-way acquisition and construction (usually a three year time frame). This could last several years, while the District was trying to build itself out of the shortfall. The developer of this proposed project has estimated the regular impact fee revenue to be generated by the level of development forecast by APA in the four square mile impact area to be $22 million at build out. Staff agrees with this amount, based on current published trip lengths and network adjustment factors. However, using new trip length and network MCU-7-95/MRZ 2-95 Page 9 adjustment data provided by APA, ACHD staff calculated the amount of regular impact fee to be $16,700,000, if the area develops according to the land use scenario developed by APA. ACHD staff estimated the cost of accommodating the traffic from the same level of development at $27 million, including: • two grade separated intersections for Eagle Road at Overland Road and Franklin Road, • widening Overland Road and Franklin Road to five lanes between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Victory Road to three lanes between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Eagle Road to five lanes from Overland Road to Victory Road. A variation of this option would be modified impact fee offset agreements with developers as they construct their projects, requiring improvements to the system that are relative to their project. The difference between these and regular impact fee offset agreements would be that reimbursement to the developer would be deferred until the revenue was available from other development within the impact area. Again, the developer would be required to absorb the interest on his money until he was reimbursed. That would be his contribution to the solution of the problem, in lieu of an extra -ordinary impact fee. No mechanism is available to reimburse the developer if the other proposed developments never occur. E. Pursue enabling legislation to allow "partnering" between the State (ITD), ACHD and private parties within an impact area to provide joint funding for the required improvements. Staff recommends that this legislation be pursued anyway, whether this development occurs or not. F. Recommend denial of the application on the basis that the development will exceed the ability of the Highway District to maintain current levels of service on the impacted roadways and intersections. This action ignores the likelihood that this property and the surrounding property will eventually be developed for some intensive form of land use, with or without the District's approval. G. Accept the project with the regular impact fee revenue that will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. This action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish the four square mile area as a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development occurs along them. This action would alter the schedule of capacity improvement projects in the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. H. Require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from extraordinary impact fees imposed on the properties in the interior of the sections. This would result in spreading the cost of the improvements among all the MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 10 r properties in the impact area as they developed, and the needed improvements would be provided more quickly than the District could program, design and construct them if they were to be done as District sponsored projects. I. Require the developers of all property in the impact area (and District wide) to replace a pro -rata share of the then available unused capacity of all intersections and roadways. The unused capacity would be quantified including a reserve for background District wide traffic and adjusted downward as each property in the effected area is developed, so there would be no unused capacity in the system when the area is 100 percent developed. Recommended Alternative: Staff recommends that a combination of Alternatives G. and I. be adopted for this and future applications in the area. Accept the development(s), requiring the developers to make whatever improvements to the system are necessary to mitigate their site related impacts, and replace any unused capacity in the system that their development uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to make needed capacity improvements as funds are available and the Commission budgets funds for the improvements. This will result in the public having to cope with deficient levels of service in some cases until revenue is available to make the required improvements. Staff Recommendation: If the application is approved, the following requirements should be forwarded to Meridian as conditions for approval. Site Specific Requirements: Prior to the construction of Phase I of this project: 1. Comply with requirements of ITD for Interstate Highway 84 and Eagle Road frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements. 2. The main site access shall be provided through an access roadway as shown on the site plan. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two northbound traffic lanes. The exiting (southbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes, and one right turn lane. A fully actuated traffic signal shall be installed at the site access road intersection with Overland Road, with design and construction acceptable to the District. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at the initial phase of site development. Easements shall be granted to ACHD for the maintenance of signal detectors that are located outside the public right-of-way. 3. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet) and abutting the parcel between the site and Eagle Road. The owner = will be compensated for this additional right-of-way. The additional right-of-way would not otherwise be required for several years without the development of this parcel, therefore it is a project related impact, not reimbursable under either the District's ordinance or the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 11 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate curve) of right-of-way at both corners of the Overland Road/site access road to keep the street improvements in the public right-of-way. The owner will = be compensated for this additional right-of-way. 5. Maintain public access along the western border of the project to the planned park and ride lot. This access will also serve as secondary access to the project, the park and ride lot and for emergency vehicles. 6. Maintain a 100 -foot clear zone/non-build area along the eastern site border between the building fronts and the southeast corner of the site to allow for a future external site connection to abutting parcels. 7. Roadway improvements to Overland Road and Eagle Road may be constructed in two or three phases as the site is developed, as described below: Phase I The following roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the first phase of development, approximately 425,000 square feet (60% of the proposed development): • Construct the site access road with three southbound and two northbound traffic lanes. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Install a traffic signal at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Coordinate the signal design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct a continuous westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road intersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct an added right turn lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Obtain and dedicate 54 - feet of right-of-way (27 -additional feet) along Overland Road from the site's driveway to the east terminus of the added right turn lane and required tapers. • Construct one left turn lane (eastbound) on Overland Road at the site access road. • Construct, or deposit the cost thereof, a median island in Overland Road for the access road into the Park and Ride lot. Phase H The following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to the development of phase H, approximately 645,000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 12 Phase III The following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to completion of the 714,000 square foot development (100% of the proposed development): • Construct a second westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road east of the project site that is needed to match the roadway widening west of the project site. • Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road west of Eagle Road that is needed to match the roadway widening between the project site and Eagle Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct one additional through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection to replace the current unused capacity. Coordinate the design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct curb, gutter and seven foot wide sidewalk along Overland Road, from 500 -feet east of the site's driveway to the end of the intersection transition west of Eagle Road. Coordinate the design with District Traffic Services staff. 8. Construct pedestrian ramps on the comer of Overland Road and the main site driveway in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 40-1335. 9. Locate proposed sign(s) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle of all street and driveway intersections. 11. None of the roadway improvements described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or reimbursement. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. A permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 13 • > M 4. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 6. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 7. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by ACHD. 8. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. AUG 2 3 1995 MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 14 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 • P.O. BOX 8028 • BOISE, ID • 83707-2028 • (208) 334-8300 September 27,1994 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho Re: L uWy Associates Inc. Power Center Dear Sirs, The Idaho Transportation Department requested a Traffic Impact Study in July 1995 for this development. We have not recieved this document showing the impact that will occur at the I-84 / Eagle Rd. interchange. Without this study to base our recommendations on we request that approval for the Power Center be denied. Sincerly; ja47 W Yy� Gary W Moles,P.E. District Traffic Engineer GWM:LDS:Ids - An Equal Opportunity Employer - TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 • R.O. BOX 8028 • BOISE, ID • 83707-2028 • (208) 334-8300 October 17,1995 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho Re:I. r ociates, Inc. "Power Mall ,, Dear Sirs, The Idaho Transportation Department has some concerns about roadway capacity problems that will be created by the construction of this development. The Westbound Ramp Terminal at the I-84/Eagle Rd. Interchange will have an unacceptable level of service without signal and roadway modifications. The Eastbound Ramp Terminal will also suffer from an unacceptable level of service and will need to be signalized. We will not endorse this development as proposed and urge the Meridian Planning Department to require improvements be made to the I-84/Eagle Rd. Interchange so as to retain an acceptable level of service as a condition of approval. Interchange improvements will need approval by I.T.D. prior to zoning approval. Sincerly; Gary W Moles,P.E. District Traffic Engineer GWM:LDS:lds - An Equal Opportunity Employer - Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Mall mania growth October 11, 1995 ECEED Q C T 16 1995 CITY OF MERiDMN We have owned property in Meridian for 20 years in three different locations, Barrett Street, Overland and ten mile, and Country Terrace Way. We are very concerned about controlling growth around Eagle and Locust Grove Roads and Overland, this is already a congested traffic area at the beginning and ending of the work day. We lived in Westland Acres just north of the Boise Town Square Mall for 25 years, and that area is now a nightmare. I hope we have all learned something from that mess. People are very critical of the Mayor, and Boise City Council members for their lack of a good planning process, and not following the comprehensive plan. We feel voters rejecting the $14.7 m,i.11ion bond proposal is telling us all something. The Running Brook Estates subdivision below us here has just lowered the price of their lots $10,000.00 because they could not sell them. We know you will do a good job of taking care of Meridian. Sincerely, . & '1Ars Jay nowba Mrl l >d'89 fou g&'ywce, /ffeld, I '° Y0 6)8642 j DEC -05-1995 17:16 FROM DESCRIPTION OF i P6WER MALL ANNEXATION December 5, 1995 MERIDIAN CITY Aparcel o land located in the NW 1/4 and the SW 1/4 of Section 16, Township13 North, Range 1 East`of tte Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Corir'men6ng at the southwest corner of Section 16, UN., R.1 E., B.M., thErice S 89°22'54" E 818.95 feet to a point on the south line of said Section 16, the Real Point of Beginning of this; description; Thence N 10°37'06" E 25.00 feet'to a point on the northerly right of way of Overland Road; 1 Therice N 136`52'54" W 485.74 'feet to a point; Thence N 66°51'55" W 261.30!feet to a point; ! Thence N j0°24'05" E 140.10 feet to a point, Thence N °2856" W 384.81 io a point on the west line of said Section 16, being the east: line of An, Ordinance #66d 1 Thence Ni 0°49'23 W (formerly,.N 0041'32" W) 1766.71 feet along the eastdrly boundary of Anriexatian Ordinance #660 to the west 1/4 corner of said Section 16; Thence S! 89023'35" E (formerly S 89°14'47" E) 149.48 feet along the easterly boundary of An6eexatioln Ordinance #660 to a point; Thence N;004508" E 54.75 feet (formerly N 0°45'13" E 54.92 feet) along the easterly boundary of Annex ion Ordinance #660 to a point on the southerly boundary of Annexation Ordinance #659 whkh is also the northerly right of way line of 1-84; 1 i 1 Thence N 89°09'88" E 758.53 faet along the southerly boundary of Annexation Ordinance #659 to a point,; 1 1 1 Thence 585°45108" E 438.46 feet to the southeast corner of Annexation Ordinance #659; Thence. Sj85°'44'�30" E 1176.86 feet along the northerly right of way of 1-84 to a point; 1� 950116 DEC 05 '95 16:20 PAGE. 01 DEC -05-1995 17:18 FROM TO MERIDIAN CITY P.02 j Thence S 89054*21" E 172.98 iFeetlalong said northerly right of way to a point on the east ;line Of the SW !114 of Said Section 1.8; 1 � Thence S :0°13' 9" E 1299.59 feet along said east line to the northeast dorner of Jewel Subdivisio i; Thence N I89023'14" W 1339.4010et to the northwest corner of Jewel Subdivision; Thence & *306" E 1326.93 ,feet to the west 1/16 corner common to Sections 16 arid -21, T.31.,'R.1!E.; Thence N 49°2254" W 513.59'feet along the south line of said Section 16 tolthe Real point of Beginning of this description Saiei Parc i of land contains 115:16'acres, more or less. Michael E: iftrks, L.S., No. 499 , i • i i 1 950116 DEC 05 '95 16:20 2 TOTAL P.02 L' PAGE. 02 I TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 - P.O. BOX 8028 - BOISE, ID - 83707-2028 - (208) 334-8300 November 6, 1995 Grant P. Kingsford, Mayor City of Meridian and Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Street Meridian ID 83642 N, r V 0 b 19:15 RE: POWER MALL AND OTHER COMMERCIALANDUSTRIAL EXPANSION Dear Mayor Kingsford and Members of the City Council: The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has serious concerns about traffic congestion that will result from development of the proposed Power Mall and other commercial and industrial expansion indicated by Meridian's Comprehensive Plan. Our concerns are based on the results of project specific traffic impact studies, the APA SUB -REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY OF (the) AREA AROUND EAGLE ROAD &_ I-84 INTERCHANGE, our own analysis and the experience of the aftermath of the Boise Towne Square Mall and resulting spinoff development. Individually, developments like the St Luke's Regional Medical Center and the Power Mall have relatively minor impacts on the State transportation system. The cumulative effects, however, are staggering, as indicated in the APA sub -regional report. If the sub -regional study area develops as envisioned in the City's comprehensive plan, operating levels of service on both I-84 and Eagle Road (SH -55) in the immediate vicinity of the study area will fall to unacceptable levels. Given ITD funding levels and vast transportation improvement needs statewide, it is not likely that further expansion of existing facilities in the foreseeable future. The City should take this into account in their decision making process concerning all future development. In addition, future transportation improvement needs should be addressed in the transportation component of the City's comprehensive plan. Funding should also be addressed, including City provided funding. - An Equal Opportunity Employer - CONTINUED Grant P. Kingsford Page 2 November 6, 1995 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE POWER MALL Should the City elect to approve development of the Power Mall, ITD requests the City to require the Power Mall developers to fund the design and construction of the following improvements. Funding should be made available so that construction of these improvements can be completed prior to the Power Mall opening for business: ■ Modify the existing traffic signal on Eagle Road at the interchange north ramps to include a protected left -turn phase for northbound to westbound traffic. ■ Signalize the intersection of Eagle Road and the south (eastbound) off -ramp. Further, the City should consider future transportation needs that will occur on the State Highway system due to spin off development as it occurs.The improvements that will need funded by the the year 2015 would include: ■ Widen the westbound off -ramp at Eagle IC to accommodate dual left -turn lanes. ■ Widen Eagle Road at the interchange north ramps to include dual left -turn lanes for northbound to westbound traffic. I.T.D. does not have the funding available to make these improvements for essentially local traffic and we feel that the City needs to address these issues in the Planning -Zoning process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, LeRoy , P.E. District Engineer LM:GM:gm Pw OCT -06-1995 10:39 FROM TO 8874813 P.01 �INIRING B RIGGS FACSiMIL TRANSMITTAL TO i div COMPI FAX N DATE J BRIGGS EN NEERING, INr. 1111 S. ORCHARD, SUITE 600 * BOISE, ID. 83705 FAX N0.(208)345-2950 TELE N0.(708)344-9700 NO. Of PAGES SENT „_ BEI PROJECT NO. 5 p REPLY REQUESTED COPY 1111 S. ORCHARD, SUITE 600 801St', IDAHO 83705 (208) 344-9700 FAX NO (208) 345-2950 TOTAL P.01 OCT 06 '95 10:40 PAGE.01 a challenge tl ;Tom shanshan/The Idaho Statesman hoping Meridian -area residents will help them restore. An spray -painting leaving trash through it; the d the radiator bandaged with dents want to rare piece of be preserved, special services strict. A of nostalgia. use it to help See Bus/3G gets P&Z nod Council expected to OK proposal. despite protests By Martin S. Johncox The Idaho Statesman By this time. next year, Merid- ian residents could be doing their Christmas shopping at Ada County's second-largest mall, right in their own city. The 700,000 -square -foot "pow- er mall" at Interstate 84 and Eagle Road passed its first hur- dle last week, when the Merid- ian Planning and Zoning Com- mission rdcommended that the city annex the land and let de- velopers proceed with construc- tion. The City Council is to take up the issue at its regular meet- ing at 7 p.m. Oct. 17 in City Hall. . Larigly Associates of Issa- quah, Wash., wants to build the "power mall" on 73 acres at the southeast corner of the junc- tion. B� comparison, the Boise Towne Square mall has 900,000 square Feet. Power malls focus on large -n ational retailers, and are non -enclosed shopping. cen- ters enters that typically have fewer stores than traditional malls. Developers decline to say what tenants might be in the mall. However, Langly Asso- ciates' power mall tenants in other cities have included Costco, Hardware and Garden, Future ' Shop, Good Guys Elec- tronics, Barnes and Noble, Blockbuster Video, Egghead Computer and Petsmart. About 15 people testified to the commission at its Sept. 12 meeting, most of them opposed to the project. Several said the project would bring too much traffic and threaten private wells and septic systems, and the city couldn't provide enough services. Others said it would bring vandalism, gangs and oth- er crime 'and hurt downtown Meridian Power Mail Developers are planninngg a 700,000 square foot mall at Eagfa Road and Interstate 84. "Power Malls" are non -enclosed malls, and 30 to 40 tenants, mainly large retailers. Area of detaU44 N Chinden Blvd. 0 Ustidc Rd -MERIDIAN w Y St. Luke's _m outpatient center El Overland Road Meridian Power Mall businesses. Nevertheless, the mall stands a good chance of getting council approval. Developers have agreed to shield neighbors from excessive lighting and widen roads to accommodate traffic. City Council President Ron Tolsma said he hasn't seen the final Planning and Zoning re- port and declined -to say. how he would vote. However, he said the project would help the city and - Meridian School District with additional tax dollars, which are especially needed since voters turned down a $14.7 million bond issue this week. "I hardly ever have to second- guess our Planning and Zoning Commission. It's a project that's basically destined to be on an interchange," Tolsma said. "I'm sure the other corners are going to develop the same." Russ Keithly, representing the developers, said the mall would have a taxable property value of between $80 million and $100 million, and bring in about $15 million in sales tax. Construction could start next spring, and some stores would open before Christmas. afore c-ommunity center or old 'eyesore? trtin S. Johncox iho Statesman expensive to renovate and V AUG -15-1995 13:49 LANGLY ASSOCIATES Langly Associates, Inc. F= rMsmgnion 2067466797 P.01 TO: Shari Stiles Cate: 8 -is -95 Firm: City of Meridian Pages: 4 From: Russ Keithly FAX #: 208-887--A29I NOTE feVJ6- 01� VCXCE:206.746.6700 FAX: 206.746.6797 3633 136th Place SE, Suite 205 Bellevue, WA 98M AJG15-1995 1349 L*GLY ASSOCIATES 2067466797 P.62 August 14,1995 CountyeHig�y dict ices Supervisor Ads 318 East 3 th Boise, ID 83714 Re: 1-84 Power Center Dear Larry: We have reviewed the Sub -Regional Transportation Study as well as your draft preliminary report concerning our proposal. In Section E of the General Information portion of your report, a very important point is made. That point being that even If our project were 100% built -art today, Overland Road from Cloverdale to Locust Drove would have fewer than 15,000 trips per day and would operate at LOS C. Our proposed Overland Road improvements from Engle Road to a point 800 feet east of our entry would be necessary to maTntaln LOS C In the immediate vicinity of our project. Our scheduled impact fees are $1,640,000. Even if they are reduced, tyre will certainty be adequate funds to Improve the balance of Overland Road between Eagle and Cloverdale to five lanes and to make a significant contribution to the stretch between Eagle and Locust Grove. To address the long term cumulative impact of the projected devslopmerft in the four square mile study area, we have enclosed a chart projecting impact fees at today's rates. On a conservative basis, this number succeeds $22,000,000. Even 0 reduced through individual assessments, this level of development will generatee Impact fee dollars to upgrade every county road within and abutting the study area to three to five lanes. In today's dollars, 70% of these Impact fees would widen Victory to three lanes from Locust Grove to Coverdale, Locust Grove to three lanes from Victory to FraMin and all other ACHD roads within and abutting the study area to five lanes. After completing this work, there would be several million dollars remaining to improve theapppprropriate roads out of the study area that are impacted by development within the study area. Summarizing, we believe that the ACHD impact tees provide ade funds to mitigate the traffic on ACHD roads should the study's 15 projections become reality. The fact that the 1-84 Power Center can be 100% developed and a LOS C maintained on Overland leads to the conclusion that the ACHD can maintain satisfactory levels of service in this urnr Mme, IM 36311 M Phwa SE Suns 205 Benevue, WA 96006 (206) 746-6700 Fax 748.6797 AUG -15-1995 1350 LANGLY ASSOCIATES 2067466797 P.03 August 14, 1995 Page 2 area by expeditiously utilizing the impact fees generated by the commercial and residential growth to mitigate the traffic generated by that same growth. Given that the ACHD has an Impact fee program in place that will provide the necessary funds to mitigate a worse case development scenario, I am not sure what Is gained by asking the City of Meridian to delay the review of the Conditional Use Permit. Relative to the growth projections in the Sub -Regional Transportation Study, our proposal represents less than 10% of the study area's 2015 commercial development and less than 10% of the total traffic generated. Any fine tuning of our site design could not possibly change our proportionate Impact by more than one or two percentage points. Given the fact that we are such a small portion of the potential build -out, a delay of the Conditional Use Permit seems pointless. Sincerely, Russell C. Keithly Principal RCK/dh Enclosure cc: Shari Stiles, City of Meridian Gary Funkhouser, Bell Walker Engineers Becky Bow -cud, Briggs Engineering, Inc. AW -15-1995 13:51 LANGLY ASSOCIATES 2067456797 P.04 TOTAL P.04 8 S S 88 a 8 0 1 0 epi a 1 : m w a w w .N o co cft N N ch w C N N N -4 N tr+ ly w w 46:4: 46: 2 2 pgLa NN S S QQ 8✓r pN bG pbl OGt ?y P S? 6 p 44 ''7yA w .`i qr -W CA N t+ A N m ti U2 .•+ p ME h AIV vi N M M M _ M a pL bw m �m im S .4 Ln CD Lo d O O 9 8 40 at -4 Mto ^ N ro o q r .-. .. �. d M h.ch N r Qf V 6 tiU33 ?y N y b =^r Qac o� Cch 1 a�-� d v .. C ... w N 7 -ra c d r W IX N t V.� J Q 0 � q Fr r Gh Z O 1 L 2 S ch s y.. TOTAL P.04 SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET Proposed Development Name FINCH CREEK SUB City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 8/10/95 Preliminary Stage Final XXXXX Engineer/Developer Hubble Enar. / Creekside Development The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Meridian City Street Name Ordinance. The followina existina street names shall appear on the plat as: "E USTICK ROAD" "N MULE DEER WAY" "E. SHARPTAIL STREET" Al."E STORMY DRIVE" �vkl'oweMt e- The followina proposed street name is aoproved and shall appear on the plat as: "NORTH SWALLOW WAY" The following proposed street name is over ten letters in lenght and must have verification from Ada County Hiahway District that the name will fit on a sign before it will be approved: "EAST FINCH CREEK STREET" "ROBIN" is a duplication and therefore cannot be used Please choose another name and have it approved by the street name committee. The following propose street name is approve to replace it: "N WREN AVENUE" T)te aft tic 11-.1 as i= 111txL M -C12— C0u.12.1- SLI I be E 06CACjAk CIIFEEK, 0-egklzT The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME C Ada County Engineer John Ada Planning Assoc. Terri RayWr _ City of Meridian Representative Meridian Fire Distict Representative IIJVII EE, Y EPRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Date 0/ fe Date LV /10 Date Date IC NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ad6 signing the "final plat". otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!! Subindex Street Index 3N 1 E 06 Section NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS County Engineer at the time of SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET Proposed Development Name CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO 5 City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 8/10/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final Engineer/Developer Roylance & Assoc. / Ron Nahas The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance. "SOUTH PROGRESS AVENUE" is an existing street and cannot be used on a east west street. Please choose a new name for the east west street that will run from the end of the existina "PROGRESS AVENUE" to the intersection of CORPORATE DRIVE and CENTRAL DRIVE. The 2 culdesacs off of this street shall be named• C 0cvi2.1 The following existing street names shall appear on the plat: ki I12irrsfa4s- 84 "SOUTH EAST FIRST STREET" "SOUTH PROGRESS AVENUE" "E. CENTRAL DRIVE" "E. CORPORATE DRIVE" "S. STRATFORD DRIVE" The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME CO ITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee in order r th street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME CO E. A NC Y RESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Ada County Engineer John Priester Date 011a Ada Planning Assoc. Terri Raynor ��`� C. Date City of Meridian Representative 9 Date Meridian Fire District Representative / �, e Date NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!! Sub Index Street Index 3N 1E 18 E18 Section NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS w Ada County Highway District Development Services Division Memorandum Date: August 20, 1995 RECEIVE ► AUG 2 2 1995 CITY OF mmUlAN To: ACHD Commission, Interested Public, The City of Meridian, Langley Associates, Inc., Ada Planning Association, Other ACUD De artments From: Pent S ices Supervisor Subject: MCU -7-95 The Langley Associates Power Center Overland Road, E/O Eagle Road REVISED STAFF REPORT Attached is a REVISED DRAFT STAFF REPORT for the referenced project. It represents the findings of the Technical Review Committee's meeting on Friday and further analysis of applicable data and alternative courses of action. Significant revisions to the draft staff report prepared last week are shown in bold type. This report will be the subject of the ACHD Commission's consideration of the application Wednesday, August 23, 1995. The meeting will begin at 7:00 P.M. S� /P1 r n. S .1C- i, % I �, Pd (a . 6 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY D Development Services D'visi Preliminary Repo MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - The applicant is requesting annexation to the City of to C -G and a conditional use to construct a commercia feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the southe portion of the site abutting Overland Road. additional vehicle trips per day. A traffi dy Planning Association (APA) has also pre ed a & mile area including this site. Both stud' di that be seriously impacted by this and oth tici dca that the planned ro ay sy .. 'll n . E development. Iqlwp- Roads impacted by this Eagle Road Overland R Issues: proval for a rezone from RT ;gle/Overland/Franklin roximately 700,000 -square - gle Road with a narrow ent estimated to generate 24,885 'tted for this application. Ada ortation study for the four square corridors will )ment in the four square mile area and tte to support the proposed level of incipal arwith bike route designation (Minor aft c co993 estimate by APA) arte pathway designation shown affic 1993 1. Determine methods of coping with the impacts of this project and the total development that is forecast in the four square mile impact area around this site. ACHD Commission Date - August 23, 1995 7:00 P.M. W IMMz W V 4 7/N711 70fI AN a 1 a 9 L avow 31gd3 l(1 o • SCI IJ i i0'i I E00'01 ii5`L Q � co i E-- E00'01 ii5`L Q � E-- co Q -y o E--4 '-r co W EEz`�z �6z`�i cc o �o W 0 F62'zi 1a1L>PlaAOID 7d r ct rn GJ O %0 O 09V9 .. 06VS (aAO.xf) ISnOO.1 0 co co aity� ant, L9i `OI LLi''L L StIt`S • LE8`z T C% a+ c,, c^ uletppaw ... o 002,2t 009 e nnn`gr 00V6T 006`ST O O at8pJ@AOIJ I 00S`Sz 009`91 0 v� 0 0 0 k ` -4 M W nnT`FiP o ° 002!`9S OOS`tz 000`Ez O O o z M � O O �D O � o E'' O O at8pJ@AOIJ I 00S`Sz 009`91 0 v� 0 0 0 k ` -4 M W nnT`FiP o ° 002!`9S OOS`tz 000`Ez O O o .If) IsnD uuipllaw 0 0 M C+ al!N ant,1 T M � O O �D M m O w I w lP � O .If) IsnD uuipllaw 0 0 M C+ al!N ant,1 T 0 Table 4 TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION ection I Land Use 162 NE 5F,R1, td eview 162 NE SF,R8 162 NE MF,R3 162 NE Free Standing Retail 162 NE Office 162 NE Canal, etc. 162 NW SF,R1, Montview Park 162 NW SF,R3 162 NW St. Luke's Hospital 162 NW Nursing Home,300 bed 162 NW Office 162 INW General Retail 162 NW Canal, etc. 162 SUBTOTAL Office 284 SW SF,R1 284 SW Park and Ride 284 SW Power Center 284 SW Flood Plain 284 SE SF,R1 284 SE SF,R3 284 SE Retail 284 SE anal, 1-84 Hwy 284 SUBTOTAL 30 1,306,800 980.10 283 NE SF,R1 283 NE SF,R1 283 NE Retail 283 NE Office 283 NW SF,R1 283 NW SF,R3 283 NW Retail 283 NW Flood Plain, etc 283 SW SF,R3 283 SW Industrial Park 283 SW Golf/Recreation 283 SW Retail 283 SW Office 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 283 SE SF,R1 283 SE SF,R1 283 SE Retail 283 SE Office 283 SE Light Industrial 283 SE 1-84 R -O -W 283 SUBTOTAL 320 ICS I via. i �+(00• - 0) •-•r Generation 79 3,441,240 2,580.93 754 25 1,089,0001 816.75 1,910 25 1,089,0001 816.75 716 16 696,960 174.24 7,086 10 435,600 108.90 3,721 5 217,800 NA NA 30 1,306,800 980.10 287 20 871,200 653.40 573 40 1,742,400 475.20 7,974 5 217,800 54.45 780 40 1,742,400 435.60 14,884 21 914,760 228.69 9,301 4 174,240 NA NA 320 13,939,2001 7,3251 47,986 40 1,742,400 1,306.80 382 2 87,120 82.76 1,726 73 3,179,880 714.40 24,885 45 1,960,200 NA NA 80 3,484,800 2,613.60 764 44 1,916,640 1,437.48 1,261 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 21 914,760 NA INA 320 13,939,200 6,3181 35,661 135 5,880,600 4,410.45 1,289 10 435,600 326.70 96 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 5 217,800 54.45 886 38 1,655,280 1,241.46 363 100 4,356,000 3,267.00 2,865 10 435,600 108.90 4,429' 12 522,720 NA NA 78 3,397,680 2,548.26 2,235 15 653,400 163.35 1,139 15 653,400 653.40 125 24 1,045,440 261.36 10,630 12 522,720 130.68 1,718 16 696,960 NA NA 35 1,524,600 1,143.45 334 10 435,600 326.70 96 34 1,481 040 370.26 15,058 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 4 174,240 43.56 304 67 2,918,520 NA NA 6401 27,878,400 15,268 47,493 Tahle 4_ Cnntinued TAZ Section Land Use Acres SQF GFA 000 Trip Generation 286 INE Retail 114 4,965,840 1,241.46 50,490 286 1 NE SF,R3 ! 33 1,437,480 1,078.11 945 286 INE Light Industrial 13 566,280 141.57 987 286 1 NW SF,R1 39 1,698,840 1,274.13 372 286 INW SF,R3 971 4,225,320 3,168.99 2,779 286 JNW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7,004 286 1 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2,214 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 286 SW SF,R3 145 6,316,200 4,737.15 4,154 286 SW Retail 101 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 SW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 286 ISE SF,R3 117 5,096,520 3,822.39 3,352 286 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3,434 286 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 SE Canal, etc. 1 31 130,680 NA NA 286 SUBTOTALI 1 640 27,878,400 16,716 84,589 285 NE SF,R1 69 3,005,640 2,254.23 659 285 NE SF,R2 65 2,831,400 2,123.55 1,242 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696,960 NA NA 285 1 NW SF,R3 60 2,613,600 1,960.20 1 719 285 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28,788 285 NW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 3,171 285 NW Flood Plain 81 348,480 NA NA 285 SW SF,R2 1221 5,314,320 3,985.74 2,330 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 285 ISW Office 15 653,400 163.35 2,033 285 1 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2,352,240 1,764.18 516 285 SE SF,R1 931 4,051,080 3,038.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 SE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 285 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 16,673 56,847 GRAND TO AL 2560 11,513,600 62,300 272,576 Facts and Findings: General Information A. RT - Existing zoning C -G - Requested zoning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square feet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone JAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessn Overland Ra is improve , 28 -feet of pavement without curb, gutter or sidewalk. The roadway i vated about ee feet above the surrounding property as is common in rural roads and will p bly requi._ '„lowering when reconstructed as an urban roadway. B. The coni" this application has been deferred by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission until September 12, 1995. C. Access to the site from Interstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of access that is proposed to be a private driveway connection to Overland Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 feet east of the Eagle Road intersection. D. The site is currently under agricultural production. Two single family residences occupy a portion of the site. It is inevitable that this site will develop for some highly intensive land use. The site's exposure to the interstate highway makes it highly desirable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or more) arterials instead of one. This report points out the problems that intensive development of this property (and others in the area) will cause the local transportation system in a rapidly developing rural area. E. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site and Eagle Road that currently serves a single family residence and an unimproved parcel owned by ITD. This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The ITD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 2 F. Eagle Road north of Overland Road is under the jurisdiction of ITD, ' g full access control on the Interstate 84 ramps and on Eagle Road between I-8 verland Road, therefore prohibiting access to this site from Eagle Road and T loper is required to submit application materials to ITD for the review and re ement _ enartme. G. Excepting the approaches to the Eagle Road inte,OverlandRWa 2 -lane roadway from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road. Both Ove ad legs of the signalized Eagle Road intersection have left turn lanes. A volume of 15 trips per day has been identified as Level of Service (LOS) C to be used for longKepl oses for two lane roadways such as Overland Road. LOS C is the ma sirabl a (not capacity) established by APA as a guideline in the 20'0T ra rtat last measured traffic volume on Overland Road east of Eagle Road w 5,29 he 1993 estimated volume west of Eagle Road on Overland was 7,265 s p ct is ecast to generate 7,855 trips per day east of the site on Overland Road and tri est gle Road, increasing the estimated traffic on Overland Road east of the t 0139 13,217 west of Eagle Road. Although the traffic volumes des' esholds on the roadways, the inordinate number of turning mov the way and the Overland/Eagle intersection require special intersection design. sect "built -out" to an ultimate configuration in advance of the roadway se the greater traffic volumes can be sustained before LOS C delays are exp nced b . rity of the traffic. H. Currently, gle Road sou of Overland Road is a 2 -lane roadway and north of Overland Road to the I-8 transiti anes is a 4 -lane roadway. Eagle Road has single left turn lanes on both legs d Overland Road intersection. Traffic: A. The developer has submitted a traffic study for this project. Staff has reviewed and accepted the traffic analysis. The traffic study recommended a number of major improvements to the segment of Overland Road between the site's driveway and Eagle Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection. These improvements will add the needed capacity to the immediate system to accommodate the additional traffic from this project, but will not replace the unused capacity in the system that currently exists. Even with the roadway improvement proposed by the developer, there will be a net loss in intersection capacity at the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. The key elements of the developer's traffic study are as follows: On-site • The planned commercial center will include approximately 714,000 square feet of gross leasable area. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 2,324 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 24,885 daily vehicle trips. • A single access roadway from Overland Road is proposed to serve the project site. A secondary, emergency access road is planned on the west side of the site that will also connect to Overland Road. • The site access road will require three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be required at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 3 Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • Westbound Overland Road will need an ai intersection. • The segment of Overland Road between E ultimate widening to seven traffic lanes; two lanes, two westbound through lanes, and an • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road) widening to three left turn lanes with t] accommodation for pedestrians with an ox • The south and west legs of the Eagle R,, s` C to match the added lanes north and t of t] • The east leg of the site access roa erla the added lanes west of the site, , ess r at the site access road the , will require iLYh laneWad tbound left turn right turn lane. ersection will require ultimate pedestrian crossings or the a ntersection will require widening d/Overland Road intersection. rsection will require widening to match Road intersection. B. ACRD staff ha " zed atio Overland/Eagle intersection and found that it currently ope O an average delay of about 10 seconds per vehicle, and uses about 15 per " e in n capacity of critical volumes. (Critical volumes are the specific in hum at conflict with each other, e.g., the southbound left turns conflictn' the no d through movements.) If this project is developed, and the recomm ded improv; have been constructed, the traffic will use 44 percent of the capac' of critical va es of the intersection. Staff recommends that the developer be requir o replace 29 percent of capacity of critical volumes that the development will use the capacity provided by the recommended improvements. This can be acf` y adding a through lane to each of the four legs of the intersection. C. Based upon the submitted traffic study and District policy, staff recommends that the developer be required to make the following roadway improvements that are necessary to accommodate the site generated traffic in the short term, prior to the build out of the four square mile impact area. These improvements will replace the current unused capacity of critical volumes of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection: On-site • The access road will be constructed to include three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • A continuous right turn lane on westbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Eagle Road north of the intersection. • A continuous through lane on eastbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway and on Overland Road west of Eagle Road. • A second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate right turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. • A separate through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 4 D. No stub streets are planned for the project. All internal roadways are access is possible in the future as adjacent residential land re lc along the eastern portion of the project site. If th11 connecting access to the site is possible. ACHD mme . buildings be allowed to develop along the souther 1 0 fee the potential additional access road will not be bloc' Sub -Regional Transportation Study A. This application was before the Commission deferred action on the application and requ te. One additional site and should be preserved dential area redevelops, ;voundary, ridian that no so the hat meeting, the Commission iation (APA) to conduct a sub - regional land use/transportation analy of fo miles surrounding this site. That analysis was completed by APA on t 1 r 95. a volumes of traffic forecast by the APA study to be generated within th r s re m' area are shown in Table 4, immediately following the map at the fro his r is findings have been summarized by District staff as follows: The analysis was req C nse to the Power Center application, the St. Luke's project north of I-84, the Be (no I-84, east of St. Luke's), and other anticipated developments in the Eagle Road dor. tual plans for the referenced properties indicate a much higher level of developmen anis assum ong Range Transportation Plan. The purpose of the transportation analysis was determine the ortation impacts of these plans and determine the amount of additional roadway i vements that y be needed to accommodate those impacts. The conceea represents approximately four square miles (2,560 acres), including the entire area bound Grove Road, Franklin Road, Cloverdale Road and Victory Road. Approximately 150 acres (6% of the total) are undevelopable, including the I-84 corridor, canals, and flood plains. The 2015 forecast trip generation from the entire area is estimated at 272,500 daily vehicle trips. This is roughly equivalent to 27,000 single family homes or seven Boise Town Square Malls. The forecast trip generation was based on a land use scenario developed by E.J. Smith and Associates under contract to APA and reviewed by ACHD staff, City of Meridian staff and some officials, and APA staff. The analysis assumed that the entire area would be built out by 2015. Maps 5 and 6 show the traffic in the study area now and in 20 years assuming full build out of the study area. This project will generate 9.1 percent of the total traffic in the study area by year 2015, but occupies only 3.1 percent of the land area and directs that traffic to the arterial system at only one location. APA's modeling effort used the Bench to Valley Transportation Study network which included the Five Mile Road interchange. The roadway volume forecast in the Eagle Road corridor will increase over the estimated traffic volumes in this report if the Five Mile interchange is not constructed. The Five Mile interchange was included in the network assumption because this system improvement would be necessary to support the proposed high level of development and its resulting traffic. The Bench/Valley network used in the analysis is the proposed network developed as a result of the March 2, 1995 community -wide meeting, and it is essentially equivalent to several versions that are currently under consideration. With respect to this area of the County, it is most important to note the Five Mile interchange assumption. It is not feasible to consider such an intense sub -regional development without a Five Mile interchange. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 5 Eagle Road and Franklin Road are principal arterials and Overland Road Traffic Services staff ran computer analyses of the operation oQQhe,9 intersection analyzing its current operation, its operati and its operation with this project plus the full build i results of that analysis indicate that the Overland Rog at LOS B or better, having less than 10 seconds of approximately 15 percent of its capacity of critical vol Overland Road/Eagle Road intersections fall below Level and arterial roadway design with the planned level of square mile impact area without this project, the operate at LOS D, with an average delay of 34., the Power Center and the improvemen o t intersection will operate worse than the ,` escril,, r2 seconds per vehicle. Extensive roadwa, be required to attain an acceptab Eagle/Overland intersections. t*a minor arterial. ACRD erland Road/Eagle Road but no other development, the f e mile impact area. The 'agle d ion c rrently operates •ag elay pe'-,,, d currently uses Both the Fran oad/Eagle Road and D using any conventional intersection Assuming build out of the four ctio uire additional lanes but will er veh Adding the forecast traffic from ct' proposed by the developer, the OS F, with an average delay of 62.8 orm of grade separated interchanges would (D or better) at the Eagle/Franklin and ACHD staff hasa i I d a ` nfig iPon of an interchange for the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection: s a 19 arated intersection with the north -south traffic on Eagle passing unimpeded b truc hich Overland Road traffic would pass over Eagle Road. Two separate inte. d *"' of Eagle Road would split the northbound and southbound turning movem to Over d and the traffic on Overland Road trying to access Eagle Road. The southbo - leg of this s ersection would operate at LOS F (average delay of more than 60 seconds pe, ' ehicle) becau ' o the high number of left turns by southbound Eagle Road traffic turning a ,, 'x to Overlan oad to the Power Center. The northbound leg would operate at LOS C becaus redom' ' e turning movement would be right turns from the Power Center going back to I- oad. Alternative interchange designs are possible. The costs of the grade separated intersection improvements ($5 million to $8 million per intersection) would be the predominant extra -ordinary cost of the high level of development being considered in the area if right-of-way for major roadway widening is obtained with development and mitigation requirements do not escalate between the time of the adjacent development and the construction of the ultimate roadway section. The APA analysis indicates that Eagle Road will have 57,000 trips per day along the one mile plus segment from south of Overland Road to north of Franklin Road, requiring widening to a minimum of eight lanes. Overland Road will have a maximum of 30,400 and 24,600 trips per day east of Eagle Road, and east of the site driveway, respectively, and would require widening to four lanes for most of its length with special treatment at the Eagle Road intersection in order to operate at an acceptable level of service. The special treatment will probably require a grade separated intersection as described above. Left turn lanes would be necessary at other intersections of existing and future local roads. Overland Road would require six lanes from Eagle Road to the entrance to the Power Center (plus the westbound right turn lane to Eagle Road), because of the site related traffic. Overland Road west of Eagle Road will have 26,400 trips per day upon build out of the impact area, including the traffic from the Power Center. Franklin Road will have a maximum of 23,000 trips per day west of Eagle Road and 25,500 trips per day east of Eagle Road. Severe problems with left turns at the Eagle Road intersection (westbound to southbound) will also require some form of special intersection design similar to Overland Road described above. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 6 B. Prior to the receipt of this application, another tra an as prepared for the District covering the area north of I-84 and east of Eagle in n with E. L. Bews annexation and conditional use application. M ews s f east of the St. Luke's property. In contrast to the analysis conduc`` A, the S ews, et al traffic analysis did not assume that a Five Mile interchan d be built, as e development of the projects north of I-84 seem to be likely regardle nch-Valley outcome and results. Although that analysis did not include the Five Mi inte t used the previously assumed APA 2015 land use in the sub -regional area emain Ada County so the lower trip generation in the surrounding area some o ce a lack of a Five Mile interchange. Thus, the two studies yield similar and mpat' e The conclusions of the St. Luke' below: The provision o est :7!k oss the St. Luke's property to the Bews property provides a significant improve the Franklin Road/Eagle Road intersection. However, the added traffic from th cacross the St. Luke's property would seriously degrade the operation of the ce tion with Eagle Road. The addition of this roadway would delay the need an interch Franklin/Eagle intersection, similar to that described above for the Overlan aale intersec The propqMntensity o velopment in the area will require unanticipated and unfunded inordinate wideningMILarter the area. Alternatively, in order to maintain currently accepted Levels of Service an ce of these inordinate widening requirements using more conventional roadway designs, limits ns of development intensity will be necessary. C. Both traffic analyses indicated that, under long term conditions, the existing transportation system is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the developments proposed and anticipated in this area. The proposed project, expected spinoff projects and other known projects north of Interstate 84 are all unanticipated in the Long Range Transportation Plan. D. The build -out of this project, the ensuing spin-off development in the immediate area, and the anticipated longer term development in the four square mile impact area will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Program, if currently acceptable levels of service are to be maintained, and will create a need for transportation system improvements that are currently unanticipated and for which funding has not been identified. These fmdings must be established and adopted as a basis for the imposition of extraordinary impact fees. E. Based on the need for these unanticipated roadway improvements, it would follow that some form of extraordinary impact fee could be required to fund the offsite roadway improvements needed to make the system operate at the current level of service, or that the needed improvements be constructed by the developers of the impacting projects. Eagle Road, which requires widening to eight lanes, is not eligible for the expenditure of extraordinary fees that might be imposed by the District. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 7 F. Facilities Financing Districts are used in other states to finance private roadway improvements. This would be extre ho cannot be done without special authorization by th ah Le G. An ironic twist to this application/site allowed by option to prepare an individual assessment and p regular impact fee, because of the usage of the Ir by some customers of this project to make part o of the volume of traffic to and from the s' getting to the vicinity of the Power Ce n ' th to the specific site are the cause of se, ` us d existing capacity of critical vol t th vi Alternative Actions: fee of state, local and this (and other) cases, but the developer's A. Adopt and impo aord , act fee for all development within the four square mile affected area. This d to a development to other locations, causing problems there. A disadvd' ' impact fees is that they are collected over a long period of time, whe a improve ey are to pay for may be needed immediately. This would require a ional accou i efforts, major commitments of staff time to administer contracts th develope providing the design and construction, and the provision of construc . pectio d oversight. The extra impact fee could be calculated by either of the following methods: i. Compute the total estimated cost of the off-site improvements that are required to maintain an acceptable LOS and divide by the total number of estimated trips in the four square mile impact area). The result would be applied to each land use as development was being approved as a fee for each forecast vehicle trip generated by the proposed use. A staff estimate indicates that the cost of needed improvements in the area is $27 million and the number of trips is 272,500, resulting in an extraordinary impact fee of $99.08 per trip. Relating this to actual land uses, a single family dwelling would have an extraordinary impact fee of $990.80 in addition to the regular impact fee of $900 ($687 if smaller than 1500 square feet). A 30,000 square foot office building would have an extraordinary impact fee of $36,248 in addition to a regular impact fee of $102,060. A 3,000 square foot convenience store would have an extraordinary impact fee of $131,834 in addition to the regular impact fee of $277,290. This is the method used in the calculation of the regular impact fee and assigns the fee to the source of travel demand. ii. The cost of the off-site improvements could be divided by the number of developable acres of land in the impact area. The result would be assessed on each acre of land as it is developed. This would place an unfair share of the cost on residential development, or eliminate any land uses with low traffic generation rates. ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 / acre = $2805 / dwelling, at four dwellings per acre). MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 8 B. Require the construction by this developer now, of the off-site improv nts that are needed to accommodate the traffic needs of the future development an in the four square mile impact area that would impact Overland Road, s' t e only road to which the project would take access, then use regular or ex, ordina fees ov , the long term of growth to reimburse the developer for his cost. a dev er v ursed for some or all of the construction costs, but may have to ` e cost of the expense until he is totally reimbursed. (Extra -ordinary impact fe not be collected from the developer that constructed the improvements, but they w ut for his development and subtracted from the total cost of the improveniSgigo be d). This action would be in lieu of establishing an extraordinary impare A variation of this option would arterial roads in the four square n along those roadways and be rm impact area. T ' is allowe District to fin owe and Eagle Ro O Improvements Pl e boundary of the is n increase cava ecaus W6 re areZ rs of property abutting the four p areaur fro impact fees collected within the to Victory are currently qualified by the Capital pact fee revenue. Victory Road along the south urrently eligible for the use of impact fee revenue to does not anticipate this level of development in this area. This wo4Loca quine less ditional staff time and accounting than described in A. above. It wouldde the n ed improvements as development occurs and assess the costs of those im he developments causing the need. C. Forma Improvement District (LID) to finance the construction of the off-site improvements and assess either extra -ordinary impact fees or the usual property tax liens to pay off the cost of the improvement. This would require the cooperation and cost of some landowners that may not have plans to develop their property and it would cost all owners the same per unit of land regardless of the ultimate use of their property. However it would provide all of the improvements needed to meet the anticipated impacts prior to all the development occurring. The cost to be financed would equal the cost of the extraordinary impact per acre under A.U. above ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 per acre). D. Accept the responsibility to meet the challenge created by the intensive development that is forecast in this area and fund whatever level of roadway improvements are affordable using the revenue currently available to the District and accept a deficient Level of Scrvice until needed improvements can be funded and constructed. The regular impact fees from the forecast development will be a substantial sum, but will be collected as the traffic is being generated and will not provide sufficient time for project design, right-of-way acquisition and construction (usually a three year time frame). This could last several years, while the District was trying to build itself out of the shortfall. The developer of this proposed project has estimated the regular impact fee revenue to be generated by the level of development forecast by APA in the four square mile impact area to be $22 million at build out. Staff agrees with this amount, based on current published trip lengths and network adjustment factors. However, using new trip length and network MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 9 adjustment data provided by APA, ACRD staff calculated the amount of regular impact fee to be $16,700,000, if the area develops according to the d scenario developed by APA. ACHD staff estimated the cost of accommo 'ng is from the same level of development at $27 million, including: • two grade separated intersections for Eagle Roa 'ferland R Franklin Road, • widening Overland Road and Franklin Road t' es between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Victory Road to three lanes between lover d and Locust Grove Road, • widening Eagle Road to five lanes from; RoaN ictory Road. ed pa"8 3 set agreements with developers as i veme to the system that are relative to their egula pact fee offset agreements would be that until the revenue was available from other e developer would be required to absorb the sed. That would be his contribution to the solution impact fee. No mechanism is available to reimburse never occur. E. Pursue enab legislation w "partnering" between the State (ITD), ACHD and private parties wi_. an impact a to provide joint funding for the required improvements. Staff recomme at this le " ation be pursued anyway, whether this development occurs or not. F. RecommT a f the application on the basis that the development will exceed the ability of the 'ghway District to maintain current levels of service on the impacted roadways and intersections. This action ignores the likelihood that this property and the surrounding property will eventually be developed for some intensive form of land use, with or without the District's approval. G. Accept the project with the regular impact fee revenue that will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. This action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish the four square mile area as a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development occurs along them. This action would alter the schedule of capacity improvement projects in the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. H. Require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from extraordinary impact fees imposed on the properties in the interior of the sections. This would result in spreading the cost of the improvements among all the MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 10 properties in the impact area as they developed, and the needed ' "" provements would be provided more quickly than the District could program, deli construct them if they were to be done as District sponsored projects. I. Require the developers of all property in the im act ar an 'fie) to replace a pro -rata share of the then available unused cap aci . intersd roadways. The unused capacity would be quantified includin "' ve for background District wide traffic and adjusted downward as each property ted area is developed, so there would be no unused capacity in the system w, the ' 0 percent developed. Recommended Alternative: Staff recommends that a combination o. ter ves and I. be adopted for this and future applications in the area. Accept the d., opm (s), r `' airing the developers to make whatever improvements to the system are n s to eir site related impacts, and replace any unused capacity in the than; evel uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to make needed capacity en` ds are available and the Commission budgets funds for the improvements. This ` t in lic having to cope with deficient levels of service in some cases until reverm to a the required improvements. Staff If the application'proved, th flowing requirements should be forwarded to Meridian as conditions for approval. Site Specific Prior to the construction of Phase I of this project: Comply with requirements of ITD for Interstate Highway 84 and Eagle Road frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements. 2. The main site access shall be provided through an access roadway as shown on the site plan. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two northbound traffic lanes. The exiting (southbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes, and one right turn lane. A fully actuated traffic signal shall be installed at the site access road intersection with Overland Road, with design and construction acceptable to the District. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at the initial phase of site development. Easements shall be granted to ACHD for the maintenance of signal detectors that are located outside the public right-of-way. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet) and abutting the parcel between the site and Eagle Road. The owner r= will be compensated for this additional right-of-way. The additional right-of-way would not otherwise be required for several years without the development of this parcel, therefore it is a project related impact, not reimbursable under either the District's ordinance or the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 11 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate curve) of rig f- at both comers of the Overland Road/site access road to keep the streetimp me a public right-of-way. The owner will not be compensated for this additional -of-w 5. Maintain public access along the western border o ect to the park and ride lot. This access will also serve as secondary access t ject, the park and ride lot and for emergency vehicles. 6. Maintain a 100 -foot clear zone/non-build ar a east to border between the building fronts and the southeast comer of the to ture external site connection to abutting parcels. 7. Roadway improvements to Overl oa d Ea Road may be constructed in two or three phases as the site i§ developed descr' Phase The following road ove 1 be constructed prior to occupancy of the first phase of development, 4 square feet (60% of the proposed development): • Const4Eag a site acces with three southbound and two northbound traffic lanes. Coordthe roadway sign with District Traffic Services staff. • Installffic sig t the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Coordesign with District Traffic Services staff. • Co -Lr--- us westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the a oad intersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct an added right turn lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Obtain and dedicate 54 - feet of right-of-way (27 -additional feet) along Overland Road from the site's driveway to the east terminus of the added right turn lane and required tapers. • Construct one left turn lane (eastbound) on Overland Road at the site access road. • Construct, or deposit the cost thereof, a median island in Overland Road for the access road into the Park and Ride lot. Phase II The following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to the development of phase II, approximately 645,000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left tum lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 12 Pha a II The following additional roadway improvements shall be 714,000 square foot development (100% of the prop9a • Construct a second westbound traffic lane on 1 the Eagle Road intersection. Construct any east of the project site that is needed to match • Construct any additional roadway widening needed to match the roadway widening betwef the roadway design with District Traffic $ • Construct one additional through 1 on intersection to replace the current `' used Traffic Services staff. • Construct curb, gutter and se oot e east of the site'driveway `` a en Coordinate th .gn rict 8. Construct pedesi compliance with 9. Locate pr4rd d sign(s) o of all stre driveway 11. None of Standard Requirements: to completion of the I be' '" access road and away w on Overland Road widening west of the project site. Road west of Eagle Road that is ftgnd Eagle Road. Coordinate Overland Road/Eagle Road nate the design with District id .alk along Overland Road, from 500 -feet id transition west of Eagle Road. Services staff. on- , r of Overland Road and the main site driveway in ►Secti'' 40-1335. public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. A permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. 3. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 4. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 13 are not being shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and proposed street improvements. Authorization i appropriate entity. 6. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawing presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dat Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance wi 7. Provide design data for proposed access., ub ACHD. 8. Submit three sets of street cons tru '' n nl to the Should you t at 345-7662. es, etc.) outside of the be obta ffied from the design information and calculations Ktetion red Professional Engineer or 54-1215. review and appropriate action by for review and appropriate action. , please contact the Development Services Division �. J. I II 1 MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 14 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY D Development Services Preliminary Repc MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - The applicant is requesting annexation to the City of to C -G and a conditional use to construct a commercia feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the southe portion of the site abutting Overland Road. additional vehicle trips per day. A traffi dy Planning Association (APA) has also pre ed a c: JA mile area including this site. Both stud' i that be seriously impacted by this and oth tici d that the planned ro ay sy n i development. \ Roads impacted by this nt: proval for a rezone from RT of roximately 700,000 -square of I- agle Road with a narrow nt estimated to generate 24,885 'tted for this application. Ada ortation study for the four square gle/Overland/Franklin corridors will pment in the four square mile area and ate to support the proposed level of Eagle Road - cipal bike route designation raff c coon 4 (1993 estimate by APA) �,tk� Overland Roa , Minor arte with no pathway designation shown raic t 5,290 in 1993 Issues: RECEIVED AUG 2 2 1995 CITY OF mu(IDIAN 1. Determine methods of coping with the impacts of this project and the total development that is forecast in the four square mile impact area around this site. ACHD Commission Date - August 1J, iyyo i:uu r.ivi. A 2 r I 0 9` W H Z W V �— sMnAr sari G I "+ CI it Z lL ¢fsc \ O - - - avol 31)d3 I I a �•, • 0 �F59`Zi SET'iT T T O'T i E6Z'21 T i S`L � (V• � o NW w E00`0i Q • P" o 0 W T i S`L � (V• � o W W FEZ`fiz E6z`Zl co tD Iaj,ep.zanojjI OSE`9 �• C 0 co co •• OWS OL9'ST . co W oaf) Isnoo-I aijY1� anti 9i Oi LLt'L • LES`z T • a%ONOlt uletppaw .. . . 4 0 R. I I ajtylt ant, L OOz`zfi 008`Ft 000`9£ OOV6T 006`9T 0 i co I 0 0 OOV6T 006`9T 0 0 0 0 S•r o co z OOV6T 006`9T 0 0 0 0 co z U U � a � o 0 0 O O f1t d' 0 0 0 0 0 �ajEp.za�oj� oos`Sz 009`91 OOz`9S oorz,tz 0o0`Fz w E- I.V,e21I ano.if) ISnDOI lP � UL>Ippaw O 1-Z Ti Ll Table 4 TRIP GENERATION CALC TAZ Section I Land Use Acr I I 162 INF i9F.R1. Edoeview ! 162 NE jSF,R8 162 NE ' MF,R3 162 NE Free Standina Retail 162 NE Office 162 NE Canal, etc. 162 NW SF,R1, Montview Park 162 NW SF,R3 162 NW St. Luke's Hospital 162 NW Nursing Home,300 bed 162 JNW Office ' 162 NW General Retail 162 NW Canal, etc. ! 162 SUBTOTAL 7,974 5 21Y,800 284 SW SF,R1 284 SW Park and Ride 284 SW Power Center 284 SW Flood Plain 284 SE SF,R1 284 SE SF,R3 284 SE Retail 284 SE Canal, 1-84 Hwy 284 SUBTOTAL 18711 Ro 82.76 1,726 283 NE SF,R1 283 NE SF,R1 283 NE Retail 283 NE Office 283 NW SF,R1 283 NW SF,R3 283 NW Retail 283 NW Flood Plain, etc 283 SW SF,R3 283 SW Industrial Park 283 SW Golf/Recreation 283 SW Retail 283 SW Office 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 283 SE SF,R1 283 St7 SF,R1 283 SE Retail 283 SE Office 283 ISE Light Industrial 283 SE 1-84 R -O -W ULATION es SQF I GFA("' Trip (000 Generation 79 3,441,2400i2,580.93 754 25 1,089,0001 816.75 1,910 25 1089JO001 816.75 716 16 \6961960 174.24 7 O86 10 43e,600 108.90 3,721 5 217,800 NA NA 30 1,306,800 980.10 287 20 8VA,200 653.40 573 40 1,7 ,400 475.20 7,974 5 21Y,800 54.45 780 40 1,742L400 435.60 14,884 21 9n 4 760 228.691 9,301 4 1 4, 40 NA NA 320 13, 9, 00 7,325 47,986 40 j,7K2,4jOO 1,306.80 382 2 18711 Ro 82.76 1,726 73 3,17$,8$2 714.40 24,885 45 1,06Q,200 NA NA 80 3J484,800 2,613.60 764 44 1191$,64D 1,437.48 1,261 15 /653,400 163.35 6,643 21 1 914,760 NA INA 320113,939L200 6,5181 35,661 135 0,880 600 4,410.45 1,289 10 1 435,600 326.70 96 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 5 217,800 54.45 886 38 1,\65 5,280 1,241.46 363 100 14,356.000 3,267.00 2,865 10 1 05,600 108.90 4,429 12 522,720 NA NA 78 3,3 7,680 2,548.26 2,235 15 60,400 163.35 1,139 15 65 400 653.40 125 24 1,045,A40 261.36 10,630 12 1 5220720 130.68 1,718 16 1 696,9L 0 NA NA 35 11,524,600 1,143.45 334 10 435,600 326.70 96 34 1,481,040 370.26 15,058 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 4 174,240 43.56 304 67 2,918,520 NA NA 6401 27,878,400 15,268 47,493 ction I Land Use i Acres 286 1 NE Retail 1 114 4,yb*,ts4U I ,Z41.4C au, 1 286 INE SF,R3 i 33 1,437,480 1,078.11 54 286 1 NE Li ht Industrial 13 566,280 141.57 93 286 INW SF,R1 39 1,698,840 1,274.13 10 2861NW SF,R3 97 4,225,320 3,168.99 2, 286 NW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7, 286 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2, 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 2560 286 SW SF,R3 1451 6,316,200 4,737.15 4, 286 1 SW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4, 286 1 SW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 286 SE SF,R3 117 5,096,520 3,822.39 3, 286 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3, 286 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4 286 SE Canal etc. 3 130 680 NA NA 286 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 16,716 84 285 NE SF,R1 691 3,005,640 2,254.23 285 NE SF,R2 651 2,831,400 2,123.55 1 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696,960 NA NA 285 NW SF,R3 60 2,613,600 1,960.20 285 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28 285 NW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 V 285 NW Flood Plain 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SW SF,R2 122 5,314,320 3,985.74 2 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 F 285 SW Office 151 653,400 163.35 i 945 987 14 285 1 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2,352,240 1,764.18 516 285 SE SF,R1 93 4,051,080 3,038.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 ISE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 285 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 16,673 56,847 IGRAND TOTAL 2560 11,513,600 62,300 272,576 Ard,:-.o Facts and Findings: General Information A. RT - Existing zoning C -G - Requested zoning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square feet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessn Overland Road is impror,,,28-feet of pavement without curb, gutter or sidewalk. The roadwav i ` � vated aboutt above the surrounding property as is common in rural roads and will A bly requi g when reconstructed as an urban roadway. B. The coni this application has been deferred by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission until September 12, 1995. C. Access to the site from Interstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of access that is proposed to be a private driveway connection to Overland Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 feet east of the Eagle Road intersection. D. The site is currently under agricultural production. Two single family residences occupy a portion of the site. It is inevitable that this site will develop for some highly intensive land use. The site's exposure to the interstate highway makes it highly desirable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or more) arterials instead of one. This report .points out the problems that intensive development of this property (and others in the area) will cause the local transportation system in a rapidly developing rural area. E. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site and Eagle Road that currently serves a single family residence and an unimproved parcel owned by ITD. This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The ITD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 2 F. Eagle Road north of Overland Road is under the jurisdiction of ITD,g full access control on the Interstate 84 ramps and on Eagle Road between I-8 verland Road, therefore prohibiting access to this site from Eagle Road andTh loper is required to submit application materials to ITD for the review and rege'_ emen _` epartmetf. G. Excepting the approaches to the Eagle Road ante Overland a 2 -lane roadway from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road. Both Ove` ad legs of the signalized Eagle Road intersection have left turn lanes. A volume of 15 trips per day has been identified as Level of Service (LOS) C to be used for Ion a pl rpmes for two lane roadways such as Overland Road. LOS C is the sirabl a (not capacity) established by APA as a guideline in the 2010 Tr rtat , e last measured traffic volume on Overland Road east of Eagle Road w 5,29 a 1993 estimated volume west of Eagle Road on Overland was 7,265 p ct is ecast to generate 7,855 trips per day east of the site on Overland Road and tri est o gle Road, increasing the estimated traffic on Overland Road east of the o13, 13,217 west of Eagle Road. Although the traffic volumes des' sholds on the roadways, the inordinate number of turning mov the way and the Overland/Eagle intersection require special intersection design. sect "built -out" to an ultimate configuration in advance of the roadway se the greater traffic volumes can be sustained before LOS C delays are exp nced b rity of the traffic. H. Currently, gle Road sou of Overland Road is a 2 -lane roadway and north of Overland Road to the I -8p transiti anes is a 4 -lane roadway. Eagle Road has single left turn lanes on both legs d Overland Road intersection. Traffic: A. The developer has submitted a traffic study for this project. Staff has reviewed and accepted the traffic analysis. The traffic study recommended a number of major improvements to the segment of Overland Road between the site's driveway and Eagle Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection. These improvements will add the needed capacity to the immediate system to accommodate the additional traffic from this project, but will not replace the unused capacity in the system that currently exists. Even with the roadway improvement proposed by the developer, there will be a net loss in intersection capacity at the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. The key elements of the developer's traffic study are as follows: On-site • The planned commercial center will include approximately 714,000 square feet of gross leasable area. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 2,324 vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The proposed project is forecast to generate 24,885 daily vehicle trips. • A single access roadway from Overland Road is proposed to serve the project site. A secondary, emergency access road is planned on the west side of the site that will also connect to Overland Road. • The site access road will require three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be required at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 3 Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • Westbound Overland Road will need an additional ight a at the site access road intersection. ` • The segment of Overland Road between Eagle.Road the sr, 'ad will require ultimate widening to seven traffic lanes; two easough lanes, eastbound left turn lanes, two westbound through lanes, and an add'ound right turn lane. • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road/Ovep rsection will require ultimate widening to three left turn lanes with the rohibi edestrian crossings or the accommodation for pedestrians with an o_ g• • The south and west legs of the Eagle R Ovetersection will require widening to match the added lanes north and t of Ea d/Overland Road intersection. • The east leg of the site access roerla, oad `tersection will require widening to match the added lanes west of the site. es s r /Ove. nd Road intersection. B. ACHD staff h zed atio Overland/Eagle intersection and found that it currently op 1- O an average delay of about 10 seconds per vehicle, and uses about 15 per a in n's capacity of critical volumes. (Critical volumes are the specific in. lum' ` at confect with each other, e.g., the southbound left turns conflict _ the no d through movements.) If this project is developed, and the recom I "ed impro have been constructed, the traffic will use 44 percent of the capaci of critical volumes of the intersection. Staff recommends that the developer be ren" replace 29 percent of capacity of critical volumes that the development will use a the capacity provided by the recommended improvements. This can be ac' y adding a through lane to each of the four legs of the intersection. C . Based upon the submitted traffic study and District policy, staff recommends that the developer be required to make the following roadway improvements that are necessary to accommodate the site generated traffic in the short term, prior to the build out of the four square mile impact area. These improvements will replace the current unused capacity of critical volumes of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection: On-site • The access road will be constructed to include three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • A continuous right turn lane on westbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Eagle Road north of the intersection. • A continuous through lane on eastbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway and on Overland Road west of Eagle Road. • A second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate right turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. • A separate through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 4 D. No stub streets are planned for the project. All internal roadways.are p te. One additional site access is possible in the future as adjacent residential land re 1 iand should be preserved along the eastern portion of the project site. If the djoesidential area redevelops, connecting access to the site is possible. ACHD mme . City of . iridian that no buildings be allowed to develop along the so 0 fee the` " oundary , so the potential additional access road will not be bloc Sub -Regional Transportation Study A. This application was before the Commission , 199 that meeting, the Commission deferred action on the application and re A sociation (APA) to conduct a sub - regional land use/transportation analy of fo miles surrounding this site. That analysis was completed by APA on t 1 95. a volumes of traffic forecast by the APA study to be generated within th r s re m' area are shown in Table 4, immediately following themap at the fro his r is findings have been summarized by District staff as follows: • The analysis was req C , nse to the Power Center application, the St. Luke's project north of I-84, the Be (no I-84, east of St. Luke's), and other anticipated developments in the Eagle Road dor. tual plans for the referenced properties indicate a much higher level of developmen an is assum ong Range Transportation Plan. The purpose of the transportation analysis was determine the rtation impacts of these plans and determine the amount of additional roadway i vements that y be needed to accommodate those impacts. • The cone a represents approximately four square miles (2,560 acres), including the entire area bound Grove Road, Franklin Road, Cloverdale Road and Victory Road. Approximately 150 acres (6% of the total) are undevelopable, including the I-84 corridor, canals, and flood plains. • The 2015 forecast trip generation from the entire area is estimated at 272,500 daily vehicle trips. This is roughly equivalent to 27,000 single family homes or seven Boise Town Square Malls. The forecast trip generation was based on a land use scenario developed by E.J. Smith and Associates under contract to APA and reviewed by ACHD staff, City of Meridian staff and some officials, and APA staff. The analysis assumed that the entire area would be built out by 2015. Maps 5 and 6 show the traffic in the study area now and in 20 years assuming full build out of the study area. • This project will generate 9.1 percent of the total traffic in the study area by year 2015, but occupies only 3.1 percent of the land area and directs that traffic to the arterial system at only one location. • APA's modeling effort used the Bench to Valley Transportation Study network which included the Five Mile Road interchanee. The roadway volume forecast in the Eagle Road corridor will increase over the estimated traffic volumes in this report if the Five Mile interchange is not constructed. The Five Mile interchange was included in the network assumption because this system improvement would be necessary to support the proposed high level of development and its resulting traffic. The Bench/Valley network used in the analysis is the proposed network developed as a result of the March 2, 1995 community -wide meeting, and it is essentially equivalent to several versions that are currently under consideration. With respect to this area of the County, it is most important to note the Five Mile interchange assumption. It is not feasible to consider such an intense sub -regional development without a Five Mile interchange. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 5 Eagle Road and Franklin Road are principal arterials and Overland goad Traffic Services staff ran computer analyses of the operation o , e,Q intersection analyzing its current operation, its operat and its operation with this project plus the full build results of that analysis indicate that the Overland Ro; at LOS B or better, having less than 10 seconds of approximately 15 percent of its capacity of critical vo Overland Road/Eagle Road intersections fall below Leve and arterial roadway design with the planned level oft, square mile impact area without this project, the, ' operate at LOS D, with an average delay of 34. the Power Center and the improvemen . o t intersection will operate worse than seconds per vehicle. Extensive roadwa be required to attain an acceptithil Eagle/Overland intersections. ACHD staff hasua Road intersectio passing unimpeded Two separate inter, turning n The soutl seconds turning e C becau.4 back to I a fi to Ove leg of this icle) becai the Both the a minor arterial. ACHD rerland Road/Eagle Road but no other development, mile impact area. The ion currently operates Fd currently uses oad/Earle Road and D using any conventional intersection Assuming build out of the four ctio uire additional lanes but will er veh Adding the forecast traffic from Worm proposed by the developer, the S F, with an average delay of 62.8 grade separated interchanges would (D or better) at the Eagle/Franklin and Vdof on of an interchange for the Overland Road/Eagle a ated intersection with the north -south traffic on Eagle thich Overland Road traffic would pass over Eagle Road. Eagle Road would split the northbound and southbound d and the traffic on Overland Road trying to access Eagle Road. ersection would operate at LOS F (average delay of more than 60 of the high number of left turns by southbound Eagle Road traffic oad to the Power Center. The northbound leg would operate at LOS turning movement would be right turns from the Power Center going Alternative interchange designs are possible. The costs of the grade separated intersection improvements ($5 million to $8 million per intersection) would be the predominant extra -ordinary cost of the high level of development being considered in the area if right-of-way for major roadway widening is obtained with development and mitigation requirements do not escalate between the time of the adjacent development and the construction of the ultimate roadway section. The APA analysis indicates that Eagle Road will have 57,000 trips per day along the one mile plus segment from south of Overland Road to north of Franklin Road, requiring widening to a minimum of eight lanes. Overland Road will have a maximum of 30,400 and 24,600 trips per day east of Eagle Road, and east of the site driveway, respectively, and would require widening to four lanes for most of its length with special treatment at the Eagle Road intersection in order to operate at an acceptable level of service. The special treatment will probably require a grade separated intersection as described above. Left turn lanes would be necessary at other intersections of existing and future local roads. Overland Road would require six lanes from Eagle Road to the entrance to the Power Center (plus the westbound right turn lane to Eagle Road), because of the site related traffic. Overland Road west of Eagle Road will have 26,400 trips per day upon build out of the impact area, including the traffic from the Power Center. Franklin Road will have a maximum of 23,000 trips per day west of Eagle Road and 25,500 trips per day east of Eagle Road. Severe problems with left turns at the Eagle Road intersection (westbound to southbound) will also require some form of special intersection design similar to Overland Road described above. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 6 B. Prior to the receipt of this application, another tra an as prepared for the District covering the area north of I-84 and east of Eagle _. din n with the E. L. Bews annexation and conditional use application. M ews s f 1 east of the St. Luke's property. In contrast to the analysis conduc A, the S ews, et al traffic analysis did not assume that a Five Mile interc kLd be built, as a development of the projects north of I-84 seem to be likely regardle nch-Valley outcome and results. Although that analysis did not include the Five Mi inter t used the previously assumed APA 2015 land use in the sub -regional area emain Ada County so the lower trip generation in the surrounding area somew o ce a lack of a Five Mile interchange. Thus, the two studies yield similar and mpat' e The conclusions of the St. Luke' The provision ofd significant improv added traffic from operation of the delay the need the Overlan aQ below: ha across the St. Luke's property to the Bews property provides a the Franklin Road/Eagle Road intersection. However, the Tacross the St. Luke's property would seriously degrade the rsection with Eagle Road. The addition of this roadway would Franklin/Eagle intersection, similar to that described above for The propqMntensity o velopment in the area will require unanticipated and unfunded inordinate widening the area. Alternatively, in order to maintain currently accepted Levels of Service an 'We of these inordinate widening requirements using more conventional roadway designs, limits ions of development intensity will be necessary. C. Both traffic analyses indicated that, under long term conditions, the existing transportation system is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the developments proposed and anticipated in this area. The proposed project, expected spinoff projects and other known projects north of Interstate 84 are all unanticipated in the Long Range Transportation Plan. D. The build -out of this project, the ensuing spin-off development in the immediate area, and the anticipated longer term development in the four square mile impact area will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Program, if currently acceptable levels of service are to be maintained, and will create a need for transportation system improvements that are currently unanticipated and for which funding has not been identified. These findings must be established and adopted as a basis for the imposition of extraordinary impact fees. E. Based on the need for these unanticipated roadway improvements, it would follow that some form of extraordinary impact fee could be required to fund the offsite roadway improvements needed to make the system operate at the current level of service, or that the needed improvements be constructed by the developers of the impacting projects. Eagle Road, which requires widening to eight lanes, is not eligible for the expenditure of extraordinary fees that might be imposed by the District. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 7 F. Facilities Financing Districts are used in other states to finance private roadway improvements. This would be extremelyhe low cannot be done without special authorization by the#Mo Le G. An ironic twist to this application/site allowed by pct fee option to prepare an individual assessment and po obtau regular impact fee, because of the usage of the In w. by some customers of this project to make part o e trip" of the volume of traffic to and from the sit I-84 getting to the vicinity of the Power Ce to the specific site are the cause of se , us d a ' level existing capacity of critical vol um t th " verl d Road/E, Alternative Actions: of state, local and this (and other) cases, but the developer's . a substantial reduction of the y and State Highway systems pvelopment. Although much ost of the length of the trips mU that are necessary to get of service and exhaustion of gle Road intersection. A. Adopt and imp -us ao nact fee for all development within the four square mile affected area. This d to a development to other locations, causing problems there. A disadv d' impact fees is that they are collected over a long period of time, whe a improv ey are to pay for may be needed immediately. This would require a onal acco efforts, major commitments of staff time to administer contracts th develope providing the design and construction, and the provision of constru pectio d oversight. The extra- unpact fee could be calculated by either of the following methods: i. Compute the total estimated cost of the off-site improvements that are required to maintain an acceptable LOS and divide by the total number of estimated trips in the four square mile impact area). The result would be applied to each land use as development was being approved as a fee for each forecast vehicle trip generated by the proposed use. A staff estimate indicates that the cost of needed improvements in the area is $27 million and the number of trips is 272,500, resulting in an extraordinary impact fee of $99.08 per trip. Relating this to actual land uses, a single family dwelling would have an extraordinary impact fee of $990.80 in addition to the regular impact fee of $900 ($687 if smaller than 1500 square feet). A 30,000 square foot office building would have an extraordinary impact fee of $36,248 in addition to a regular impact fee of $102,060. A 3,000 square foot convenience store would have an extraordinary impact fee of $131,834 in addition to the regular impact fee of $217,291. This is the method used in the calculation of the regular impact fee and assigns the fee to the source of travel demand. ii. The cost of the off-site improvements could be divided by the number of developable acres of land in the impact area. The result would be assessed on each acre of land as it is developed. This would place an unfair share of the cost on residential development, or eliminate any land uses with low traffic generation rates. ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 / acre = $2805 / dwelling, at four dwellings per acre). MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 8 B. Require the construction by this developer now, of the off-site improv nts that are needed to accommodate the traffic needs of the future development an in the four square mile impact area that would impact Overland Road, s' z e only road to which the project would take access, then use regular or ex ` ord' fees ovethe long term of growth to reimburse the developer for his cost. a dev r ursed for some or all of the construction costs, but may have to a cost of the expense until he is totally reimbursed. (Extra -ordinary impact f not be collected from the developer that constructed the improvements, but they w uted for his development and subtracted from the total cost of the improvemeo be ). This action would be in lieu of establishing an extraordinary impac a ar A variation of this option would arterial roads in the four square n along those roadways and be rig impact area. is allowe District to fm ac and Eagle Ro O Improvements P1 e boundary of the ' is n increase cava ecaus qa rs of property abutting the four area install additional system improvements ro egular impact fees collected within the dinance and is currently being used by the erland Road from Cloverdale to Meridian 0to Victory are currently qualified by the Capital pact fee revenue. Victory Road along the south 0uto eligible for the use of impact fee revenue to does not anticipate this level of development in this area. This woujWequire less ffiditional staff time and accounting than described in A. above. It would fiWde the n ed improvements as development occurs and assess the costs of those imv=W=W0The developments causing the need. C. Form a LoOT-Improvement District (LID) to finance the construction of the off-site improvements and assess either extra -ordinary impact fees or the usual property tax liens to pay off the cost of the improvement. This would require the cooperation and cost of some landowners that may not have plans to develop their property and it would cost all owners the same per unit of land regardless of the ultimate use of their property. However it would provide all of the improvements needed to meet the anticipated impacts prior to all the development occurring. The cost to be financed would equal the cost of the extraordinary impact per acre under A.ii. above ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 per acre). D. Accept the responsibility to meet the challenge created by the intensive development that is forecast in this area and fund whatever level of roadway improvements are affordable using the revenue currently available to the District and accept a deficient Level of Service until needed improvements can be funded and constructed. The regular impact fees from the forecast development will be a substantial sum, but will be collected as the traffic is being generated and will not provide sufficient time for project design, right-of-way acquisition and construction (usually a three year time frame). This could last several years, while the District was trying to build itself out of the shortfall. The developer of this proposed project has estimated the regular impact fee revenue to be generated by the level of development forecast by APA in the four square mile impact area to be $22 million at build out. Staff agrees with this amount, based on current published trip lengths and network adjustment factors. However, using new trip length and network MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 9 adjustment data provided by APA, ACHD staff calculated the anunt of regular impact fee to be $16,700,000, if the area develops according to the d. scenario developed by APA. ACHD staff estimated the cost of accommo 'ng is from the same level of development at $27 million, including:`' • two grade separated intersections for Eagle Roi Overland Ra►a Franklin Road, • widening Overland Road and Franklin Road t es between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Victory Road to three lanes betwee • widening Eagle Road to five lanes from E F. A variation of this option would be they construct their projects, ream project. The difference between reimbursement to the develo development w e ' interest on his m til h of the problem, in r the developer if Pursue enab legislation parties wi an impact o recomme " t this le and Locust Grove Road, )ry Road. ed pa set agreements with developers as veme to the system that are relative to their egul pact fee offset agreements would be that until the revenue was available from other e developer would be required to absorb the sed. That would be his contribution to the solution impact fee. No mechanism is available to reimburse never occur. w "partnering" between the State (ITD), ACHD and private to provide joint funding for the required improvements. Staff n be pursued anyway, whether this development occurs or not. Recomm dQMMMVbf the application on the basis that the development will exceed the ability of the 'ghway District to maintain current levels of service on the impacted roadways and intersections. This action ignores the likelihood that this property and the surrounding property will eventually be developed for some intensive form of land use, with or without the District's approval. G. Accept the project with the regular impact fee revenue that will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. This action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish the four square mile area as a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development occurs along them. This action would alter the schedule of capacity improvement projects in the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. H. Require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from extraordinary impact fees imposed on the properties in the interior of the sections. This would result in spreading the cost of the improvements among all the MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 10 properties in the impact area as they developed, and the needed provided more quickly than the District could program, deli at were to be done as District sponsored projects. I. Require the developers of all property in the impact pro -rata share of the then available unused capat unused capacity would be quantified includin " traffic and adjusted downward as each property would be no unused capacity in the system yftg the Recommended Alternative: Staff recommends that a combination applications in the area. Accept the di' improvements to the system are necks( unused capacity in the make needed capacity in the improvements. This orae cases until Staff Recommen If the application. for approval. �. Site Specific Re( would be construct them if they inW;'de) to replace a terse roadways. The for background District wide ted area is developed, so there k-po percent developed. mterngiives l and I. be adopted for this and future Ppm ;_ (s), r, luring the developers to make whatever to eir site related impacts, r replace any :velop uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to are available and the Commission budgets funds for inlic having to cope with deficient levels of service in oto 101k the required improvements. requirements should be forwarded to Meridian as conditions Prior to the construction of Phase I of this project: 1. Comply with requirements of ITD for Interstate Highway 84 and Eagle Road frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements. 2. The main site access shall be provided through an access roadway as shown on the site plan. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two northbound traffic lanes. The exiting (southbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes, and one right turn lane. A fully actuated traffic signal shall be installed at the site access road intersection with Overland Road, with design and construction acceptable to the District. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at the initial phase of site development. Easements shall be granted to ACHD for the maintenance of signal detectors that are located outside the public right-of-way. 3. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet) and abutting the parcel between the site and Eagle Road. The owner = will be compensated for this additional right-of-way. The additional right-of-way would not otherwise be required for several years without the development of this parcel, therefore it is a project related impact, not reimbursable under either the District's ordinance or the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 11 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate curve) of Overland Road/site access road to keep the street imp r owner will = be compensated for this additional -o: 5. Maintain public access along the western border c This access will also serve as secondary access emergency vehicles. 6. Maintain a 100 -foot clear zone/non-build fronts and the southeast comer of the abutting parcels. if 7. Roadway improvements to poses as the site is deveh Phase I The following rc of development, at both corners of the public right-of-way. The to the park and ride lot. A. the park and ride lot and for border between the building external site connection to Road may be constructed in two or three Il be constructed prior to occupancy of the first phase square feet (60% of the proposed development): • Construct a site acces with three southbound and two northbound traffic lanes. Coord' the roadway sign with District Traffic Services staff. • Install ffic sig t the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Coord' esign with District Traffic Services staff. • Constru us westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eag a oad intersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct an added right tum lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Obtain and dedicate 54 - feet of right-of-way (27 -additional feet) along Overland Road from the site's drivevyay toV the east terminus of the added right turn lane and required tapers. p" t wivee- • Construct one left turn lane (eastbound) on Overland Road at the site access road. • Construct, or deposit the cost thereof, a median island in Overland Road for the access road into the Park and Ride lot. Phase lI The following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to the development of phase H, approximately 645,000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 12 Phase III The following additional roadway improvements shall be 714,000 square foot development (100% of the prop • Construct a second westbound traffic lane on i the Eagle Road intersection. Construct any east of the project site that is needed to match • Construct any additional roadway widening needed to match the roadway widening betweE the roadway design with District Traffic SA AMIN • Construct one additional through rused on intersection to replace the current _ Traffic Services staff. • Construct curb, gutter randXse oe east of the site's drive,nCoordinate th 'an 8. Construct pedesi compliance with 9. Locate propgW sign(s) of of all streedW driveway i 11. None of 1 rAmhnrc Standard Requirements: to completion of the be access road and iway w`` on Overland Road widening west of the project site. oad west of Eagle Road that is d Eagle Road. Coordinate Overland Road/Eagle Road nate the design with District Id `walk along Overland Road, from 500 -feet AW tersection transition west of Eagle Road. Services staff. on r of Overland Road and the main site driveway in ®Sect` 0-1335. public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. A permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. - 3. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACRD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 4. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 13 are not being shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and dra; proposed street improvements. Authorization fo appropriate entity. 6. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawin presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and da ` Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance wi ahc 7. Provide design data for proposed access ub ACHD. 8. Submit three sets of street cons n Dl "' to thel7i Should you ha at 345-7662. .Wces, etc.) outside of the 1, be obtained from the design information and calculations istered Professional Engineer or Wkxtion 54-1215. and appropriate action by for review and appropriate action. please contact the Development Services Division MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 14 `,� %i6, ,? e f f ""I C Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 9 Highlands HackberrY (Continued) believed the Commission's action should be to forward the zone change to Ada County with a recommendation that it be denied and that the applicant be asked to come back with his proposal after the Foothills Plan has been adopted and after the 2010 Plan has been amended. She further pointed out the benefits of the commercial development that was approved. Commissioner Eastlake then moved to forward the zone change to Ada County with a recommendation of denial until the Foothills and 2015 Plans are adopted, which tells us how we are going to handle foothills traffic and how we are going to pay for it. No sec- ond received. Commissioner Huber agreed with Commissioner Eastlake's assess- ment of the uniqueness of Harrison Boulevard. Everyone recog- nizes that Harrison Boulevard is a historic district, but it is not the Highway District's definition that made it a historic designation. It's important that, as a Highway District, if we decide we're going to take a step like that, we should have an internal definition of "historic". Boise City has been the one providing the definition of historic; consequently, she is torn, but does not believe the Highway District is in the role of defining for any city a unique street. The city would have a right to specify particular unique streets, but she had reser- vation and would go back to the staff recommendation with the very clear defining with regard to the plat. Consequently, she couldn't second the motion. Commissioner Bruce appreciated what both Commissioners have said and stated that he is very fond of Harrison Boulevard and doesn't want to see it destroyed in any manner or by any means. He believes that staff has pointed out the facts with regard to the proposed zone change. From the legal standpoint, he is a firm believer that the Highway District is not responsi- ble for land use decisions; that's the charge and responsibili- ty of either Boise City or Ada County. From his standpoint, a legal standpoint, the District cannot tell them what to do with a zone change. He agreed that the staff report relating to the zone change should be signed and forwarded to Ada County, with neither recommendation for approval nor denial; as well as deferral of the preliminary plat until Ada County has rendered a decision on the land use issue. Commissioner Huber then moved to accept the staff recommenda- tion as submitted. Commissioner Bruce seconded. Commissioner Eastlake voted no. Motion carried two to one. DISCUSSION OF STAFF REQUIREMENTS, MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - I-84 POWER CENTER - Larry Sale presented the staff report for sub- ject development and explained what is planned for the shopping center, indicating that there will be only one access and that access will be onto Overland Road; there is no other access Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 10 Power Center (Continued) available to the developer for this parcel. He further ex- plained the Highway District requirements in staff report (copy attached). Mr. Sale also explained the improvements to other roadways in the general vicinity that were pointed out in the traffic study. He further reported that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the project to its City Council. They did so without waiting for input from the Highway District. The staff report will be forwarded to the Meridian City Council after the Commission takes action on same. He further explained the recommendations of staff as it relates to a possible future access to Overland Road; future spin-off development that is expected to occur; and the impact to the District's Five Year Work Program. He further pointed out the options available to the District. Much discussion followed concerning the proposed project relat- ing to rezoning and the probability of spin-off development in the immediate area. Commissioner Bruce opened the meeting for public input. Dale Cox, 3780 West Overland, Meridian, explained his concern with the proposed plan for narrowing a seven -lane section back into a two-way roadway in such a short distance. He presented a drawing showing his perception of the problem (copy at- tached). He further pointed out the problem with the crown of the road and the dangers that will be present to the adjacent property owners in the winter time in trying to use their drive- ways. He pointed out that when he had given Meridian P & Z his views a month ago, he believed they fell on deaf ears. He stated that the proposed development be considered in the con- text that it will impact the roadways all the way from Meridian Road to Five Mile on Overland. Mr. Cox then explained the hazards on Overland Road presently and said curbs, gutter and sidewalk should be required. Much discussion held concerning whether or not Overland Road is currently on the Five Year Work Program. Kent Brown stated that the only section of Overland Road currently in the work program is the section between Five Mile and Cloverdale; it is in the current program for 1996. However, based on funding limitations, staff will be recommend- ing that it be moved to 1997. All other sections of Overland Road are in the program, but unfunded, meaning that there is no money identified for those sections. Much discussion followed concerning the need for improving Overland Road and the lack of funds available to the District. Mr. Cox pointed out that the P & Z Commission had been given information that the section between Eagle and Cloverdale was on the Work Program and they need to be informed that it is not funded. He further stated that he believes development is needed in that area; that the idea of having a mall at the intersection is a bad idea; that location is a very bad idea because of the single entrance and Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 11 Power Center (Continued) exit. It's less than 1,000 feet from his front door. If the District approves this development, it should get Overland fixed, the whole thing. Otherwise, it will be a disaster and people will be killed; that concerns him because they will be killed right in front of his house. Russ Keithly, Langley Associates, 999 Lead Drive, Issaquah, Washington, presented the history of how they have gotten to this point and stated that the Meridian City Planning and Zon- ing Commission had tabled their decision on May 9 pending re- ceipt of a recommendation from Ada County Highway District and asked if the recommendation could be provided by June 13. He pointed out the work that was done with ACRD staff and stated that a lot of information was exchanged with the staff. He stated that the recommendations of staff had changed recently and was concerned that they had spent well over a month with staff to get to what they thought was an approved project to find last Friday that it wasn't approved. The latest addition to the staff report was a requirement potentially to build three miles of road. He asked about the Five Year Work Program and what is included in the plan. Much discussion followed concerning the Five Year Work Program and the current plan which is now in effect. Kent Brown explained that, in the current plan which is now in effect, Overland Road, Eagle to Cloverdale is unfunded in all three categories; Locust Grove to Eagle, unfunded in all three categories; State Highway 69 to Locust Grove, funded in the current program with design in 1995, right-of-way purchase in 1996, and construction in 1997. He further explained the Five Year Work Program and noted that it is prepared only for planning purposes; that projects are not budgeted until the budgeting process is completed; that the Five Year Work Program and the ACHD Budget are two separate documents; that a project is not actually funded until it is included in the budget. The new Five Year Work Program, which has not yet been approved by the Commission, will recommend that Overland Road, Cloverdale to Five Mile, moved to 1997; Eagle to Cloverdale, unfunded; Locust Grove to Eagle, unfunded; and State Highway 69 to Eagle, unfunded. He pointed out that the reason for deleting the one portion from the current FYWP is that there is just not enough money. Further discussion followed concerning with staff attempting to clarify the pro- cess for the FYWP and budgeting. Mr. Keithly was concerned that the one section had been taken from the FYWP and him being required to build that portion all at once. Commissioner Huber pointed out that unless a project is included in a current budget, it does not necessarily mean the current FYWP will be upheld. Mr. Sale further explained conversations that were held several months ago and the actions taken by staff since those preliminary conversations with regard to financial con- straints being faced. Mr. Keithly stated that the requirements staff is recommending bears absolutely no resemblance to a Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 12 Power Center (Continued) single project's requirements. He asked the Commissioners to consider making a recommendation that includes all of the off and on-site requirements identified by your staff without hav- ing to do further studies. Mr. Keithly was surprised that the staff was not aware of the probability of this site being com- mercially developed because of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, the intersection being the largest one in Idaho, it being an intersection of I-84 and State Route 55, and their working with the City of Meridian for a couple of years. Good planning dictates that development be placed where services are avail- able; there is not a better place to establish this project in the City of Meridian. They are willing to widen the roadway and the traffic will not exceed the 14,000 vehicles per day on Overland, east of the site. If further analysis is necessary, he asked that it be done on a general basis, not as a project specific item. He stated that at best they would break ground in the spring of 1996 and will be done in phases with the first phase being only 400,000 square feet. Overland Road would not require widening until 1998 or 99. He asked the Commissioners to look at the original staff report; they are willing to meet those requirements. He further asked that if the Commission wishes to do further analysis of the project, he requested it be completed prior to August 15, 1995, at which time the Meridi- an City Council will hear the application. Much discussion followed concerning the safety concern of the neighborhood with the developer pointing out that their busi- ness' traffic will not impact the morning or evening peak hours and don't believe it will be a problem. David Little, 1495 Tanager Way, presented excerpts from the Highway District's brochure about ACHD projects and stated that the District is trying to saddle one development with more than Y�M his fair share. He asked several questions about the actions 51D taken by the District and other developers. He pointed out several observations of the community as a whole and his opin- ions thereof. He stated that the proposed development is a good use of the property and supported it. Jim Rogers, 1115 Rolling Hills Drive, representing forty resi- ' dents of the two subdivisions to the east of the proposed Power Center. He then read his letter (copy attached) and explained their opposition to the development as submitted. They support ACRD staff 100% in their recommendation to the Commissioners so that no further cost be passed onto the taxpayers of Ada Coun- ty. He requested that the staff report be modified by: elimi- nating the three-phase requirement for improving Overland Road, which would require all improvements prior to starting construc- tion; by adding that additional work required by ACHD to bring Overland and Eagle into compliance would be accomplished at the completion of his project (the completion would be determined Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 13 Power Center (Continued) by ACHD); and to eliminate the reference to the possibility of future project access through the Jewel Subdivision on the south border of the property or the Rolling Hills Subdivision on the east border. It should be clearly understood by the developer that there would not be access to the project through these neighborhoods. Mr. Rogers stated that the plans submit- ted to Meridian City do not show the emergency access and that should be required on the plans. They want to make sure the easement is dedicated to the emergency access roads. He also wanted to make sure the drainage problem is addressed in the process. Pam Haines, 1235 Rolling Hills, Meridian, stated that she didn't know how much they paid the Commissioners, but it is not enough. She further indicated that Meridian P & Z didn't lis- ten to their concerns at all. She stated that she is concerned about the possibility of a future access from the development through their neighborhood. She was opposed to any type of access; she liked her quality of life and doesn't believe they can have that quality of life with a 700,000 square foot retail development in their back yards. She requested that the Commis- sion deny the application. Morris Racken (pronunciation not clear on tape), stated that he lives on Eagle Road and asked about the change on the plans for 1 the Overland Road improvements. He stated that he had lived in 1 the area for a long time and the traffic problems have in- creased considerably. He asked why it was changed and where the money went that was planned for that section of Overland Road. Much discussion followed concerning the Five Year Work Program with Mr. Brown again explaining the process for plan- ning and the annual budget. Further discussion followed con- cerning the lack of planning for commercial growth at the inter- section with Mr. Racken being very critical of the lack of knowledge by the Highway District. Mr. Racken asked about the funds being put into the Meridian area to represent the area's growth compared to other areas of the county that aren't experi- encing any growth at all. He said there should be a larger percentage of money being spent in the Meridian area. Commis- sioner Eastlake explained the problems in all parts of the County that have been waiting many years for funds and pointed out that there are just not enough funds to take care of all the problems; more than half the money is spent on maintaining roads that are put in by all the new development. There are many needs and no ready answers. Much discussion held regard- ing Mr. Racken's perception that the road had been previously funded and that the funds were no longer available for that project. Commissioner Bruce recommended that Mr. Racken meet with Kent Brown to get the answers to his questions regarding the Five Year Work Program and ACHD Budget. Mr. Racken stated that he is in favor of the Power Center. After further discus- Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 14 Power Center (Continued sion, Commissioner Bruce stated that his opinion is that devel- opment does not pay for itself. Alicia Turner, 1485 Rolling Hills Drive, explained the reasons she purchased her home and stated that she wanted to live in a residential area and that she expects to live in a residential area. She expects the Commissioners and trusts them to keep her in a residential area; a mall of this size is not going to provide residential traffic. She is experiencing a severe hearing loss because of nerve damage from noise. The pitch that she is losing her hearing at is voices which is really frustrating to her. Ms. Turner stated that the proposal to have an access from the mall through her neighborhood is unset- tling to her; she doesn't want the traffic coming by. Arch (last name not discernible on the tape), 9424 Knottingham Drive, recommended that the Commission approve the Power Center for the reason that the farmers who own the property have been offered a fair price and they should have the opportunity to sell it. People living adjacent to the property should not have the power to eliminate the sale of adjoining property. If it is not sold for this project, it will be sold for something else. It should be approved. Janie (last name not discernible on the tape) stated that they have lived there twenty years and the interstate has changed their area considerably. Whether we like it or not, we can't stop change. This area will continue to grow and if someone is willing to pay for part of the road, it is a taking off some of the taxes we will have to pay. She is in favor of the Power Center. Virginia Oliason-Jenison, owner of the property proposed for development, stated that they worked hard on this farm. They didn't have anything to say about the freeway coming in; their property was taken. At this point in time, they are entitled to do something with their property in order to realize some benefit from the property. Pam Rogers, 1115 Rolling Hills Drive, stated that if Meridian rezones this area, it will open up commercial development on the entire south side of Overland Road and explained the amount of land that is available for development. She asked about the numbers of vehicles that will use Overland if that is developed. The developer took exception to Commissioner Bruce's statement that development does not pay for itself and explained what their type of development provides for the community. He stat- ed that there is an allocation problem in Idaho, but if a major retail development is analyzed relative to its revenue and expenses, that project will stand on its own and create posi- Commission Meeting - June 14, 1995 Page 15 Power Center (Continued tive revenue. He acknowledged, however, that allocation and cash flow is an issue in Idaho. Discussion held concerning what the sub -regional land use trans- portation analysis would provide and whether it could be com- pleted prior to the Meridian City Council's meeting on August 15. Commissioner Eastlake asked if there is any other access that could be imposed that does not go through the neighbor- hood. Mr. Sale indicated that there is not without acquisition of residential property. Commissioner Huber pointed out that she agreed with the statement that the property is a prime location; it has been a prime location for many years so it appears it is time to move ahead with this. She then moved to remand the staff recommendation and direct staff to prepare the sub -regional land use transportation analysis, to be completed by August 1, 1995. Commissioner Eastlake seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Larry Sale stated that it will be on the Commission Agenda for August 9, 1995. IMPACT FEE APPEAL, FRED MEYER, INC., LOCUST GROVE/FAIRVIEW - Larry Sale reported that there is no one present for the Impact Fee Appeal for Fred Meyer and recommended that the item be deferred one week. Commissioner Eastlake moved to defer the Impact Fee Appeal for Fred Meyer for one week. Commissioner Huber seconded. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION OF STAFF REQUIREMENTS, 95 -38 -CU, 5850 WEST CHERRY LANE - Larry Sale presented the staff report and explained the disagreement between the developer and staff. Fact and Finding C. should read "The District is improving Cherry Lane from Black Cat Road to Linder Road, approximately 0.7 miles east of this proposed development." He stated that the applicant is opposed to providing a deposit to the Public Rights -of -Way Road Trust Fund for the cost of constructing a 5 -foot sidewalk on Cherry Lane abutting the parcel. Rodney Row, 24900 Market Road, Parma, stated that he is not opposing the sidewalk or curb, but it appears a long time be- fore the adjoining properties will be developed and that at the time it goes forward the District could assess an impact fee. He requested that the deposit requirement be waived. Discus- sion followed concerning the process for deposit to the road trust fund and that the District has no other opportunity to get the funds for sidewalk construction. Commissioner Eastlake stated that the Commissioners wouldn't be requiring the deposit if they didn't think it would be used prior to ten years. Mr. Row asked about the funds earning interest and he was told that it does. Commissioner Huber moved to accept the staff recommen- dation as submitted. Commissioner Eastlake seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 07/24/95 16:45 Boise City: $208 345 7650 ACHD 444 CITY MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Applications Commission Meeting $,L1995 Tech Reviewer 1995 1. AA -60-95 201 N. Phillippi St 2. CA -15-95 Borah St between 8th & 11th 3. CU -89-94 2516 Apple St 4. DR -80-95 6467 Supply Way 5. DR -81-95 1500 Maple Grove Rd 6. DR -84-95 1524 Broadway Ave 7. RZ-11-95 BC in Sept 3614 W. State St Ada County: PRELIMINARY PLAT: 8. Hackberry Highlands 9. Puma/95-22-PDR/NF 10. 95 -62 -CU 11. 95 -17 -PR Meridian: PRELIMINARY PLAT: 12. Packard No 2 MRZ-7-95/Annexation 13. MA -i-95 4740 W. Chinden Blvd 3080 Wildwood St a/c Tablerock Rd Wingate Ln s/o Ustick Rd Franklin Rd w/o Meridian Rd 14. MA -2-95 Blue Haron Ln e/o Meridian Rd 15. MCU -1-95 Franklin Rd e/o Eagle Rd 16. MCU -14-95 200 E Fairview Ave Eagle: PRELIMINARY PLAT: 17. Spyglass Chinden w/o Locust Grove cc: 364-2406 Ada County Development Services: David Abo 384-3905 Boise City Public Works: Terry Simmons 384-3753 Boise City Community Development. Scott Spjute 384-3814 Boise City Fire Department: Pete Mulvihill 336-9048 Boise Urban Stages: Keiji Fairless 939-6827 Eagle: Mary Berent 377-9656 Garden City: Dave O'Leary 378-0329 Hubble Engineering: Julie 922-5989 Kuna: Melodie Halstead 887-4813 Meridian: Shari Stiles Page 1 of 1 Au9295 JUL 24 '95 16:35 10001/001 Relocate and replace storage tanks Pioneer pathway extension Fast food dining room expansion Woodworking/cabinet manufac- turing facility Smith's Food and Drug Store Shoe repair Rezone from C-21), C-11) and R -IC to C -1D for Smiths TAZ: 251 Lots:2 Private school Private road TAZ: 265 Lots: 95 Annexation/R-14 & R -T to C -G & L -O Annexation/R-1 to R-40 Mixed use development Quick lube shop TAZ: 252 Lots: 25 208 345 7650 PAGE.01 ��r� s�'� Cst I � (�?��l ��� („ � ,�' f� X� �� AUG -15-1995 13:53 L ALLY ASSOCIATES Langly Associates, Inc. 2067466797 P.01 TO: Shari Stiles pate: 8-15-95 Firm: City of Meridian P009S: 4 — From: Russ Keithly _ 0,4g#- 208-887_I297 7M7NEW RDDRESS &PNONENUMBERSEffECiIVEJU�VSfh., VOICE: 206.746.6700 FAX: 206.746.6797 3633 136th Place SE. Suite 205 Bellevue, WA 98006 AU13-15-1995 13:53 LP143LY ASSOCIATES 2667466797 P.02 August 14, 1995 Larry Sale, Development Services Supervisor Ada County Highway District 318 East 37th Boise, ID $3714 Re: 1-84 Power Center Dear Larry: We have reviewed the Sub -Regional Transportation Study as well as your draft preliminary report concerning our proposal. In Section E of the General Information portion of your report, a very Important point Is made. That point being that even N our project were 100% built -out today, Overland Road from Cloverdale to Locust Grove would have fewer than 15,000 trips per day and would operate at LOS C. Our proposed Overland Road improvements from Eagle Road to a point 800 feet east of our entry would be necessary to maintain LOS C In the immediate vicinity of our project. Our scheduled impact tees are $1,640,000. Even if they are reduced, there will certainly be adequate funds to improve the balance of Overland Road between Eagle and Cloverdale to five lanes and to make a significant contribution to the stretch between Eagle and Locust Grove. To address the long term cumulative Impact of the projected development in the bur square mile study area, we have enclosed a Chart projecting impect fees at today's rates. On a conservative basis, this number exceeds $22,000,000. Even N reduced through individual assessments, this level of development will generate enough impact fee dollars to upgrade every county road within and abutting the study area to three to five lanes. In today's dollars, 70% of these impact fees would widen Victory to three lanes from Locust Grove to Cloverdale, Locust Grove to three Was from Victory to Franklin and all other ACHD roads within and abutting the study area to five lanes. After completir>Ig this work, them would be several million dollars remaining to Improve tthhe .is roads out of the study area that are Impacted by development within the study area Summarizing, we believe that the ACHD impact fees provide adequate funds to mitigate the traffic on ACHD roads should the study's 2015 pro'ecliwa become reality, The fact that the 1-84 Power Center can be 100% developed and a LOS C maintained on Overland leads to the conclusion that the ACHD can maintain satisfactory levels of service in this in* AxpdM. IN. 3633 136th F12M SE Suite 29 Bellevue, WA 96666 I906) 74HTUD Fax 1"27 RUCr15-1996 13:54 LANGLY RSSOCIATES 2967466797 P.93 August 14, 1995 Page 2 area by expeditiously utilizing the impact fees generated by the commercial and resklential growth to mitigate the traffic generated by that same growth. Given that the ACHD has an impact fee program In place that will provide the necessary funds to mitigate a worse case development scenano, 1 am not sure what is gained by asking the C�'ty of Meridian to delay the review of the Conditional Use Permit. Relative {o the growth projections In the Sub -Regional Transportation Stud+, our proposal represents less than 10% of the study area's 2015 cornmeraa l development and less than 10% of the total traffic generated. Any fine tuning of our site design could not possibly change our proportionate impact by more than one or two percentage points. Given the fact that we are such a small portion of thepotentlal build -out, a delay of the CondItImat Use Permit seems pointless. Sincerely, Russel C. Ke'ihly Principal RCK/dh Enclosure cc: Shari Stiles, City of Meridian Gary Funkhouser, Bell Walker Engineers Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, Inc AUG -15-1995 13:55 N d F - Q A 4t oaW N _O LL, m M h g M6 � h e- �" O C M b� a r LANGLY ASSOCIATES 2067466797 P.04 TOTAL P.04 CD 40 C3 N 4- 4- 4• 11-:4: 40 S S ♦- &n C5 1~� N m c N � e� n a� .� o� �0 4► .r sp OCD O �w pp O N Ot7 Q M W M d y Cf O O Ix M M w y TOTAL P.04 N 4- 4- 4• 11-:4: df S S N N N N N N �o S Q OCD O M pp O Opp Ot7 Q p ..� t0 2 C, d O Cf O O a r► M w y 409 ^ N e�0 N M cn tr oe ti N n a N A. M M •+ rl N N en N +. .� ni N M Vf M f/► TOTAL P.04 N N N N N N N �o S Q OCD ppN pati p ..� t0 2 C, ^� M ¢ y ^ N e�0 N M cn tr M M to N N N N ni r- � q .. .. a .- Ij e 44Ch N N G 4 Ch -psiCh Of 9 � N 2 to ph +to ty-!• r V W V 11, q1 O 1 J ~ r L p�� C r 4a O F� }I M 4• tl! O+ y � v y W �-•� O '✓ H 1 ? N S TOTAL P.04 LETTER' OF TRANSMITTAL BRIGGS ENGINEERING, Inc. 1111 So. Orchard St, Suite 600 Boise, Idaho 83705 PHONE: (208) 345-2881 FAX NO: (208) 345-2950 DATE ID NO. TO L > M ► i► CITY,JOB ADDRESS ENCLOSED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA ❑ FEDERAL EXPRESS ❑ COURIER F6R APPROVAL IO WE ARE SENDING YOU Cl SHOP DRAWINGS C ❑ CHANGE ORDER .4PRROVFD AS N070 ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ WE ARE RETURNING ❑ PLANS ❑ RETURN CWRECIID PRINTS ❑ ORIGINALS ❑ ❑ FINAL PLAT ❑ ❑ SPECIF/CA TONS ❑ COMPUTER DISK ❑ O THER ENCLOSED ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA ❑ FEDERAL EXPRESS ❑ COURIER THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW ❑ F6R APPROVAL ��WWFIWAN •DESCRIPTION - OwAgram, I_ AWARE= ❑ FOR MYR INF09MAI70V ❑ .4PRROVFD AS N070 ❑ 57WIT CLW/ES FA? DIS7R/BUA0V ❑ AS REOUES70 ❑ RETURNED FA? 6 WRECIIGWS ❑ RETURN CWRECIID PRINTS ❑ FOR RENEW AND CANMOVT ❑ PRICE ❑ FOR 81,0SOff ❑ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW ❑ F6R APPROVAL ❑ APPROVED AS SUBMITIFO ❑ REASM/T EWES FGW APPROVAL ❑ FOR MYR INF09MAI70V ❑ .4PRROVFD AS N070 ❑ 57WIT CLW/ES FA? DIS7R/BUA0V ❑ AS REOUES70 ❑ RETURNED FA? 6 WRECIIGWS ❑ RETURN CWRECIID PRINTS ❑ FOR RENEW AND CANMOVT ❑ PRICE ❑ FOR 81,0SOff ❑ COPY TO SIGNED 13 0 1--T-/ Ada Planning Association No. 16-95 SUB -REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY OF AREA AROUND EAGLE ROAD & 1-84 INTERCHANGE Prepared For: Ada County Highway District Commission Clair Bowman Executive Director By: Ada Planning Association August 1, 1995 Ervin Olen, P.E. Deputy Director Table of Contents Page Executive Summary .................................................... 1 Introduction.......................................................... 2 Background Sub -Regional Study Area Organization of Study Part I - Land Use Study ................ Meridian Comprehensive Plan Land Use Methodology/Approach Assumptions Land Use Analyses Part II - Transportation Impacts Analyses Existing Facilities Site Trip Generation Traffic Volume Projection 2015 Traffic Volumes Intersection Analysis ................................ 6 .................................... 12 Appendices......................................................... 21 List of Maps Map 1. Project Location ................................................. 3 Map 2. Sub Regional Transportation Study Area ............................... 4 Map 3. Traffic Analysis Zones ............................................ 9 Map 4. Transportation Impacts Area ....................................... 13 Map 5. Average Daily Traffic of Study Area .................................. 14 Map 6. 2015 Traffic Volume Projections .................................... 18 List of Tables Table 1. Summary of Land Use Projection ................................... 8 Table 2. Demographic Projection of Study Area for Year 2015 ..................... 8 Table 3. Land Use Projection ............................................ 10 Table 4. Trip Generation Calculation ....................................... 15 Table 5. 2015 Traffic Volume Projections (Constrained) ......................... 19 Table 6. 2015 Unconstrained Traffic Volume Projections ........................ 20 Appendices Appendix A - References and Information Sources Appendix B - Demographic Adjustments for Balance of Ada County Appendix C - Intersection Capacity Analysis EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of the Ada County Highway District CHD) Commission, APA conducted a sub -region transportation study of approximately quare miles around the intersection of Eagle and Overland Roads. The purpose of this PC was to review the cumulative traffic impacts of all Broposed and anticipated land use developments within the study area by year 2015. In the core of this study is the assumption that the four square miles of land around Eagle and Overland Roads will be completely built out by the horizon year 2015. The study consists of two parts: Part I is a land use projection conducted by Smith and Associates under a contract with APA. The consultant's work was based upon interviews with the City of Meridian officials, prospective developers for the area and the directives of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan (Appendix A). Part II is a review of the traffic impacts of projected land uses using Trip Generation, 5th Edition, 1991; Trig Generation Intensity Factors (TGIF), 1967; and APA's travel forecasting model, TranPlan. Under review of the Demographic Advisory Committee, APA revised its population and employment projections to reflect the anticipated concentration of retail and office developments in that area. Part I, Land U . The table below is a summary of the results of land use work based upon a complete buil"out of the four square mile area around the Eagle/Overland intersection: The above land use activities will generate the following demographics: Households Population Retail Non -Retail Employment Employment 2.730 7,098 9,304 7,234 Part II, Traffic Impacts. The anticipated land use activities will generate 57,000 ips per day. Using the travel forecasting model with the above demographics for a showed a significant increase in the traffic volumes of arterials within the study area. 1-84 will increase to 126,400, between Eagle and Five Mile Roads, and to 83,600, between Meridian and Eagle Roads. Volumes on Eagle and Overland Roads, around their intersection will increase to 56,200 and 30,500 respectively. If the existing c=rteri�alsaro adways are used, these volum indicate level of service LOS F or w r the sing the existing configuration of intersections and the projected volumes, the Highway Capacity Software was used to analyze LOS for major intersections in the study area. Again, the results were LOS F or worse for all major intersections (Appendix C). Finally, it is noteworthy that this study does not necessarily repudiate the findings of consultants' work for St. Luke's facility and the proposed Power Center, the differences are due to the different assumptions of each study. . P 6 INTRODUCTION Background On June 14, 1995 the Ada County Highway District (ACRD) Commission deferred action on an application for the development of a 714,400 sqf. shopping center on the southeast comer of Eagle Road and 1-84 interchange (Map 1) and requested APA to conduct a sub -regional transportation study of the area by August 1, 1995. This proposal, which is referred to as the "Power Center," consists of 73.5 acres of land, currently under Ada County jurisdiction. The applicant is requesting annexation of the prop to the City of Meridian and its rezoning to C b o . The Power Center makes u 4° of the entire property earmarked for commercial activities.; Additionally, St. Luke's gional Medical Center has begun the construction of a medical complex on the northeast quadrant of the interchange. These two major developments have prompted additional land use activities in an effort to capture their spinoff developments. Several traffic studies have been prepared by different consultants to look at the impacts of a particular land use proposal. In this context, the ACRD Commission deemed a sub -regional transportation study was warranted to look at the cumulative impacts of all known and anticipated developments in that area. Sub -Regional Study Area Since the intensive level of land use activities proposed around the 1-84/Eagle Road interchange will have transportation impacts beyond the interchange facilities, two different study areas are assumed. 1. Land Use Area. The Land Use Study Area includes a block of four square miles surrounded by Franklin Road on the north, Victory Road on the south, Cloverdale on the east and Locust Grove on the west (Map 2). 2. Transportation Impact Area. The Transportation Impact Area is extended beyond the Land Use Area and encompasses the area surrounded by Franklin Road on north, Amity on south, Five Mile on east, and Meridian on west (Map 2). Study Purpose The purpose of this study is to analyze the long-term transportation impacts of gill proposed and anticipated land use activities in the vicinity of 1-84/Eagle Road. To this end, the following objectives have been set forth: Provide an inventory of proposed land uses for the Land Use Study Area. 2. Anticipate a reasonable spinoff development for the known land use proposals. 3. Calculate trips generated by the known and spinoff developments. 4. Update the demographic parameters of the Travel Forecasting Model to account for these developments by year 2015. 2 C\? aITK ant, CCS A 0 IST '3 ajEp.zanojJ ano.zf) JMOO� upipi.ian O U co i A 0 IST '3 ajEp.zanojJ ano.zf) JMOO� upipi.ian O U 5. Project traffic volumes for the planning year 2015 in the Transportation Impact Area (sites generated + regional). 6. Analyze projected traffic volumes in relation to the capacity of existing roadways and intersections. Organization of Study This study consists of two parts. Part I is a review of land use developments and land use projections, and Part II is the analysis of the transportation impacts of those land use developments. APA retained Smith and Associates for the completion of the land use portion of the study. The consultant based assumptions upon the results of several interviews with Meridian and St. Luke's officials. A list of officials contacted for this information is shown as Appendix A. ACHD and APA's technical staff modified some of the consultant's land use assumptions based upon their intimate knowledge of existing land use proposals and the area's demographics. �i PART LAND USE STUDY This section is a review of recent applications in the Land Use Study Area for zone changes and annexation to the City of Meridian, as well as potential spinoff developments of all these proposals. The intersection of Eagle Road with 1-84 and Overland Road is a central location for the Treasure Valley, convenient to the large growth expansions in the West Bench and the City of Meridian. This major intersection also carries regional significance in that it is easily accessible to traffic originating in Canyon, Elmore, Gem and Boise Counties, as well as traffic from Eastern Idaho, Oregon and locations further north such as Valley County. This area has become the focus of future mixed uses and represents a logical site of expansion as growth in the region continues. Meridian Comprehensive Plan The Foreword of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan calls for the expansion of commercial and industrial development in Meridian. It is a goal of the city to gain a larger employment base through the addition of jobs in planned mixed uses areas including commercial, industrial and office. This intersection is shown in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as being a desired site of planned mixed uses. Mixed use areas adjacent to 1-84/Overland Road are unique in that they are: "surrounded by arterials; immediately adjacent to the freeway; relatively level; distinctly linear in shape; greatly affected by contiguous (existing) industrial, residential and commercial land uses." To achieve "compatible land uses and efficient use of the land" this intersection area is planned for commercial, medium to high density residential, tourist lodging, industrial, offices, medical and open space for noise buffering'. The City of Meridian is most interested in expansion and development of the type proposed in this area. The Comprehensive Plan and Map fully support such proposals. Land Use Methodology/Approach Research was conducted through personal and telephone interviews with city officials, developers and planners (see Appendix A). The questions asked were intended to identify the following factors: 1. What type of development is desired in the area? '. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, 1993; P. 1. 2. What intensity (residential density; retail/non-retail mix) of land use would be reasonably expected? 3. The degree of phasing, if any is known; i.e., what portion of a project would be built by 2000, and what portion by 2015? 4. What effect development of any one site would have on adjacent proposals, i.e. would it preclude another development totally, or would it alter the land use mix? Responses to the above questions were the basis of this land use projection for 2015. Assumptions The following assumptions were used to calculate the land uses for the future. 1. The entire area in the Meridian Area of Impact, will be annexed to Meridian and served by Meridian water and sewer utilities. 2. Land owners are willing to develop their land as soon as services are available. 3. The areas directly bordering Eagle Road, Overland Road and 1-84 are more likely to develop as retail/service areas. Areas nearer Victory, Locust Grove, Franklin and Cloverdale Roads will develop with a much greater percentage of residential. Current proposals and existing developments support this assumption. 4. Retail, office, and industrial developments are assumed to occupy 22.510/6-259'0 of the total acreage or gross floor area (GFA). 5. Actual GFA is used when known, i.e. St. Luke's and Power Center. 6. , Residential development was assumed to be at the following levels. Single Family @ R1 = 78% of land is used at rate of 1 DU/acre (2.6 persons/HH); Single Family @ R2 = 75% of land is used at rate of 2 DU/acre (2.6 persons/HH); Single Family @ higher density = 3/houses/acre (2.6 persons/HH); Multi Family (2.5 persons/1-11-1). 7. Existing subdivisions and plats were assumed to be fully built as subdivided by 2015. 8. For residential developments, slightly higher densities were chosen than might actually develop. 9. Locust Grove will be extended north and south and overpass 1-84 by 2015. 10. The Power Center will be built by 2000. 11. The retail designation is general commercial and could include such developments as hotels, restaurants, convenience stores, groceries, etc. When a specific type of use is known, it is designated. 7 12. St. Luke's Phases I and II are completed by 2000. St. Luke's Phase III is completed by 2015. St. Luke's Phases IV and V are completed sometime after 2015. Land Use Analyses The Eagle/Overland Road intersection is located in T3N, RIE, S16, 17,20 and 21. It includes Traffic Analysis Zones JAZ) 162 in the West Bench Planning Area; TAZs 284 and 285 in the Rural Ada Planning Area; and TAZs 283 and 286 in the Meridian Planning Area. Map 3 shows TAZ boundaries of the Land Use Study Area. The area within each square mile has been broken down to four quadrants to provide a more specific land use projection. An inventory of proposed and projected land uses were developed for the four square mile area around the Eagle/Overland Road intersection. In summary, 64% of the area was projected to develop as residential, 17% as retail and 6% as office area (Table 1). Table 3 shows how these estimates were obtained by reviewing the most reasonable and probable use of each parcel. Table 1 Summary of Land the Projection Residential Retail Office Institution Industrial Drainage Total /R -O -W Acreage 1,643 442 149 75 32 219 2. Percent 64 17 6 3 1 1 9 1� APA's demographic projections for the five TAZs were updated to reflect the employment and population generated by these developments. Table 2 shows a summary of demographics for the Land Use Study Area. The additional retail and non -retail employment anticipated for this area was subtracted from other areas in Ada County to hold the total projection for the county constant (zero net gain). Appendix B shows adjustments made to the other planning areas as a result of these developments. Table 2 DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS OF STUDY AREA FOR YEAR 2015 T/Z 2015 PROJECTIONS POPULATION EMPLOYMENT RETAIL NON -RETAIL 162 1,656 663 2,656 283 1,158 1,708 1,415 284 468 1,8664 0 285 1.443 2,121 1,698 286 2,372 2,948 1,465 TOTAL 7,097 9,304 7,234 8 N n'.U"MTAZ Map 3 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES (TAZ) of Land Use Study Area Franklin 2831-84 SLRMC 162 PC 284 Overland a� 286 bo 285 c� w Victory U Table 3 LAND USE PROJECTION TAZ Section Land Use I Acres HH 1 Pop lRetailIN-Ret. 162 NE - Edgeview SF,R1 79 164 426 162 NE SF,R8 25 100 260 162 NE MF,R3 25 300 780 162 NE Free Standing Retail 16 214 162 NE Office 10 377 NE Canal, etc. 5 162 NW-Monteview Par SF,R1 30 28 73 162 NW SF,R3 20 45 117 162 NW - St Lukes Hospital 40 400 162 NW Nursing Home,300 bed 5 200 162 NW Office 40 1679 162 NW General Retail 21 449 162 NW Canal, etc. 4 162 SUBTOTAL 320 637 1656 663 2656 284 SW SF,R1 40 30 78 284 SW Park and Ride 2 284 SW Power Center 73 1546 SW Flood Plain 45 284 SE SF,R1 80 51 133 284 SE SF,R3 44 99 257 284 SE Retail 15 318 SE Canal, 1-84 21 284 SUBTOTAL 320 180 468 1864 0 283 NE SF,R1 135 107 278 283 NE SF,R1 10 54 283 NE Retail 10 212 283 NE Office 5 188 283 NW SF,R1 38 38 99 283 NW SF,R3 100 225 585 283 NW Retail 10 212 283 NW Flood Plain, etc. 12 283 SW SF,R3 78 59 152 283 SW Industrial Park 15 314 283 SW Golf/Recreation 15 283 SW Retail 24 509 283 SW Office 12 452 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 16 283 SE SF,R1 35 7 18 283 SE SF,R1 10 10 26 283 SE Retail 34 721 283 SE Office 10 377 283 SE Light Industrial 4 84 2831 SE 1-84 R -O -W 67 283 SUBTOTAL 640 446 7081 1415 TAZ = Traffic Analysis Zone; HH = No. of Households; P = Population Retail = No. of Retail Employees; N -Ret. = No. of Non Retail Employees SF = Single Family; MF = Multi Family; R1 = One Unit Per Acre Table 3, Continued TAZ Section Land Use I Acresl HH I Pop lRetail . N -Ret. 286 NE Retail 114 2418; 286 NE SF,R3 33 74 193 { 286 NE Light Industrial 13 272 286 NW SF,R1 39 30 79 286 NW SF,R3 97 218 567 286 NW School Site 15 62 286 NW Retail 5 106 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 286 SW SF,R3 145 326 848 286 SW Retail 10 212 286 SW Canal, etc. 5 286 SE SF,R3 117 263 684 286 SE Office 30 1131 286 SE Retail 10 212 286 ISE Canal, etc. 3 286 SUBTOTAL 640 912 2372 29481 1465 285 NE SF,R1 69 52 135 285 NE SF,R2 65 98 254 285 NE Retail 10 212 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 285 NW SF,R3 60 135 351 285 NW Retail 65 1379 285 NW Office 27 1133 285 NW Flood Plain 8 285 SW SF,R2 122 183 476 285 SW Retail 15 318 285 SW Office 15 565 285 SW . Canal, etc. 8 285 SE SF,R1 54 18 47 285 SE SF,R1 93 70 181 285 SE Retail 10 212 285 SE Canal, etc. 3 285 SUBTOTAL 1 1 6401 5551 14431 21211 1698 GRAND TOTAL 1 25601 27301 70981 93041 7234 TAZ = Traffic Analysis Zone; HH = No. Retail = No. of Retail Employees; N -Ret. SF = Single Family; MF = Multi Family; Aa\PMLU.%M of Households; P = Population = No. of Non Retail Employees R1 = One Unit Per Acre PART 11 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ANALYSES This section provides an analysis of the transportation impacts of land use activities anticipated within four square miles of the Overland/Eagle Road intersection (Land Use Study Area) on the existing facilities of the adjacent area (Maps 4). Existing Facilities The intersection of Eagle/Overland Roads is served by an interstate highway, an interchange, principal arterials, and minor arterials. 1-84 is a 6 -lane interstate facility accessible via an interchange north of the intersection. The intersection of Eagle Road with the northern ramps of this interchange is signalized. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on 1-84, east of Eagle Road, is 62,000, and 53,000 west of it (Map 5). Eagle Road is a 5 -lane principal arterial north of Overland Road which turns into a 2 -lane minor arterial south of Overland Road. Eagle Road is designated State Highway 55 and serves as a major north -south arterial in Treasure Valley. Traffic volumes on Eagle Road range between 24,000 north of the interchange and 3,000 south of Victory Road. Overland Road within the Study Area is a 2 -lane substandard minor arterial which carries approximately 7,000 vehicles around its intersection with Eagle Road. Franklin Road is a substandard principal arterial with additional turning lanes at its major intersections. Other minor arterials within the Study Area are Victory, Amity, Cloverdale, Five Mile and Meridian. With the exception of Meridian Road and a portion of Cloverdale, these roadways are 2 -lane substandard. The intersection of Five Mile and Overland is a signalized intersection with exclusive turning lanes for all movements. Site Trip Generation Trip Generation, 5th edition, was used to calculate the number of trips which will be generated by all proposed and potential developments within the Land Use Study Area. For this calculation a complete build -out by year 2015 was assumed. For retail, office and industrial park land uses, 25% of the land was used as the Gross Floor Area (GFA). For residential developments the number of dwelling units per acre was entered as input into the Trip Generation. As a general rule, when a specific land use data was available, it was used as input to the Trip Generation, in lieu of the GFA. Table 4 shows the location of proposed and anticipated land uses, acreage, thousands of square feet and the number of trips they will generate. It is estimated that a total of 257,000 trips per day will be generated by the complete build -out of the four square miles around the Overland/Eagle Roads intersection. 12 'i ajjjl� aAIJ ICSS L ..... ...... ...... ..... ........ ...... ...... ........ ........ ........ ........ ...... ... ........ ...... ------ ...... .... . .... ...... ...... ...... ...... I ...................... ....... ......... -1 ................. .............. ............... -- - ------- --- ..................... .., ... ...... .... ...... ... . ... 0 ...... V �4 CU 5 I.VL:) a I aAOJf) Isno • ...... .. .. ...... ............ ...... . . ..... ------ ...... IUL>Ipl.lawl cz V �4 CU 5 I.VL:) a I aAOJf) Isno • ...... .. .. ...... ............ ...... . . ..... ------ ...... IUL>Ipl.lawl • S8I`�T Ti0`TT 86Z`ZT ajEp.zanojD •• 88Z`�Z �6z`zT laAOlf) Isnool kn co 0 ajty� ani, G9T `OT ��•� I 6 � I x m It 0 c a C� e • S-pfi`S OL8`ST n • ��-, • � � ro o co W � LIEIpI.Zay� c' oa� o, o, cc i NW 800`OT Q • ••� Q S88`8z � oma, • C; co � Q W 86Z`ZT ajEp.zanojD •• 88Z`�Z �6z`zT laAOlf) Isnool kn co 0 ajty� ani, G9T `OT ��•� I 6 � I x m It 0 c a C� e • S-pfi`S OL8`ST n • ��-, • � � ro o co W � LIEIpI.Zay� c' oa� o, o, cc i 86Z`ZT ajEp.zanojD •• 88Z`�Z �6z`zT laAOlf) Isnool kn co 0 ajty� ani, G9T `OT ��•� I 6 � I x m It 0 c a C� e • S-pfi`S OL8`ST n • ��-, • � � ro o co W � LIEIpI.Zay� c' oa� o, o, Table 4 TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION TAZ Section Land Use Acres SQF GFA 000 Trip Generation 162 NE SF,R1, Ed eview 79 3,441,240 2,580.93 754 162 NE SF,R8 25 1,089,000 816.75 11910 162 NE MF,R3 25 1,089,000 816.75 716 162 NE Free Standing Retail 16 696,960 174.24 7,086 162 INE Office 10 435,600 108.90 3,721 162 NE Canal, etc. 5 217,800 NA NA 162 NW SF,R1, Montview Park 30 1,306,800 980.10 287 162 NW SF,R3 20 871,200 653.40 573 162 NW St. Luke's Hospital 401 1,742,400 475.20 7,974 162 NW Nursing Home,300 bed 5 217,800 54.45 780 162 NW Office 40 1,742,400 435.60 14,884 162 NW General Retail 21 914,760 228.69 9,301 162 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 162 SUBTOTAL 320 13,939,200 7,325 47,986 284 SW SF,R1 40 1,742,400 1,306.80 382 284 SW Park and Ride 2 87,120 82.76 1,726 284 SW Power Center 73 3,179,880 714.40 24,885 284 SW Flood Plain 45 1,960,200 NA NA 284 SE SF,R1 80 3,484,800 2,613.60 764 284 SE SF,R3 44 1,916,640 1,437.48 1,261 284 SE Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 284 SE Canal, 1-84 Hwy 21 914,760 NA NA 284 SUBTOTAL 320 13,939,200 6,318 35,661 283 NE . SF,R1 135 5,880,600 4,410.45 1,289 283 NE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NE Office 5 217,800 54.45 886 283 NW SF,R1 381 1,655,280 1,241.46 363 283 NW SF,R3 1001 4,356,000 3,267.00 2,865 283 NW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 INW Flood Plain, etc 12 522,720 NA NA 283 SW SF,R3 78 3,397,680 2,548.26 2,235 283 SW Industrial Park 15 653,400 163.35 1,139 283 SW Golf/Recreation 15 653,400 653.40 125 283 SW Retail 24 1,045,440 261.36 10,630 283 SW Office 12 522,720 130.68 1,718 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 16 696,960 NA NA 283 SE SF,R1 35 1,524,600 1,143.45 334 283 SE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 SE Retail 34 1,481 040 370.261 15,058 283 SE Office 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 283 SE Light Industrial 4 174,240 43.56 304 283 SE 1-84 R -O -W 671 2,918,520 NA NA 283 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 15,268 47,493 Tahla_ d_ f_nntinuprl TAZ Section Land Use Acres SQF GFA 000 Trip Generation 286 NE Retail 114 4,965,840 1,241.46 50,490 286 NE SF,R3 33 1,437,480 1,078.11 945 286 NE Light Industrial 13 566,280 141.57 987 286 NW SF,R1 39 1,698,840 1,274.13 372 286 NW SF,R3 971 4,225,320 3,168.99 2,779 286 NW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7,004 286 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2,214 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 286 SW SF,R3 145 6,316,200 4,737.15 4,154 286 ISW Retail 101 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 SW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 286 SE SF,R3 117 5,096,520 3,822.39 3,352 286 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3,434 286 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 ISE Canal, etc. 1 31 130,680 NA INA 286 SUBTOTAL 1 640 27,878,400 16,7161 84,589 285 NE SF,R1 69 3,005,640 2,254.23 659 285 NE SF,R2 65 2,831,400 2,123.55 1,242 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696,960 NA NA 285 NW SF,R3 60 2,613,600 1,960.20 1,719 285 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28,788 285 NW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 3,171 285 NW Flood Plain 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SW. SF,R2 122 5,314,320 3,985.74 2,330 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 285 SW Office 15 653,400 163.35 2,033 285 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2,352,240 1,764.18 516 285 SE SF,R1 93 4,051,080 3,038.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 SE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 285 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 16,673 56,847 GRAND TO AL 2560 11,513,600 62,300 272,576 AB*nuip.wU Table 4 TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION TAZ Section Land Use Acres SQF GFA 000 Trip Generation 162 NE SF,R1, Ed eview 791 3,441,240 2,580.93 754 162 NE SF,R8 25i 1,089,000 816.75 1,910 162 NE MF,R3 25 1,089,000 816.75 716 162 INE Free Standing Retail 16 696,960 174.24 7,086 162 NE Office 10 435,600 108.90 1,494 162 NE Canal, etc. 5 217,800 NA NA 162 NW SF,R1, Montview Park 30 1,306,800 980.10 287 162 NW SF,R3 210 871,200 653.40 573 162 NW St. Luke's Hospital 4 1,742,400 475.20 7,974 162 NW Nursing Home, 30 bed 5 217,800 54.45 780 162 NW Office 40 1,742,400 435.60 1,613 162 NW General Ret 914,760 228.69 9,301 162 1 NW Canal, etc.1 iN 4 174,240 NA NA 162 SUBTOTAL 320 13,939,200 7,325 32,488 284 SW SF,R1 401 1,742,400 1,306.80 382 284 SW Park and Ri4p 21 87,120 82.76 1,726 284 SW Ikower Centek 73 3,179,880 714.40 24,885 284 1 SW FLood Plain 45 1,960,200 NA NA 284 SE SF,"R1 80 3,484,800 2,613.60 764 284 SE SF,13 44 1,916,640 1,437.48 1,261 284 SE Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 284 SE Panal, 1-8 21 914,760 NA NA 284 SUBTOTAL 320 13,939,200 6,318 35,661 283 NE' SF,R1 135 5,880,600 4,410.45 1,289 283 NE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NE Office 5 217,800 54.45 886 283 NW SF,R1 38 1,655,280 1,241.46 363 283 NW SF,R3 100 4,356,000 3,267.00 2,865 283 NW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NW Flood Plain, etc 12 522,720 NA NA 283 SW SF, R3 781 3,397,680 2,548.26 2,235 283 SW Industrial Park 151 653,400 163.35 1,139 283 SW Golf/Recreation 151 653,400 653.40 125 283 SW Retail 24 1,045,440 261.36 10,630 283 SW Office 12 522,720 130.68 1,718 283 SW 1-84 R-O-W 16 696,960 NA NA 283 SE SF,R1 35 1,524,600 1,143.45 334 283 SE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 SE Retail 34 1,481,040 370.26 15,058 283 SE Office 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 283 SE Light Industrial 4 174,240 43.56 304 283 SE 1-84 R-O-W 671 2,918,520 NA NA 283 SUBTOTAL 640 27,878,400 15,268 47,493 TahlP 4_ Continued TAZ Section Land Use Acres SOF GFA 000 Trip Generation 286 NE Retail 114 4,965,840 1,241.46 50,490 286 NE SF,R3 33 1,437,480 1,078.11 945 286 NE Light Industrial 13 566,280 141.57 987 286 NW SF,R1 39 1,698,840 1,274.13 372 286 NW SF,R3 97 4,225,320 3,168.99 2,779 286 NW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7,004 286 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2,214 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 286 SW SF,R3 145 6,316,200 4,737.15 4,154 286 SW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 SW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 286 SE SF,R3 1 7 5,096,520 3,822.39 3,352 286 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3,434 286 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 ISE lCanal, etc. 31 130,680 NA NA 2861SUBTOTALI 640 27,878,400 16,7161 84,589 285 INE SF,R1 69 3,005,640 2,254.23 659 285 NE SF,R2 65 2,831,400 2,123.55 1,242 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696,960 NA NA 285 NW SF,R3 60 2,613,600 1,960.20 1,719 285 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28,788 285 NW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 3,171 285 NW Flood Plain 8 348,480 NA NA 285 ISW SF,R2 1221 5,314,320 3,985.74 2,330 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 285 SW Office 15 653,400 163.35 2,033 285 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2,352,240 1,764.18 516 285 SE SF,R1 93 4,051,080 3,038.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 SE Canal, etc. 3 130,680 NA NA 2851SUBTOTALI 640 27,878,400 16,673 56,847 GRAND TO AL 2560 11,513,600 62,300 257,078 "*mu*.wk3 Traffic Volume Projection APA's travel forecasting model, TranPlan, was used to project traffic volumes for year 2015. The model has recently been calibrated by Cambridge Systematics and includes all anticipated long-range transportation improvements in Ada County, including the Bench/Valley Alternative 8A2. Based upon the land use projections discussed in Part I, the model's demographics were adjusted to reflect anticipated retail and non -retail employment for subject area. This was done by using the procedure in Trig Generation Intensity Factor (TGIF). Arizona Department of Transportation, 1976. 2015 Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes for year 2015 were projected by using the TranPlan model, a widely used travel forecasting model in the country. The analysis takes into consideration projected regional traffic plus the site generated traffic. Table 5 and Map 6 show the projected traffic volumes for 2015 and the Volume per Capacity Ratio (v/c). This is a constraint run using the existing capacity of roadways. Traffic volume on Eagle Road, between the Overiand/1-84 interchange, will increase to 56,200; between Franklin and the interchange to 51,900; on Overland, East of Eagle intersection, to 30,500; and on 1-84, between Eagle and Five Mile Roads, to 126,400 per day. These volumes indicate severe congestion and decline of level of service (LOS) to E/F and worse. For modeling and planning purposes APA uses the following convention regarding v/c ratios. The v/c ratios on Table 5, however, can be used for any other conventions. V/C Ratio LOS < 0.75 A/B >_ 0.75 C >_ 1.0 D 1.25 E/F To determine the total traffic volumes without any capacity constraints, an All -Or -Nothing (AON) run was completed. The results of the AON run are listed in Table 6. The run revealed that as many as 88,700 vehicles would use Eagle Road between the interchange and Overland Road. The unconstrained volume on Overland, east of Eagle Road, would be 68,700; and on 1-84, between Eagle and Five Mile it would soar to 156,400. The AON is usually a very good indication of the total number of vehicles which desire to use a roadway without any constraints. Intersection Analysis Projected turning movements at eight major intersections were produced by the travel forecasting model. These volumes were entered into the Highway Capacity Software to calculate LOS at intersections. The program showed that LOS at the following intersections will be F or worse: Overland/Eagle; 1-84/Eagle, N. Ramps; Eagle/Franklin; Overland/ Cloverdale; Five Mile/Franklin; Five Mile/Overland; Overland/Power Center entrance; Eagle/ St. Luke's entrance. The actual computer output for this work is included as Appendix C. 2. Includes extensions of Maple Grove to Chinden, Adams to Glenwood, Curtis to Chinden and Ustick to Curtis, plus an interchange at Five Mile and 1-84. 17 aOOz`zt 008`iv` 000 9F E OOV6T 006`OT 0 0 O O i C6 cc c i E OOV6T 006`OT 0 0 O O M � C6 c o � O � E OOV6T 006`OT 0 0 O O M � C6 U � a rn o w OOT`6£ O ° 002!`9s � �o 0 a I �I-E � 1 I 0 M � O co co Fit ZS i 3 O O G1 d' ajPp.zanOIJ oos`sz 009`91 oos`-pz 000122 anOJj) ISnZ)Ort e—i E:::� - I uptpt.zaylt o—z r 0 a d Table 5 2015 Traffic Volume Projectios (Constrained) Roadway Location NB SB EB WB Total ADT V/C Ratio Eagle Rd. Victory - Overland (south 1/2) Victory - Overland (north 1/2) 13,100 11,800 9,900 12,700 23,000 24,500 1.53 1.63 wa�=ms.wU Overland - 1-84 (south) 29,800 26,400 56,200 1.66 1-84 (south) - St. Lukes 28,800 23,100 518900 1-53 St. Lukes - Franklin 20,400 19,200 39,600 1.17 Franklin - Fairview 20,200 18,900' 394100 ' 1.11:5 Cloverdale Rd. Victory - Overland (south 1/2) 8,400 8,200 16,600 1.11 Victory -;Overland (north 112) ; 12,800 1;2,700; 25,500 1.7 Overland - 1-84 9,100 9,800 18,900 1.24 1=84 - Franklin 9,700 9,700' 190400 1:26 Franklin - Fairview 8,800 8,200 17,000 1.11 Five Mile Victory - Overland (south 1/2) 18,300:::::A7,700 36,000 1.06: Victory - Overland (north 1/2) 22,300 21,500 43,800 1.29 Overland -1-84 (south! 11'100.::.2T;100 42, 200: > 1.24 1-84 (north) - Franklin 19,000 17,200 36,200 1.07 Franklin -' Fairview - 211900 201100 42,000 1:2.4 Victory Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 6,500 7,700 14,200 1.29 Locust Grove - Eagle (east 1/2) _ 7,900 7,300 1:5;200 1.38 Eagle - Cloverdale (west 1/2) 8,100 11,200 19,300 1.38 Eagle - Cloverdale (east 1/2) 9,000 11,900 20,900 1'.49: Cloverdale - Five Mile 8,800 10,700 19,500 1.39 Overland Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 8,000 ;9,400 17,400 1.16 Locust Grove - Eagle least 1/2) 15,000 11,400 26,400 1.76 Eagle - Power MaU 14, 900 15, 600 30, 500: ' 2:Q3' Power Mall - Cloverdale 11,800 12,800 24,600 1.64 Cloverdale= Five Mile' 21,400 21;500 42,900 1-84 Meridian IC - Eagle IC 43,400 40,200 83,600 .96/.89 Eagle lC - Five Mite 101 63,600 62,800 1260400 1 411V.39 Franklin Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 11,200 11,800 23,000 1.44 Locust Grove..' east i /2I 10,500 9,900 20,400 > t;.28 Eagle - Cloverdale (west 1/2) 8,000 7,500 15,500 0.97 .... _ _ Eagle Cloverdale'(east 1i2) - _ 11,900 9,800 21;,700:' 1::35 Cloverdale - Five Mile 10,600 9,100 19,700 1.31 wa�=ms.wU Table 6 2015 Unconstrained Volume Projections Roadway Locadon NS SB EB WB Tota/ ADT Eagle Rd. Victory - Overland (south 1/2) 2,600 3,000 5,600 Victory - Overland (north 1/2) 42,000 40,200 82,200 Overland - 1-84 (south) 43,100 45,600 88,700 1-84 (south) - St. Lukes 391900 33,000 72,900. St. Lukes- Franklin 25,600 25,900 51,500 Franklin - Fairview 25,800 240-100 49,900 Cloverdale Rd. Victory - Overland (south 1/2) 7,000 7,500 14,500 Victory - Overland (north '1 /2) 71900 8,400 16,3.00 Overland - 1-84 5,700 6,400 12,100 1-84 - Franklin 5,300 5,900, 11,200 Franklin - Fairview 7,400 7,500 14,900 Five Mile Victory - Overland (south112) 18,800 170600' 36,400' Victory - Overland (north 1/2) 23,800 22,500 46,300 Overland - 1-84 (south) . 30,400 280500 58,900 1-84 (north) - Franklin 12,400 14,900 27,300 Franklin - Fairview 15,600 14,400 30,000 Victory Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 1,600 4,800 6,400 Locust Grove - Eagle (east 1/2) 1,400 4,000 5,40.0 Eagle - Cloverdale (west 1/2) 800 3,500 4,300 Eagle - Cloverdale (east 1/21 3,300 6,100;; 9,400 Cloverdale - Five Mile 1,800 4,000 5,800 Overland Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 19,100 20,500 39,600 Locust Grove - Eagle (east 1/2) 13,500 16,100 29,600 Eagle - Power Mall 35,200 33,500 68,700 Power Mall - Cloverdale 42,600 42,000 84,600 Cloverdale - Five Mile 42,400' 41,600 841000 1-84 Meridian IC - Eagle IC 42,700 41,600 84,300 Eagle 1C -�Rve Mile 1C:: 74,100>. 82,300 156,400 Franklin Rd. Locust Grove - Eagle (west 1/2) 18,700 17,800 36,500 Locust Grove - Eagle (east 112} 16,900> 13,300 30,200 Eagle - Cloverdale (west 1/2) 6,000 4,500 10,500 Eagle -Cloverdale (east( /2) `! 14,000' 7,900> 211900 Cloverdale - Five Mile 13,300 5,300 18,600 AMPMAON.WU APPENDIX A References and Information Sources Interviews: Grant Kingsford, Meridian City Mayor, July 5, 1995 Shari Stiles, Meridian City Planner, July 5, 6, 1995 Walt Morrow, Meridian City Councilman, July 6, 1995 Max Yerrington, Meridian City Councilman, July 6, 1995 Jeff Hull, St. Luke's Construction Department, July 7, 1995 (phone) Christopher Brown, Director of new St. Luke's Site, July 7, 1995 (phone) Russ Keithly, Langley Associates, Inc., Issaquah, WA (Power Mall Developer), July 7, 1995 Bill Clark, Area Developer, July 5, 1995 (phone) Documents: Traffic Study of the St. Luke's, Bews and Thomas -Tullis Properties, CH2M-Hill, June 1995 1-84 Power Center Traffic Impact Analysis, Bell -Walker Engineers, May 1995 Trip Generation Intensity Factors, USDOT, FHWA, June, 1977 Planning Design Criteria, deChiara & Koppelman, 1969 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, 1993 Meridian Comprehensive Plan Map, 1993 Boise Towne Square, Traffic Impact Study of Spin Off Developments, January/February 1994 ACHD Development Applications Documents for Tech Committee Review, May 27, 1995 T 1993 Provisional Demographic Report for Northern Ada County, Idaho, Ada Planning Association APPENDIX 8 Demographic Adjustments for Balance of Ada County Planning Area Airport Central Bench Eagle Garden City Kuna Meridian North River Downtown East End Foothills North End Northwest Southeast Southwest West Bench Rural County TOTAL 1990 Retail N -Retail 223 5,262 3,765 19,546 418 1,200 1,513 3,890 156 529 992 4,300 5,957 74 260 602 494 1,986 804 9,434 309 30,063 3,712 3,180 3,446 1,229 11,399 2,130 16,990 3,098 1 2015 Retail N -Retail 1,826 9,732 6,122 29,825 909 2,405 2,123 6,860 289 1,754 2,317 9,641 Adjusted 2015 Retail N -Retail 1,534 9,732 5,310 28,465 909 2,405 2,285 7,718 289 1,754 6,162 11,114 8,356 50,599 7,740 48,516 101 5,614 101 5,614 407 6,356 407 6,356 1,213 8,892 805 8,892 1,579 3,361 820 2,503 3,575 30,868 3,003 30,868 1,703 7,396 1,022 6,432 18,511 35,528 15,660 36,885 1,969 6,169 4,953 7,745 51 000 215,000, 51 000 215 000 Appendix C Intersection Capacity Analysis a .►..�....a �•y.._��•r. ..•-a.« .i+�i. s-�y l4-.. a.a a�-t.a�_ �y�.�y ... �. .i:�-a-•.rai+�•..�. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LT ��:8_ �5° 3E .� c? L lc. C: L :: L :... _ L . _ :S TR T'H T 12'.0 1_. RR'15 ' S 1c. C� ._. _ i=. C a J i2. 0 ..., ll 12. 0 :Z. 12.0 C --------------------------------------------------------- i7,DJUSTMENT FACTORB G.RACl E P(G BUSES RHF EDS PED. BUT. ARR. -Y== (%) (X) Y/N Nra Nb Y/N miry T EB 0..00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 22.8 3 WS C), CIO 2. OO N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 2'2. 8 .3 NB 0.00 2.00 N: 0 0 0.90 10 Y 19.8 3 SB 0.00 2.00 N O O 0.90 10 Y 19.8 3 ------------------------------------------------------------ SIGP4AL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 120.0 _ F'H-s PH -44 '-'H _, PH -2 • � RH-3 EB LT X NB L- X TH X TH X RT X R X F' D F' L X SB L 7 X WB LT X TH X '_ ^ X RT X R' X F' L• X AD X GREEN 25.0 25. 0 0.0 0. 0 GREEN 25.0 25.0 0.0 0. 0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ LEVEL OF SERVICE LANZ GRP'. V/ C G/C DELAY LCS APP. DELA`( App. .C'= ER 0.225 *A.tt R 1 . 1 4 0, . c2j5 14C�. . '7.. S 0.225 � a N2 C . 25: i:. 225 29.1 = T 2. 51 1 C. 225 * + G R 0.282 C. 450 15.9 C . SB .v. 002 0. 22-5 * } 386 ---------- --------------------------------------------------------------- r Le1ay = * (sec/veh) /C = 3.322 LOS = _--------- --- _----- -----------------------------1 -----------------.---------- RT , .�• l_) a.• is i.. !' —_• .. ------------------------------------ ---- ----- CJI.'S"YE.N; FACTCnS R. G�1F;D� .' RL.; ;KG (%) iX) Y/N Nin Nb Y/N train T ER 0. Ott :_. 00 N 0 0 ii, 90 Ica Y 20.5 3 WB tt• c;ti 00 N 0 t► 0. 90 1tt Y 20. 5 NS ca. c_u c. ('u N i.t 0. 90 10 Y 8.5 0 C . 9 C- Y `' =' . ct.ct .:.t,�t �� t' t ------------------ ------------------------------- CYCLE Lc`ir'r = _<-`,`...0 TH Tei ^ FT X RT X PD r "' ;4 LT X SR LT TH TH X RT X RT 'F��D X 0. 0 0.0 GRZEN 2C. 0 40. Q 0. tit =0• - 5. -----1------------,-`-t----,------------------------------------------------- LEVEL OF SERVICE _ c LANE l; V: C G 1r DELAY LOS APP. DE -:-AY APP. -1 . WB L E58 t)• —.:)= R 51 c T{ ; 65. - -• E . T F SB ---------R---------------�---.---------------------------- ----------------- '7ESS —De = f .,sac/vet) V/C = E. 071 LOS = I . � � • SECT I Ot'.: Delay ay . i.a .•�-ia . � yip}- ��- i • --...- . .••i•♦ -*1i'. . . . . . . . . . r�: -•.. --------------------------- ------------ =----J--- ---•C ------------------------------------------------ , ---- --------------- ------------------ - - . �.L'-ME-=I r•• ES WB 5B EB ..i -y L ..:. c.i ice..• L Ic. L7 --C-G . - - • - T 1 �. 1 T.[ _ . _y . t: H 340 1 .,c - - - . - TR 1 _ ,._. _ lc. 0. c. . R T .•, 7 7 165 2 i � �+ i `J- -- • •., • ' 12 . C% .._. RR .c 15 i5 15 • ice. V iG. 1�. 1.. --------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- ADJ USTMEtiT FACTOR GRADE HV AD.: RKG FUSES RHF REDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYfr (%) M Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 2.00 N O O 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 WB 0.00 2. 0C: N 0 O 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 O 0.90 10 Y 14.5 3 SB 0.00 2. 00 N O 0 0.90 10 Y 14.5 ---------- -------- ---------�:GtiaL S.TT:v3S------- CYCLE LENGTH = 120. Z, ►= H-1 PH -2 RH P H-4 PH -1 PH -2 PH -3 G --- EB LT X NB LT X TH X T: i X R1 X RT X RD X R� X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X RT X R 1 X PD X RD X GREEN L0. 0 30.0 0. 0 0. O GREEN 20. 0 30.0 0.0 `- YELLOW 5. 0 5.0 0. Cl 0. ':n YELLOW 5. 0 5. 0 0.0 -------------------------------------------- LEVEL OF SERVICE LAN= GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS Ar R. DELAY ARR. �.C= E9 L 1. 149 0.183 13.8 F TR 1. 50 1 0.28? 1 1 1.� E7 • 5 F 1 WB L 41.095 0.183 TR I . G5- Cs. c:_7 7t:). 7 F S7.6 F ItV 1� L 1.063 0.1=3 �. 1 •✓.S TR 2.156 0.267 SB L 0.836 0.183 48.2 E TR 2.066 0.2S7 --T-----Ti---------T-----_-� (sec/veh>-----V/C = 2.274 LOS = IN ERSEC ON: Delay _. . . . . . . . . —. . . . . . . . . . . .r i R E. z -. .- _ _ — �•� .�0�. �•�.� _—. .—. � ate. (� � i.L. _ _ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- SRADE V ADJ PKG B�.iSES PPF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. -YF'E (X) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 E. 00 N o O 0.90 10 Y 20.5 ., WB 0.00 OC) N 0 O O.90 10 Y 20.5 3 ":� 0. 00 0C) N C: c� C:, 90 1C) Y 14. S.:: O.00 Z. 00 N C% U 0.90 10 Y 14.5 .?. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ,r—_ v.rL � EB LT x NB LT X ,F x R X FT x D X X I.:c �T X ES LT X T'J T A n R7 X RT x PD X PD x G 20. 0 30.0 4. 0 0. 0 GREEN 30. 0 O. O 0. C' Y ---=UPJ 5. 0 5. 0 G. ) 0. 0 'Y EL! OW 5.0 5. C' ':. C: --------------------------------------------- -------- --------------------- L='iEL 3- SERVICE LANE GRP'. V/C. DELAY LOS APP. DcLA`' AF'P. LOS ES L 0. 412 3... 4 D R2. 473 =• 2.434 J. B L C? :15- C_. 6 D TR 3.145 0.267 Ste` L 1.056 C:. IS S .. E F TR 1.622 0. 267 --- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IN-0ERSECTION: Delay = * (SEC/ve`) V/C = 2.827 LOS = * -♦ .•t:.....ii-Lil-..a.is..-.-s+:r�a_�a.�+a���ar-aL+-_; �a�Yr y.-.-. a. .a.♦ia.�ta.. •-.--t Z -ti 7 -cam --1 f -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- L_C-- _a ;,►6 Nig EE :JB Nr SS TR 12.0 TR 12.o TR 12.0 7R :c.0 rr IJ -J 4 Sa . - +) -:) 12.0 1E. �) RIR a . 5 . .... _ 1.0 1E. _ i.=.. 0 12. 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADJUS-i MEPIT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS GED. BUT. ARR. TYrE M (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 WB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 NB 0.00 2.0c% N o O 0.90 10 Y 14.5 3 SB 0.00 .00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 14.5 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- GN AL SE77: NGS CYCLE LENGTH = 125-01 PH -1 PH ph -3 PH -4 :H-1 PH -2 PPH-3 PH -4 `B LT X NB LT X X TH X F7 X RT X F D X F� D X WB L7 X SP LT X TH X TH X RT X RT X PD X PD X GREEN 20.0 30.0 C 0 0.O GREEN 25.0 30.0 0.0 O.0 YELLOW 5. t_) 5.0 c i. Q � i. 0 YELLOW 5.0 5. 0 i). 0 L 'J -------------------------------------------------------------------- LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APF'. LOS EB L 0.634 0.176 39.4 D 84.0 F TR 1. 130 C.256 92.6 F WE L 0.888 0. 176 56.4 E TR 1.416 `.•.256 NB L 0.267 .x. 216 3- 1 D TR 2.340 0.256 SB L 2.033 0.216 TR 1.723 0.256 -------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION: Delay = * (sec/veh) V/C = 2.500 LOS = * - -'------------------r------------------------------------------------------- Z E, E` • - _ N• r.•. �_ v r 7 1E -- - - - f ) a . .-1 1.• • 2. J • - �_; lam. �: i._• • —. .� ate• :, -----------------------------------------//—��--------------- CTORS GRADE ti`J AADJ, F' -,.a S*_,SE,S PHF REDS PED. B'J7. ARR. TYPE M (X) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N mir, T ES C1. 00 2. UC; N 0 U C. 3C-; Y 20.5 3 C;. C)o 2. 00 N :1 C: C%. 30 1 C-; Y 2 _ . 5 3 t _a c-:, (:C) 2. UC: Nil C;. gU Y .-. = C-', :1:� 2. Uci N c:: C:. SU 10 Y --- --• — _ - --------------------------------------- ----� _U. - ES LT X NS L7 X T x 7H RT A RT PD .-:P LT X S2 LT X TH RTI ^ X X X�_ r -�P•D RES1 20. U 30. U C'. c� C;. C; GREE'D 2c.1. U C�• �:� _ r, ------- -------------------------------------------- LEVE-- OF E ERV I CE LANE GRP. 'J/C Gr C DELAY LOS APF'. A=='. Q EE L 3.::137 CI. i bC 4. .. .... 0. 4 .� � • J.S V 1 L• J 9 �.= L _. TR =.45.3 = L C;. 381 O. i83 71.5 F 3- 1'------5---------------------------------------------- ------------------ Delay = * (sac/v'eh) V/C = 2.838 LOS = * IN-ERSECTION: 6•♦. •.vim_aaa-•+•��i>.'>�-an►•.t-Y'+>_.•-ate.+}}ism.'•>►�iir �'!}ii +��•.. `. a. pi♦_t}arm }}. 0,7-23-1995 , 9 5 T: 'Z ......... ply. C0Mi Z..7 . . . . . . . Ex ist in C�c:f:Ct.''�/ ------------------------ VOLUMES _ Tti - V 1�J'. - - 1J. _ � _L. Co TR 1=.% T 12.0 T ;=• C% RT .► .J&c 7C- 16 � 175 . R _2. 0 R 12. i, T.2. 0 T 1�.:1 RR _ t l 15 .5, - CI . c . .S. C+ R 0 R 1 �: Ci a ----------- --------------------------------------- ADJUS7MENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE (X) M Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB ().00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 WB 0.00 2.00 N O 0 0.90 10 Y 20.5 3 NB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 14.5 3 SB 0.00 2.00 N 0 0 0.90 10 Y 14.5 3 ------------------ SIGNA_ SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 130.0 PH -1 H-3 PH -4 PH -1 PH -2 PH -3 PH -4 EB LT X NB LT X .H X TH X RT X RT X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X RT X RT X PD X GREEN 25. 0 30.0 0. 0 FD 0. 0 GREEN X 20. 0 35.0 O. O O. 0 YELLOW 5.0 5. (:) 0.0 0., 0 YELLOW 5.0 5. 0 0.0 0. 0 ---------------------------------------------------- LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP.FLOS EB L 1.169 0.208 148.7 F 64.1 R 532 0. 246 28.5 D R 0.741 0.531 17. 4 C W3 L 1.315 208 TP, 0.296 :•.246 25.9 D R 0. 412 01.531 12.0 B NB L 4.068 C:, 169 T 1.440 0.285 R 0.786 0.531 18.9 C SB L 1.637 0.169 T 1.517 0.285 R 0.221 0.531 10.5 ---- B -------- ---------------- INTERSECTiON: Delay = (sec/veh) V/C = 1.968 LOS .. _ 1.4•-. ...j_.F rY•-i t�l..a. _.. J_ ..} _•._.... ... .._ i_i J._-.._ _._. ... r -i.. Ez t rG' iii• JC WE15 C� .. . r J � ice) - � _ • •.) 1 a. • GRAIDE HV ADJ PK'S BUSES p .- PED'S FED. EvT. =;RR. TYPE (X) (X) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N rain T E5 c:%. 00 2. GG N C% G 0.9C) 10 Y 20. 3 WB Cl. GG 2.00 N G G. 90 -0 Y 20.5 3 NEA U. 00 2. GC) N 6 0 ci. 90 IQ Y .-.. S9 C%. 00 2.00 N G C.. S i _Cl Y J. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PH-1 F'_ PH-- —1 rH-� �• EEA L . x N$ T x 7 H R T x FI r x r J V wE L X TH x R7 x -T x nFE�LENC cL .�%G 3C. 0 C1, 0. C) GREE�:J-7c).ZQ Cl, �l C:, C) 0. . LEVE_ C= LAN_ GRP. V/C C' r DE AY EB L 1.415 EZ T 1.051 .- 4 . w c; Tit 1. 021 t.. r. �� i �r �:.4 G +� . -. E ter' , __# G. G .. ` vi• � _ . G��v - �_a ").Q74 5.3 L� �7 ri L%. v - ----_-riE_C\ --~ \SGC/iE.1� , /C — 4. 14J L.. = 1 • J JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary. Wayne Crookston City Attorney City of Meridian 33 E Idaho Avenue Meridian ID 83642 RE: Power Center (MCU -7-95) Dear Wayne: June 15, 1995 At the ACRD Commission's meeting of June 14, 1995, the Commission voted to table the Power Center until August 9, 1995, to allow Ada Planning Association to complete a sub -regional traffic study. This study will confirm what roadway improvements are attributable to the Power Center and should be required as conditions of approval. The study will also forecast the amount and effect of spin-off development that will surely occur after the Power Center is opened. Please contact me at 345-7662, if you have addition questions. Sincerely, coordinator cc: Mayor Kingsford Jim Johnson Chron Project file ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 David Lewis 1494 Tanager Way Boise, Idaho 83704 June 13, 1995 Commissioner Sherry R. Huber Commissioner Susan S Eastlake 318 East 37th Street Boise, Idaho 83714 Dear Commissioners Huber 8 Eastlake I've always thought that every person has the Right to Petition for his or her voice to be heard. Saying that... First of all, I'm extremely appreciative and thank both of you for the courtesy of listening to my attempted testimony last night. And because of the interruption, which resulted in an incomplete delivery, 1 have taken the prerogative of enclosing a "complete" copy of my written comments. Over the years, I have been Involved and appeared at many public meetings to present my comments/concems relative to various items of community interest. Never during the past 19 years of personal Involvement have I ever felt such indignation or been treated with such rude discourtesy by any public official, so evidenced last night. " I found it extremely disturbing, while during a public hearing, an elected official would so crudely interrupt testimony concerning such a pressing issue in Southwest Ada County as the proposed Meridian 1-84 Power Center Development. Not knowing for sure wheither this elected official didn't like the massager or the message, I suspect the latter. Waiting in turn behind Mr Korte, the representative for the Highland Hackberry Subdivision or Mr Sell of ACHD, neither were so rudely interrupted; both were allowed to continue with their long/ continued dissertation. Its no wonder and understandable why the majority of American public patentenly refuse to become involved in Local, State, or Federal Issues, or that only some 38% of the Ada County voters involve themselves in the voting process. And then the rest of us wonder, why so few are able to dictate or decide for so many. Proceeding forward, I found it extremely disturbing to listen to ACHD's three new revelations last night The first revelation was the announcement that ACHD Is now demanding the 1-84 Power developer be compelled to reconalruct some 3 % MILES of existing roads extending some two miles away from the proposed Mall site located at the Eagle Road Interchangel This is aisolutely amazing, especially in view of ACHD'S printed omission per the enclosed copy of the ADA COUNTY ROAD, BRIDGE & TRAFFIC PROJECTS .... "How Projects are Funded..."EACH YEAR FOUR OR FIVE MILES OF EXISTING COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL ROADWAYS ARE WIDENED BY PROPERTY OWNERS..." And now some 95% of ACHD'S ENTIRE annual road widening occurring In all of Ada County Is to becomes the burden of one project developer? Not in the entire existence of ACHD has those penalty conditions ever been imposed. What happened to all that impact monies from the St Luke's West Medical Complex - a 100,000 square foot development The first 100,000 sq ft IST Phase of a SIX PHASE DEVELOPMENT? Was south Eagle Road expanded? Or Franklin Road - east or west, or Overland Road or Cloverdale Road or any streets leading bisecting State Highway #55? Not one inch of ROAD widening in this referenced area. An area identified in the Idaho Statesman a few weeks ago, where growth has increased 74% versus Boise's 20%. Or for that matter what has happened to the other Impact Fee monies from the Mill Creek Subdivision, the Edgeview Subdivislon, the new 168,000 sq ft Fred Meyer's Store, the Waldon Pond Subdivision, the new Pizza Hut, the Dairy Queen, the 7 phase Meridian Green's Subdivision, the Sportsman's Point Subdivision, JB'S Restaurant -Texaco Station, the Hunter's Point Subdivision, the Charleston Subdivision, the five new businesses In the Treasure Valley Business Park, or the up -coming 296 unit Pepperhill Subdivision, the new Ford Dealership being constructed on west Overland Road, and on and on and on????? And then to sit there and rrsten to ACHD's second revelation that the entire 5 lane-widenirw the one mile section - between Five Mlle and Cloverdale Roads which was to taper equal 600 feet north/south on Cloverdale and 600 feet west on Overland -'is now suddenly" - within the past couple weeks, *without adequately funds" for the previous targeted construction commencing this Fag of 1995 with completion by Spring of 1996. Or to hear the third revelation, that the entire mile section of Overland Road from Kuna-Merldian Road to Locust Road is all of a sudden "without ADEQUATE funds",due to this shortage of road funds and can only be build by THE 1-84 Power Developer SOME TWO MILES AWAY?. Its certainly not difficult to figure out that ACHD has SUDDENLY figured out a way to knife our road needs In this Soudwvest area of Cloverdale, Overland and Eagle Road. And the reasons why? Meridian's proposed 1-84 POWER CENTER ... Is ACHD going to compel John Price to re -construct 20 MILES (proportionate to the monies Involved) of Ada County Roads, when APA's estimated $60- 65 million price tagged construction commences to modify the already modified Alternate 1-84/ Franklin Road around the Boise Square Mall? If not, why not? Commissioners, We becoming so tiresome. So utterly tiresome watching the ACHD re juggle their rational, shifting the numbers, adjust their target dates, or so grossly err In their traffic counts with OUR ADA COUNTY TAX PAYERS IMPACT FEE MONIES. Both of you were in attendance when the Paradise `Sound Wall issue" surfaced and, whereby, some of us suddenly found ACHD's numbers skewed off in left field when compared with the Ada Planning Association's Traffic Count Study. Not too big of a mistake by those planners In ACRD. Only amounted to some 20,000 "additional" vehicular trips a day radiating around the Five Mile and Overland Road Intersection area. ACHD ...."Gee, how did we miss that one...." Like 1 said, We getting so tiresome that this department can be allowed to continue to do what their doing. Many years ago, I remember a college professor once stating ,,,,'Only one In 27 people take the time to get involved, the rest, just walk away in disgust" Perhaps, that's the reason why those of us who attempt involvement, either remove ourselves from this quagmire or simply place our trust in some elected officials like yourselves. Someone, who can separate fact from fiction. Thank you for listening. And, again, your extended courtesy last night INC: 1&0� e -9c: ✓ 2A,g0( 0 as lzw,�v' � C1kiov t&J4 C-oLLr)e.,' Por Additional Key Phone 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian Brochure Numbers regional winter road Copies conditions Y Ada County Highway District Highway Helpline: 334-8888 Please check The Idaho 318 E. 37th Street Boise, Idaho 83714 for daily construction season updates on traffic impacts ADI (208)345-7680 ACRD Commuteride: Ada County 345 -POOL (7665) or 650 Main Street, Boise 1-800-498-7662 (outside Boise) Idaho Transportation Department for carpool and vanpool 3311 W. State Street, Boise services Boise City Hall BUS (Boise Urban Stages): 150 N. Capitol Boulevard, Boise 336-1010 for public transportation Boise City Public Library 715 S. Capitol Boulevard, Boise ACCESS: 345-1234 or 336-0845 PF Garden City Hall for persons with disabilities 201 E. 50th Street, Garden City and unable to use the bus Meridian City Hall Winter Road Report: 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian 376-8028 (Oct.for KIZN-FM (92.3) regional winter road Kuna City Hall conditions 326 W. 3rd Street, Kuna Please check The Idaho Eagle City Hall Statesman for regular 310 E. State Street, Eagle updates. Radio Stations with Frequent Traffic Reports KBOI-AM (670) KQFC-FM (97.9) KIDO-AM (630) KLTB-FM (104) KIZN-FM (92.3) J105 -FM (105.1) KZMG-FM (93.1) K106 -FM (105.9) qu r i ��E . � Ada County Highway District 318 E. 37th Street Boise, Idaho 83714 (208) 345-7680 TY 995) i ADA C� HWTRICT ,,oda County Highway District's Road Projects How road projects are chosen... Saving you (the taxpayers) money on projects... This brochure was developed to let you know how your local highway district funds are being used. Listed are 94 Ada County Ilighwav District projects scheduled for study, planning, design and /or construction in the 1995 fiscal year (Oct. 1, 1994 - Sept. 30, 1995). Total project costs, including Federal Aid funds hi ►dgeted for FY 95 are $23 million. Each year ACHD priorities its capital improvement projects. This is based on information from Ada County and the transportation task forces of its five cities, the Ada Planning Association, school districts, utility companies, ACHD's Capitol Improvement Advisory Committees and various groups and individuals. This results in a Five -fear Work Program for capital improvements. The current five-year program WY 95-2000) includes projects worth $360 million for which only $142 million is projected to be available. One of ACT D's main goals is to always keep traffic moving as smoothly and efficiently as possible. However, minor traffic restrictions and delays are inevitable during construction. Detours or alternate routes are provided when needed. Projects affecting motorists are listed regularly in The Idaho Statomtnn, on our I lighway IF felpline (334-8888) and on local radio stations. How project�aref unded... Most ACRID projects are funded by general tax revenue. in addition, more than 40 miles of new local streets are added to the roadway system each year through approval of new subdivisions and other private land development projects. These new roadways are funded solely by the land developer, and ACHD accepts them into the system only after careful inspection and testi t'! L ach year f�+ or five miles of existing collector and arterial roadways arc also widened by property developers. Road impact fees paid by developers and builders in subdivi- sions and other development projects fund the improvement of these roads. Since the road impact fee program Uegan in April 1992, more than $10 million has been collected, greatly enhancing ACI 1D's ability to improve the capacity of major streets and intersections in Ada County. Road impact fees can be used only ()It projects that increase. tre vehicular capacity of the major roadway system. ACHD is committed to reducing the mileage of gravel roads in the county by paving at least four miles annually, usually by using recycled asphalt. Recycled asphalt is obtained by rotomilling existing roads as part of our pavement overlay program. in FY 95, the Highway District will pave the following roads with recycled asphalt: South Cole Road Ki.ma-Mora/Ten Mile Creek Road Kama -Mora, RR Crossing at Locust Grove Pierce Park, existing end of pavement to sand pit Pierce Park, Esterbrook/Cartwright Wright Street, Orchard /Diamond if sufficient rotomilled materials are available, 4.9 miles of roadway will be paved with recycled asphalt. Tell us what you think about these projects... if a project is planned or is being considered in your neighborhood or if it affects your family or friends, you may want to comment on the project before construction begins. Public information meetings are held on nearly every project. And sometimes formal public hearings are held. ACHD will be glad to notify you of upcoming information meetings and hearings if you provide your name, address and phone number, along with the project(s) that interest you. ACHD also sends information on upcoming meetings and hearings to the media in your area. � -� 4 5 Langly Associates. Inc. 999 Lake Drive Suite 300 ssaquah. WA 98027 (206)391-6600 FAX 3191-9030 April 13, 1995 Shari Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: 1-84 Power Center Dear Shari: Langly Associates, Inc. recently made application for Annexation Approval and Zoning and a Condition Use Permit for the subject project. Relative to this project, Langly Associates, Inc. agrees to pay all applicable sewer, water, trash and other City of Meridian fees associated with the proposed use. I also confirm that I have read both applications and the contents of these applications are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and beliefs. Sincerely, Russell C. Keithly f Chairman and CEO STATE OF z� ) ss. COUNTY OF I certify that I know -or have satisfactory evidence that RUSSELL C. KEITHLY is the person who appeared before me, and acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Chairman and CEO of LANGLY ASSOCIATES, INC. to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: e J I/ � prin name NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State ofd; residing at 17ty appointment expires \word\rck\temp\stilesan n 9£ : v S6, 17Z 21dt' M' 39dd i CERTIFICATION OF HEARING NOTICE SIGN I 1 Debbie Becker (Briggs Engineering, Inc.), do hereby certify placed at h notice subject sign for Conditional Use Permit for L.angly & Assocla parcel on°April 24, 1995. Q Debbie Becker STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) undersigned, personally before me, the u On this 24 day of And , 1995, person whose! name is, appeared � cker _, known to me to me first duly sworn, did depose subscribed to the within instrument, who, being by and say that she executed the foregoing instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed my official seal the, day and year in this certificate first above written. 95o116 NotaryubP lid4or Idaho -0�� Residing at 1O 2 oar My Commission Expires Wn214 L2:bt 96ST-02-88H JUN 13 k�vu June 12, 1995 Shari Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: 1-84 Center - Design Flexibility Dear Shari: We have discussed the fact that, as leasing progresses, we will likely need to modify our site plan to accommodate specific retailers. It would be extremely beneficial if we could work with your office when these modifications are required instead of having to go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Our counsel has prepared the enclosed, suggested consider language r deliberations. ask the Planning and Zoning Commission t Sincerely, Q1 U'-J� Russell C. Keithly Principal RCK/dh Enclosure rck\stilsp Langly Assnciales. Inc. 949 Lakc Drive Suile 300 ISsaquan, WA 4A027 (?06) 391 6600 FAX 391.4030 JUN 13 '95 10:16 moon PAGE.02 .0-, ► JUN -13-1995 —09:19 CONDITION NO. Effect of site plan approval and amendments to the approved site plan. The City f as reviewed the r sositemeaothee identifyntified ing reference dated the day o royal of the Conditional Use Permit �s for the prol'ect and the i s app conformance explicitly conditioned upon development oproperty a ian n coons to the site with that site plan. However, the City recognizes plan may be required to satisfy the needs of specific users of the properly. h the Therefore, the City authorizes rove amendments oto 'the she plan upon city planning director, o pp approval b the City request of the applicant without further review and aPP royal of the Council provided that there will be no administrative app following changes: 1. Substantial changes to the location of the access drive to the property from Overland Road, 2. Substantial changes to the size of the perimeter landscaped buffers, and 3. An increase in the total floor area approved for the project as a whole. Subject to the condition set forth above, changes to the size, number, and location of buildings ocationon e of interior park ng es to the and orientation; and change circulation drives shouldgenerally alter the natube 1re or concept f the pred unless the ojecaken together would fundamentally 13 195 10:16 rck\condmer TOTAL P.03 PAGE.03 1 C/� H�I JUN 09 195 17:02 LANGL'Y ASSOCIATES, INC. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 206.391.6600 voice Issaquah, WA 98027 206.391.9030 Fax TO: S�n r'�'St\`e s FAX;• a 2� -��-�1Y 3 COMPANYNr�MT: DA TE: PACTS:•Rl (Including this one) MESSAGE - THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WIiICH PI' IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS FAX IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE. THANK YOU. PAGE. 01 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Dever Services Division Preiimin.ry Report MCU-7-95NRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd -1-94 Power Center Meridian The appheaut is requesting approval for a rezone from RT to C -G and a conditional use to Construct a cmunemisl project of approximamly 700.000 -square feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the soutbeast side of 184 and Eagle Road with a narrow portion of the site abutting Overland Road. A traffic study bas been submitted for this application. This development is cstimatcd to generate 24.8115 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by this fiagle Road - Principal amoral with bike route designation - Traffic count 9,094 (1999 estimate by APA) Overland Road - Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown - Traffic cant 5,290 in 1993 +� FiW11I8Eno WA Y6. Elan p aG r. 08 EIIAIM4JN am FMN" 3W "Wo POSW Fax NOW 7671 JUN 09 '95 17:02 wenn � P_ 8 � qD. oaor �oows ® neo. eo.o 0 rip. ! nae 1"Trc ■ aqo ACRD C mmission Date • June 14. 1995 7:00 P.M. PAGE.02 Facts and Findings: A. General information RT Existing zona$ C -G - Requested tuning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square feet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Qverland Rand Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown TrRMc count 5,290 in 1993 140 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25-1eet from centerline) 108-1eet required right -of -wap (544m from centerline) Overland Road is improved with 28 -feet of pavement without curb, guner or sidewalk. B. This application is scheduled For a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on June 13. 1995. C. The site is currently under agricultural production. Two single family residences occupy a portion of the site. Access to the site from L*rstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited. Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of adequate access, a connection to Overland Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 feet east of the Eagle Road intersection. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site. The existing roadway serves a single icy residence and an unimproved parcel owned by tate Idaho Transportation Deparmoent (IM). This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The 1 TD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot with access to the proposed commercial development via the secondary access road. D. The segment of Eagle Road north of Overland Road is under the jurisdiction of rM. The TTD has informed the District that full access control has bees placed on the btersh to 84 and Eagle Road corridors. Site access to these two corridors is therefore prohibited. The developer is required to submit application materials to ITD for review and requuements of that Department - E. With the eucepdon of the approaches to the Eagle Road intersection, Overland Road is a 2 - 17:03 MCU -7-9540M-2-95 PW2 PAGE. 03 lane roadway from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road. Both Overland Road legs of the sigutalized Eagle Road intersection have left tuna legs. 14,000 vehicle trips per day has been identified as the maximum desirable volume (not capacity) on a two lane road by APA and ACRD staffs, although this value has not been formally adopted by any agency. The last measured traffic volume on Overland Road was 5,290 in 1993. This project is forecast to generate 7,85S trips per day east of the site on Overland Road and 5,952 drips west of Eagle Road. This will increase the traffic on Overland Road east of the site to 13,145 without accounting for way other growth in the area. Currently, Eagle Road south of Overland Road is a 2 -laze roadway and north of Overland Road to the 1-84 ramp trauosition lanes is a 4 -lane roadway. Eagle Road has left turn lasses on bodi legs of the signalized Overland Road Intersection. F. The developer has submitted a traffic study for this project. Staff has reviewed the traffic analysis and accepted the report. The key efts of the traffic study are as follows: On-site • The planned commercial center will include approximately 714,000 square feet of gross leasable area. • The proposed project will generate 2.324 vehicle trips during the p.m peak hour. • The proposed site will generate 24,885 daily vehicle trips. • A single access roadway from Overland Road is proposed to serve the project site. A secamdary, emergency access road is planned on the west side of the site tient will also connect to Overland Road. • The site access mad will need three southbound and two northbound lades. • A traffic signal will be required of this development for the b mersectkm of the site access road with Overland Road. Off site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • Westbound Overland Rand will need an additional right -turn lane at the site access road iatersect3ozl. • Tbc segment of Overland Road between Eagle Road and the sift aces road will roquuc Ultimate widea ft to seven traffic lanes, two eastbound through lanes, two eastbound left MM lanes, two westbound through Tarbes, and an added westbound ngiu turn sane. • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require ultimate: widening to three left turn lanes. • The south and wear legs of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require ultimate widening to match the added lanes east of the Eagle Road/Overland Road icon. • The on leg of the site access road/Overland Road intersec don will require ultiumat+e widc=g to match the added ),azul west of the site access road/Overland Road inursection. G. Based upon the submitted traffic study and District's policy, staff recommends that the developer's portion of the roadway zuVrovements include: On-site • The site access mad will be constructed to include three southbound and two nordiboun d lanes. 17:03 MCU-7-95/MRZ.2-95 Pegs 3 PAGE. 04 • A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Fagle Road • A contimums right turn lane on westbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This inchxdes the transition on to northbound Eagle Road. • A continuous through lane on eastbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway. • A second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Read at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate right turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. H. No stub streets are planned for the project. All internal roadways are private. One additional site access location is anticipated and should be preserved along the eastern portion of the project site that abuts a rural residential development. If the residential area redevelops. connecting site access is desirable. ACHD recommends to the City of Meridian that no buildings be allowed to develop along the south portion of the eastern site boundary (not including the access road). Y. Under long term conditions, the existing tcansporr1 io , system is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by this proposed developmew. The proposed project and expected future spinoff projects, and known additional projects north of Inacrstatc 64 are all unaatitdpated in the long range Transportation Plan. I. The District staff is of the opinion that the build -out of this parcel and the ensuing spin-off development will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Progrann and acute the need to widen. Overland Road from Cloverdale Road to Meridian Road. (This assumes that the scgmcnt of Overland Road ftnn Five Mile to Cloverdale will be reconstructed in the next five years.) Due to the major shifts in land use in this am, the Ada Planning Association and the Ada County Highway District should jointly update the long range plan to recommend future aranspartation options for the area. Staff onendation: Staff r xo ne nds that the Commissioir ter end to tate City of Meridian we oit the fouowiae options. • that tins application be denied, or • that action on it be defeu'red until a su&regional lead nsefticcaosportatin I analysis cera be completed and that the applic of be advised that future aet = on the application coWd include denial, the bnposition of exbv-wdinary impact fen and/er additional pnsojoxt related, off-site coasbrevctioa regaires. 9 the Chy approves tI& appEcation, stats suggests that the Cvmmisaton reeommenrd the following ccs to Meridian ere+ condom fw appmval: JUN 09 '95 17:04 MCU -7-9546M-2-95 Page 4 PAGE. 05 JUN -09-1995 Site Specific Requirements: 1. Comply with regniof rM for interstate Highway 84 and Eagle Road frontage. Sabxmt to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements. 2. The main site access shall be provided through an access roadway as shown on the site plan. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two nortbbound traffic lanes. The exiting (soutbbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes and one right turn lane. A hilly actuated traffic signal shall installed at the site access road intersection with. Overland Road. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at ft initial phase of site development. 3. Dedicate 54 -feet of right -of --way from the eentdm of Overhmd Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet). The owner not will be compensated for this additional right -f -way. The additional right -of --way would not otherwise be required for several years without the development of this parcel, therefore it is a project related knpact, not retatbursable under either the District's ordinance or the Idaho Development hmpaet Fee Act. 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate etnrtre) of right-of-way at the both corners of the Overland Road/site access road to keep the strut improvements in the public right-of-way. The owner also will = be compensated for this additional ri&-of-way. S. Provide a deposit to the Public Rights -of -Way Trust Fund at the District for the required street inogtravQnents of 5 -foot sidewalk abutting parcel on Overland Road. 6. Maintain public access along the westem border of the project site to the planned park and ride lot. This access will also serve as secondary access to the project. the park and ride lot and, for emergency vehicles. 7. Maintaiuu a minimum 54 -foot clear zonch on4mild area along the astem sim border between The building fronts and the southeast corner of the site to allow for a Femme external site connection to abutting parcels. S. Roadway icWt oveaatnts to Overland Road and Eagle Road may be conmucted in two or tbtce phases as the site is developed. The following roadway improvements shall be constructed for the fast phase of development, approximately 425.000 square feet (60% of the proposed development): Construct the she access road with three southbmmd and two nottl9mad traffic lutes. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Install a traffic signal at tht jawtsmtion of the site access road with Overland Road. Coordinate the signal design with District Traffic Services staff. CoMuct a coati+ m westbound traffic tube on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road haoersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Sarvices staff. JUN 09 '95 17:04 MM--195/l1M-1-95 Page S PAGE. 06 • Consume an added rigs turn lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Phase 11 The following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to the developmem of phase II, appro=gftly 645.000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widemtlg on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. ftse M The following additional roadway improvements sball be constructed prior to completion of the 714,000 square foot developnyent (100% of the proposed development): Construct a second westbound waffle lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road intersection- Comatict any additional roadway widening on Overland Road east of the project site that is needed to match the roadway widening west of the project site. Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road west of Eagle Road that is needed to match the roadway widening between the project site and FAgle Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. 9. Construct pedestrian ramps on the corner of Overland Road and the main site driveway in compliance with Idaho Code. Section 40-1333. 10. Locate proposed signs) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight- W3119ie of all street and driveway intersections, Standard Requirements; 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requiremew or policy outlined bereia shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Er:gill raring Services within 15 c4odag of the original Commission action. Tbc request shall include a sta== explaining why such a requ%amettt would result in substantial hardaltip or inequity and fee of $110.00. 2. A right -Of --way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility const ucum within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. C011et Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning fie number) for details. 3. Submit site drainage plans ad calculations for review and appropriate anion by ACHD. The proposed drainage system sball conform to the regluremems of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right -of --way or in a comntion lot MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 6 JUN 09 '95 17:05 PAGE. 07 JUN -09-1995 owned by a hoomeowurrs aSsvciation set aside specifiuuWly for that use. These shall be no tris. fences. bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed is said easemem Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 4. Locate driveway curb cuts a minirmLn of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obstructions (tttii facilities, irrigation and drainage appu umauees, ctc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shalt be obtained from the appropriate entity - 6. . land surveys. reports. Plats. drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACRD shall be staled, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor. in caompliaac a with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 7. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by ACHD. 8. Submit three Sets of street conshuction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. JUN 09 '95 17:05 MCU-7-95/Wnez-2-9s Pate 7 TOTAL P.08 PAGE.08 JUN -09-1995 16:05 1 LANGLY ASSOCIATES LANGL'Y ASSOCIATES, INC. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 206.391.6600 voice Issaquah, WA 98027 206.391.9030 Fax TO: S hA r'� �`i `e -s FAX-.- a -'Xg, - �) Y 1,. COMPANYNAME: FROM: DATA _ PAGES.• (Including this one) MESSAGE.• THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY rROHIBrrED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS FAX IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE. THANK YOU. JUN 09 195 17:02 PAGE.01 JUN -09-1995 16:05 LRNGLY RSSOCIRTES ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Dever. Services Division Pt+eliminffy Report MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - I -M power Center Meridian The applic= is ruing approval for a rezone from RT to C -G and a conditional use to Conan = a aommarcial pmjoct of approxima ely 700.0004quare feet. The 73.5 -acro site is located on the south= side of 1-84 and Eagle Road with a narrow portion of the sibs abutting Overland Road. A traffic study bas been submitted for this application This development is estimawd to generate 24.9M addit;o W vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by this dem: Eagk Road - Pri>uipal arterial with bike mute designation - Traffic count 9.094 (1993 outman by APA) Overland. Road - Minor arterial with no pathway designation sbown - Taft count 5,290 in 1993 ranvr AY6.. PJINK1,01 pD. 8RD. FMNiLN � xr. woes yew Sao ® M bow ACRD Commistdoa Date - June 14. 1995 7:00 P.M. POSW Fax Nate 7677 JUN 09 '95 17:02 PAGE. 02 JUN -09-1995 16:05 LANGLY ASSOCIATES Facts and FYndiW: A. General inFormatioa RT - Existing zoning C -G - Requested tuning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square Beet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TA2) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Gver�`oad Miran arteriai with no pathway designation shown Traffic coma 5,290 in 1993 140 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 1094a required right-cf--way (54 -feet from centerline) Overland Road is improved with 28 -feet of pavement without curb, gaffer or sidewaUL B. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian PlamnM and Zoning Commission on June 13. 1995. C. The site is cwrrady under agricultural production. Two single family residences' occupy a portion of the site. Access to the site from Interstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited. Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of adequate access, a cottttecdon to Overlm d Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 ftet east of the Eagae Road intersection. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site. The existing roadway serves a single family residence and an unimproved parcel owned by the Idaho Transportation Department (1TD). This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The 1TD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot with access to the proposed commercial development via the secondary access road. D. The segment of Eagle Road north of Overland Road is under the jurisdiction of PI'D. The 1TD has informed the District that full access control has been placed on the Interstate 84 and Eagle Road corridors. Site access to these two corridors is therefore prohibited. The developer is required to submit application, materials to 1TD for review and requirements of that Department. E. With the exception of the approaches to the Eagle Road intteraectioa, Overland Road is a 2- MCU-7-95/MRZ245 Page 2 JUN 09 195 17:03 PAGE.03 JUN -09-1995 16:06 LANGLY ASSOCIATES lase roadway ftoum Five Mile Road to Meridian Road. Both Overland Road legs of the signalized Ea& Road intersection have left tuna legs. 14,000 vehicle trips per day has been idenufied as the maximum desirable volume (not capacity) on a two lade road by APA and ACRD staffs, altbough this value has not been formally adopted by any agency. The last measured u -Me volume on Overland Road was 5,290 in 1993. This project is forecast to generate 7,85S trips per day east of the site on Overland Road and 5,952 trips west of Eagle Road. This will increase ft traffic on Overland Road east of the site to 13,145 without accounting for uty other growth in the area. Clrendy, Eagle Road south of Overland Road is a 2 -lane roadway and north of Overland Road to the 1-84 ump transition lanes is a 4 -lane roadway. Eagle Road has left tutu lanes on bode legs of the signalized Overland Road intersection. F. The developer has submitted a traffic study for this project. Staff has reviewed the traffic analysis and accepted the report. The key ckm=nts of the traffic study arc as follows: oa-site • The planned commercial seater will include approximately 714.000 square feet of gross leasable area. • The proposed project will generate 2,324 vehicle trips during the p.m peals hour. • The proposed site will generate 24.885 date► vehicle trips. • A single access roadway from Overland Road is proposed to serve the project site. A secondary, emergency access road is planned on the west side of the site that will also comma to Ovecland Road. • The site access road will need three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be required of this development for the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland RoadMagle Road • Westbound Overland Road will need an addiu mal right -tarn lane at the site access road • The segment of Overland Road between Eagle Road and the sift access road will require ultunate wideaft to seven traffic lanes; two eastbound dumgb lanes, two eastbound left turn lanes, two westbound through lanes, and an added westbound right turn lane. • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road/Overland Road W section will require ult ante widening to three left turn lanes. • Thu south and west legs of the Eagle Road/OverlaW Road intersection will require ultimate widening to match the added lanes east of the Eagle Road/Overland Road W ersxtion. • The east leg of the site access road/Overland Road inmrsection will require ultimate widening to match fire added lanes west of the site access road/Overland Road kwrsecdm- G. Based upon the suubmittod traffic study and District's policy. staff recommends that the developer's portion of the roadway improvements include: On-site • The site access mad will be constructed m include three soutbbamd and two northbound lanes. MCU-7A5/MR7.-2-95 Peas 3 JUN 09 '95 17:03 PAGE. 04 JUN -09-1995 16:06 LANGLY ASSOCIATES • A traffic si gnd will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • A continuous right turn law on westbound Overland Road between, the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on to northbound Eagle Road. • A continwo through lane on eastbwnd Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes Ilse transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway. • A second souttibound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate riglu turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. H. No stub streets are plannoed for the project. All internal roadways are private. One additional site access location is anticipated and should be preserved along the eastern portion of the project site that abuts a rural residential development. if the residential area redevelops, connecting site access is desirable. ACHD reca®mends to the City of Meridian that no buildings be allowed to develop along the south portion of the eastern site boundary (not including the access road). Under long term conditions, the existing t =portauon system is not adequate to I _ naodaw the additional traffic generated by this proposed development. The proposed project and expected future spinoff projects, and /mown additional projects north of locrrmte 84 are all in the long range Transportation Plan - 1. The District staff is of the opinion that the build -out of this parcel and ate cosuing spin-off developine tt. will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Program and aeocknite the need to widen Overland Road from Cloverdale Road to Meridian Road. (Ibis assumes that the segment of Overland Road firm Five Mile to Cloverdale will be reconstructed in the next five years.) Due to the major shahs in land use in this area, the Ada Planning Association and the Ada County Highway District should jointly update the long range plan to recommend future ttanspC11 "oa options for the area. Staff Rtecommdadatiota: Staff t e r nmmends that the Comnsission reoonmmead to the City of Meridian one of the fdrDOwiae options. • the Nus application be denied, or • that acdon on it be deferred until it sub-regionrd land use/brartslportatiou anab►sis can be completed and that the applicant be advised that Eut ure action on the applicatim could iudude denial, the imnpos tiota of W&a4o rdit=y impact Eves and/or addiitiend project rented, off-site const mcdoo requirat4�tts. if the City approves this application, stats suggests that the Commission recommend the folLuwing regoirementa to Meridign as conditions for approval: MCU-7-95/NOM-2-9S Page 4 JUN 09 '95 17:04 PAGE.05 JUN -09-1995 16:07 LANGLY ASSOCIATES Site Spedfic Reguiremem: Comply with reqahemm of ITD for Interstate highway 84 and Eagle Road Montage. Sabeiit to the. District a leder from 1TD resarding said requirements. 2. ne main site access shall be provided through an access roadway as shown on the site plan. The access road sball have throe soutlibound traffic lames and two nortblimud traffic lanes. The exiting (soul bound) haves shall mchuie two left turn lanes and one right tum lane. A fully actuated traffic signal shall installed at the site access toad intersection with Overland Road. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at the initial phase of site development. 3. Dedicatee 54 -fret of right-of-way from the ccutcrline of Overland Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet). The owner ma will be compensated for this additional tight -of way. The additional right-of-way would not oderwise be required for several years without the developwcat of this parcel. therefore it is a project related impact, not reimbursable under either the District's ordinance or dr Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate curve) of right-of-way at the both corners of the Overland Road/sitc access read to keep the saner h &%F emtms in the public aright -of -way. The owner also will W be compensated for tris additional right-of-way. S. Provide a deposit to the Public Rights -of -Way Trun Fund at the District for the required stmt irnProvenietrts of 5 -foot sidewalk abutting parcel on Overland Road. 6. Maintain public access along titre western border of the project site to the platmed park and ride lot. This access will also serve as secondary access to tie project. the park and ride lot and, for emexgoncy vebicles. 7. Mairmein a mimtnaim 50 -foot clear mne%ncn-build arta along the astern sloe border between the building frogs and the southeast corner of the site to allow for a fcmn+e external site connection to abutting parcels. S. Roadway ittrptoveatatts to Overland Road and Eagle Road may be conatnrcted in two or three phases as the site is developed. kbM The following roadway improvements shall be constructed for the fast phase of development, approximately 425,000 square feet (60% of the proposed development): • Cowtma an she access road with tbree southbound and two notdA uod traffic lanes. Coordinate the roadway design wide District Traffic Services staff. • install a traffic signal at the tatersectim of the site access road with Overland Road. Coordinate the signal design with Distinct Traffic Services staff. • Co gamt a coa rmous wesdwwd traffic lane on Overland Road between. tyre site access road and the Eagle Road intersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic services staff. JUN 09 '95 17:04 MCU 7-"/MRZ-?r9S Flee S PAGE. 06 JUN -09-1995 16:08 LANGLY ASSOCIATES P.07 • Construct an added right tura lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. Phase -11 The following additional roadway improvemeCts shall be constructed prior to the development, of prase 11, approximately 645,000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left turn lace on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. RhLT.LM The following additional roadway improvements shall be construed prior to completion of the 714,000 square foot developn>aem (100% of the proposed development): • Construct a second westbound traffic lane on Overland !toad between the site access road and the Bt& Road intersection_ Con acct any additional roadway widening on Overland. Road east of the project site that is needed to match the roadway widening west Of the project site. Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road west of Eagle Road that is needed to match the roadway widening between the project site and Eagle Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. 9. Construct pedestriaan ramps on the corner of Overland Road and the main site driveway in c um&=e with Idabo Code, Section 40-1335. 10. locate proposed signs) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight - triangle of all street and driveway is necdons. Standard Regtdremnts: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 r of the original Cammission action. The regmt sball include a station t explaining why such a requtsremient would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimurn fee of $110.00. 2. A right -of --way permit most be obtained from ACRD for any street or wilily construction, within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Caanact Consm=on Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. 3. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACRD. The proposed drainage system sball conform to the regturtmeots of Meridian and shall retain All storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot JUN 09 '95 17:05 MCU-7-95/MRZ-2.95 Page 6 PAGE. 07 JUN -09-1995 16:08 LANGLY ASSOCIATES P.08 owned by a homeo*am assucWon set aside SpOclficaly for that usc. 111M ftH be no tress. fences. bashes, sheds, or otter valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (wben applicable). 4. Locate driveway curb can a minium of 5 -feet from the side lot property litres when driveways are not befog shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obsuumom (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurteoatlees, etc.) outside of the proposed street movements. Authorization for relocations "I be obtained from the appropriate entity. 6. SpecificaWns, land surveys, reports, plats, draw' alga. plans. design infonastion and calculations prey Bred to ACRD shall be sealed, signed rood dated by a Reegmured Frofcssioaal Engarccr or Prowl Land Surveyor, in compraaoe with idabo Code, Sectio$ 54-1215. 7. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and aPps+opriate action, by ACHD. 8. Submit thMe MU of street coASMIction pians to the District for review and approprix e action. Should you have any questions or comments, please comict the Development Services Division at 345-7662. JUN 09 '95 17:05 MCU-7-95/MRZ2-9s Pale 7 TOTAL P.08 PAGE.08 December 22, 1994 Shari L. Stiles Planning Director/Zoning Administrator City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: S.E. Corner 1-84 and Eagle Road Dear Shari, have enclosed the marketing package we are sending out to national retailers. We are very encouraged by the response we are getting at this very early juncture. While the site plan is still quite preliminary, it was created by Bud Johnson, an architect in San Francisco who is widely recognized as the country's foremost planner for this type of center. Baylis, Brand, Wagner is an excellent Seattle area designer who have simply hardlined Mr. Johnson's. conceptual plan at this point in time. We are extremely interested in any comments you have on the plan at Ahis stage. As I mentioned when we met, the plan will undoubtedly change as we site specific retailers, particularly the anchors. However, z it is important that we not have any major flaws in this preliminary design. I; Sincerely, , Russell C. Keithly Principal RCK/mw Enclosure Langly Associates. Inc. 999 Lake Dare Suite 00 �� 'NA E027 BOISE 1-84 POWER CENTER FACT SHEET THE PROJECT 665,000 square feet of big boxes, category killers and national and regional tenants on a 72 acre site ° 5 parking spaces per thousand square feet, more for high draw anchors ° Six lane, signalized access off five lane arterial TIMING Construction start in fall 1995 ° Occupancy in early summer, 1996 THE AREA ° 500,000 population in Retail Trade area ° 334,000 population in immediate two county area (all within 15-20 minutes of Center) Approximately half of the trade area population is west of the Center and half east of the Center ° Average family income: $44,000 Average Household Income: $38,000 Page 1 LOCATION ° Entire southeast quadrant of the intersection of 1-84 and State route 55, the state's major east -west and north -south highways ° Full clover leaf interchange constructed in 1990 ° First interchange west of only regional mall in Boise ° 1/2 mile of freeway frontage ° 63,000 vehicles per day on 1-84 23,000 vehicles per day on SR 55 (Eagle Road) ° SR 55 currently five lanes from Center north to Fairview Avenue (two miles). SR 55 to be widened to five lanes from Fairview past the City of Eagle (six miles) during 1995. DEVELOPER ° Langly Associates, Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300, Issaquah, WA 98027 Langly principals have been involved in all types of retail development for 25 years ° Just completing the 550,000 square foot Pickering Place Power Center at intersection of 1-90 and SR 900 in Seattle suburb of Issaquah, WA. ° Mini, in -fill Power Center of 70,000 SF under construction in Olympia, WA. ° Retailers in these projects include: Costco, Eagle Hardware and Garden, PetsMart, Future Shop, Olympic Sports, Barnes and Noble, Ballard Computer, Act III Theaters, Blockbuster Music Plus, Good Guys, Boaters World, Cucina! Cucina! and Red Robin. Page 2 Christopher J. Kepus 8633 Wilmot Court Elk Grove, California 95624 May 5, 1995 Shari L. Stiles Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83640 Dear Ms. Stiles: r��++ ~� elm -:� .F�� "ham 11✓' (1011Y Ut fd.thl!)Ip° As a former resident of Boise and a current landowner in the Meridian area, I would like to comment on the announcement of the proposed Power Center mall that would be located at I-84 and Eagle Road. I strongly support such development for several important reasons: 1. The Meridian commercial tax base will need continuing growth to support future infrastructure improvements. This type of commercial development is precisely the type that is needed. 2. The location of the proposed mall is not only very suitable for the available land, it is right at the crossroads of the developing valley. Access for a significant portion of the valley would be very convenient. 3. The mall would be, if properly architected, a real plus for the Meridian area in terms of a beneficial development that would likely influence potential residents and businesses to locate in the area, further enhancing the ability of Meridian to grow within an balanced economic base. This development is sure to stir controversy but I urge the City Council to support this project. It is a perfect addition to the area. Sincerely yours, (2 , 1" ---- Chris Kepus MAY 0 9 1995 LT 5-" oye RECEIVED MAY 0 9 1995 Fred and Molly Nakaji CITY Ok MthifilA, 12712 Lee School Road Wilton, Calif. 95693 Ms. Shari Stiles Meridian Planning Director 33 East Idaho St. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Meridian P&Z Dear Ms. Stiles: We are excited to hear of the proposed Power Center Mall at Eagle and Overland Roads. Being frequent visitors to the Meridian area, we believe the planned mall will provide a much needed retail outlet center for area residents, and it will also provide a boost for the area's economy. We wholeheartedly support locating the mall at the proposed site. Sincerely, -2� 1 X7AIA-� IieiN ajgejunoo3V jo-i m . K LL m m m g •_� c 'A E ,G.. 2� 8 � < HIM o c� w y _ c.c ¢ m w .°.p SES ¢LL CLO > ECv p Vm Ov �O f o w a w p LLLO�551 i m O # 0 ao.5 a a 5 cm° °E C a❑❑ _CCa g� m m F �.� •g ,� LL N N P4 W .ra • -to 00 CD M CO eo 0 moo❑ ❑❑ N o lfl H c H o H O o H X v A !� M Ct~ G (d W cc cc U °\ b ra b M r �aooa 9 o v ra -4 r1 •1-1 -rq r0 •v •r1 a C7 Aj ti u •rl fd •1-1 Z 2:E E @ 1 0 ro � v u, a+ 1 ' d •r1 0 b O 4-) 4.) 4-3 4 t~ r1 r-1 rl Id is O rO w 10 v b Q i �.� -r1 W v v N v v N 4-)N v v �? [� � 'Y' • b O N l0 ° N v 1~ is �". $4 >4 Wi-1 b �. N 0 �. V1 NO d' m U1 r-1 M U) b En W !/� tr' N r -I N � Is (a.rl • >r d c0 y r0 W X 4J X i ri X O b X 14 v X CT O a w .-f O •r1 O �] � v rl Im rn C $s -� m m �" 1d 0 fd 1.3 U r O -I fd i. 3 0 '�. %. 0 ?� 0 m 0 S-1 0 0 0 N r-1 & A � 0 •r1 A n rt £ m Sa rd H v b41 H v �. b td N i~ A 0 4,0 N •r1 0 � r. A E O G4 0 u a `- o m 0 fd NUI U O cd N Id ri N p Id 9 U) N 0 !~ N •H Id O 0 1-3 0-,4 i, 0 1~ O 0 O O 3 94 ►-1 to O 'O �d ' 0 �- 44 +1 cd Om•.4 m E UI >4W�W cdW4JW3W x U) 'O vI r0 b f 4 N rd VI ri r-1 74E M Id b W•� O Gi b 0o w vo 0 0 00•,0 > 00Arn 00•x1 >o •,.4 v D A A u >41n b w C: qO z r1 M v t`bMAw N O r O t` >4 Id ao X1n Id ao cd 00 r-1 W m N O 4 O a rn H z N O o�A b UMC a'-(yfr'1aMa MIX: Ma'M V V v Q K3 r� O me E� a W� m - 00F° o IieiN ajgejunoo3V jo-i L "lD :� Ap 0 . -!5 co f I.; Q In g e v tq � y O = LL O �qo L E 6 w o QLL ]REac gvyaoy� g � O m C EGOO O e O O �. 00 xCv 4 m .- � �O <cmim � mm m S c> Ck 44 m Wai' >0 N N Q' Cal kD -0 V ._ c m M %0 CO 00 N r7� A g a OD � MII $4 I " m IL r4 C • 114 n W i b b $ ro a tp a 0 a 4) r1 �' 4) 4) •rl rm $4 Ad pGId w�W ❑ ❑ ?4 4) '� O e S pIy 'C O Id � " g.Lq q W b Q, O N W ri UI U1 r -I H S•14) wb NH •��a, S m r cn a >`I r� N r 4 0 b� a x 4 O x x -I w tr,x Q LU 41 O 4) 4) r �" N o w q N rl O e•i .!!, R cd -H a r1 u] 4) aJ cd c F Id qw rt0o a° pq ri rr.4. $4 U r•1 r•1 4) r -I 4) H HXi H 4) 4) S -I E to gf_ ro WOC $4 a .'(ad "I U s E Ob Ida O E ~ k Ecd 4.)0 1-1 ` 4) i �(d 'i�d 04 r r-1 14-) r A(0 4Cl OW E '� H H(d 0) aJ Eobborobro 4J 4-) 4J 'o O '» 4 b 0 4.) •r m ,-1 o m to o to to .0 E4 >. Q U m In b a a a� V •r, $4 m w 00 a� a) M a 9 a� $4 s~ L a 4J m G Id O d r- fd r• O r• 4-) N e-4 CN4) m (d o c \v\ UM.�." E �e- xLnhe- G4r-Uir• W h Q gM m Z Em �m Z, sm J � o -6-0E E EU) E�+m e m �+ •O a z' - v mm ° Q ^' t� ' o c ATTACHMENT 7 1-84 CENTER MAILING ADDRESSES 1. 2385 South Eagle James F. Griffin 705 West 9th Street Boise, ID 83702 2. 3285 East Overland HCM Investments 1281 Oriole Boise, ID 83709 3. NW 4 NE 4 Hwy. Sec. 213 M 1 E Bruce Pickett James M. Ballantyne Jr. 10250 Whispering Cliffs Drive Boise, ID 83704-1907 4. 3905 East Overland Bruce R. Pickett James M. Ballantyne Jr. 10250 Whispering Cliffs Drive Boise, IS 83704-1907 5. William P. and Susan M. Bienapfl 4225 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 6. Blue Moon Trust 3110 East Overland Road Meridian, ID 83642-6612 7. Randolph H. and Faith A. Exley 3140 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 Attachment 7 Page 2 8. 1545 South Eagle Warner and Marilyn Sheldahl 1901 South Ten Mile Road Meridian, ID 83642 9. SW4 NW4 EXR/W Sec. 16 3 M 1 E Jeff Hall St. Luke's Regional Medical Center, LTD. 190 East Bannock Boise, ID 83702 10. 4335 East Franklin J. RobertTullis P. O. Box 8329 Boise, ID 83707-2329 11. Ray M. and Kimberly A. Keller 1545 South Jade Meridian, ID 83642 12. 3650 East Overland James Robert Throneberry 424 Cherry Lane #86 Meridian, ID 83642 13. Ronald Todd Barr Subrina Jo Lewis 3620 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 14. David and Reva Stear 1345 South Jade Meridian, ID 83642 15. Gary R. and Deborah K. Fulton 1315 South Jade Meridian, ID 83642 16. Randall D. and Teresa A. Ledbetter 1285 South Jade Meridian, ID 83642 Attachment 7 Page 3 17. Alan Clay and Susan D. Miller 1275 South Jade Meridian, ID 83642 18. Rodney J. and. Carolyn E. Fontaine 3730 East Onyx Street Meridian, ID 83642 19. Robert N. Stewart 3760 East Onyx Street Meridian, ID 83642 20. Ray Harlin Holaday 3810 East Onyx Street Meridian, ID 83642 21. Max Steve Byrd 3850 East Onyx Street Meridian, ID 83642 22. Alan R. Wineburger 3880 East Onyx Street Meridian, ID 83642 23. David R. Johnson 1280 South Topaz Meridian, ID 83642 24. John Mitchell and Janice Griffin 1290 South Topaz Meridian, ID 83642 25. David G. and Shirley J. Fulton 1300 South Topaz Meridian, ID 83642 26. David Robert Jr. and Shelia F. Cox 3780 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 27. Robert B. Whitney 3775 East Onyx Meridian, ID 83642 28. Michael A. and Diana L. Kruse 3825 East Onyx Meridian, ID 83642 Attachment 7 Page 4 29. Daryl W. Smith 1295 South Topaz Meridian, ID 83642 30. Donald D. Robbins Linda M. Penne 925 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 31. Randy and Mary J. Schindel 1005 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 32. Daniel R. Meyers Belinda A. Murphy 1045 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 33. 1095 South Rolling Hills Drive Hermis and Charlotte A. Sparks 5114 South Black Cut Road Meridian, ID 83642-6802 34. James L. and Pamela Rogers 1115 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 35. Robert A. and Karen Lee Nelson 1185 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 36. Steve C. and Haynes Pamela Bell 1.235 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 37. Elvin L. and Dixie Scrivner 1285 South Rolling Hills Drive Meridian, ID 83642 38. Kenneth R. and Marge S. Higgs 3330 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 39. Jerry L. Tibbetts 3376 East Overland Meridian, ID 83642 Attachment 7 Page 5 40. Dan Contrell State of Idaho Transportation Department P. O. Box 8028 Boise, ID 83707-2028 04/25/95 08:57 $208 345 7650 ACRD Post -it" Fax Note 7671 ZAGI /lam �l Phone M Fex K JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, vice President SUSAN S. EAS7LAKE, Secretary Re: I-84 Center (Eagle Road s/o I-84) Dear Shari Stiles, Q001/001 April 24, 1995 A traffic study for the proposed I-84 commercial center has not been submitted to the District. The engineering firm expects to have it completed within a week, after which the District will procede with its review and recommendations. We would like to request that the public hearing for the conditional use and rezone for this item, currently scheduled for May 9, 1995, be postponed until after the District reviews the traffic study. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 345-7662. Sincerely, Mark L. Butler Development Analyst cc: Russell C. Keithly, Langly Associates, Inc Project File (MCU-7-95/NW-2-95A) ada county highway district 318 East 37th - Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 APR 25 195 08=48 208 345 7650 PAGE.01 T0'30dd i i i EpNEFR1N� rC�B R I G G � OMDL�� `� N�SMOTTAL ��� FROM BRIGGS ENGI EERING; IN ;. 1111 S. ORCHARD, SUITE 600 * BOISE, ID. 83705 FAX N0.(208)345-2950 TELE N0.(208)344-9760 TO COMPANY FAX NC. DATE NO. OF PAGES SENT (Including Transmittal) REFERENCE _ REMARK REPLY REQUESTED BEI PROJECT NO. COPY 345-2950 BOISE, IDAHO 83705 (208) 344—°i00 FAX N4 (208) ,,,a c nAruAR�. SUI'T'E 600 WOdd 1L2:bT S66t-bz-Ndd T0'd AlIO NUIGIN3W Ol Wl_. AN W_ 0 U c 0 y� W cc Ic Q Boise Retail Trade Area 500,000 SCALE 0 20 40 60 80 100 Kilometers Jill I IIN 0 20 40 60 80 100 Mlles BOISE RETAIL TRADE AREA 500,000 IMMEDIATE TRADE AREA 334,000 �*R VALLEY WASHINGTON A 55 14-1 BOISE Q? GEM i U` tiv �p (CAMAS BLAINE ELMORE MALHEUR OWYHEE BOISE I-84 POWER CENTER rDemographic Detail Ada & Canyon Counties, ID Page 1 POPULATION RACE 1994 315,016 94.4% 1999 Projection 356,170 White 1,225 0.4% 1994 Estimate 333,755 Black 4,878 1.5% 1990 Census 295,851 Asian/PI 2,400 0.7% 1980 Census 256,792 American Indian 10,236 3.1% Other Race % Change 94-99 % Change 90-94 6.7% 12.8% Hispanic Origin 1994 21,399 6.4% % Change 80-90 15.2% GROUP QUARTERS 1994 8,131 2.4% Race 1994 N 94.4%, White AGE 1994 <18 yrs 99,825 29.9% I' 0.4%, Black 18-64 yrs 194,768 58.4% ■ 1.5%, Asian/Pl 65+ yrs 39,162 11.7% 0.7%, American <6 yrs 25,524 7.6% Indian 6-9 yrs 28,251 8.5% 03.1%, Other Race 10-13 yrs 24,603 7.4% 14-17 yrs 21,447 6.4% 18-20 yrs 12,135 3.6% 21-24 yrs 16,729 49,546 5.0% 14.8% ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER POP BY NATIONALITY 1990 25-34 yrs 35-44 yrs 56,073 16.8% Asian 3,507 1.2% 45-54 yrs 37,908 11.4% Chinese 584 416 0.2% 0.1% 55-64 yrs 22,377 6.7% Filipino 1,050 0.4% 65-74 yrs 21,801 6.5% Japanese 172 0.1% 75 -84 yrs 13,314 4.0% Asian Indian 405 0.1% 85+ yrs 4,047 1.2% Korean 438 0.1% Median Age 32.9 Vietnamese 10 0.0% Cambodian AGE BY SEX 1994 Males Females Other Asian 432 367 0.1% 0.1% Total 164,445 169,310 Pacific Islander 191 0.1% <6 yrs 13,120 12,404 Hawaiian 57 0.0% 6-9 yrs 14,598 13,653 Samoan 34 0.0% 10-13 yrs 12,627 11,976 Guamanian 85 0.0% 14-17 yrs 11,004 10,443 Other Pacific Islander 18-20 yrs 5,982 6,153 21-24 yrs 8,557 8,172 HISPANIC POP BY NATIONALITY 1990 25-34 yrs 24,430 25,116 Not Hispanic 2,457 94.1% 35-44 yrs 28,125 27,948 Hispanic Origin 17,394 17 13,974 5.9% 4.7% 45-54 yrs 18,960 18,948 Mexican 201 0.1% 55-64 yrs 10,755 11,622 Puerto Rican 56 0.0% 65-74 yrs 9,645 12,156 Cuban 3,161 1.1% 75 -84 yrs 5,400 7,914 Other 85+ yrs 1,242 2,805 Median Age 31.6 33.8 HOUSEHOLD LANGUAGE 1990 English Speaking 98,788 90.8% MARITAL STATUS (Age 15+) 1990 Spanish, Linguistically Isolated 775 0.7% Single Male 27,470 12.3% Spanish, Not Linguistic Isolated 4,680 4.3% Single Female 21,352 9.6% Asian/Pl, Linguistic Isolated 232 0.2% 0.7% Married 134,159 60.1% Asian/PI, Not Linguistic Isolated 737 Sep/Div/Wdwd Male 13,439 6.0% Other, Linguistically Isolated 303 0.3% Sep/Div/Wdwd Female 26,684 12.0% Other, Not Linguistic Isolated 3,268 3.0% DecisionWhem, Inc., Copyright, 1994 (714)365-0125 4 Demographic Detail Ada & Canyon Counties, ID HOUSEHOLDS 1999 Projection 1994 Estimate 1990 Census 1980 Census % Change 94-99 % Change 90-94 % Change 80-90 HOUSING 1990 Housing units Occupied Owner Hshlds Renter Hshlds Vacant For Rent For Sale Rented/Sold Seasonal Use Migrant Workers Other Boarded Up Housing Value 1990 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% r OWNER OCCUPIED BY RACE White Hshld Black Hshld Asian/Pacific Islander Hshld Am Indian Hshld Hispanic Hshld Housing Units Value HOUSEHOLD TYPE 1990 $75,882 134,919 Average Household Size 569 124,337 Average Family Size $67,210 108,759 Families 1985-88 91,597 Married Couples 1985-88 19.5% With Children 1980-84 8.5% Average Children 1980-84 14.3% Other Families 1970-79 18.7% With Children 1970-79 17.5% Average Children 1960-69 8.5% Non Families 113,986 5.6% .3% 108,759 95.4% UNITS IN STRUCTURE 1990 75,031 65.8% 1, Detached 33,728 29.6% 1, Attached 5,227 4.6% 2 Units 1,996 1.8% 34 Units 1,204 1.1% 5-9 Units 516 0.5% 10-19 Units 278 0.2% 20-49 Units 118 0.1% 50+ Units 1,115 1.0% Mobile Home/Trailer 94 0.1% Other Housing Value 1990 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% r OWNER OCCUPIED BY RACE White Hshld Black Hshld Asian/Pacific Islander Hshld Am Indian Hshld Hispanic Hshld Housing Units Value 56,531 $75,882 139 $67,050 569 $73,146 228 $67,210 1,763 $57,273 BUILT Owner Renter MOVED IN Owner Renter 1989-90 1.9% .4% 1989-90 9.4% 16.5% 1985-88 5.4% 2.0% 1985-88 19.5% 10.6% 1980-84 7.5% 3.5% 1980-84 11.8% 2.3% 1970-79 25.1% 10.0% 1970-79 17.5% 1.2% 1960-69 8.5% 4.6% 1960-69 5.6% .3% 1950-59 8.0% 3.5% < 1960 5.3% .2% < 1949 12.5% 7.0% DecisionWhere, Inc., Copyright, 1994 (714)365-0125 HOUSING VALUE 1990 $0-15T $15-30T $30-50T $50-75T $75-100T $100-150T $150-200T $200-$250T $250-300T $300-400T $400-500T $500T Median Average RENT 1990 < $100 $100-200 $200-300 $300-400 $400-500 $500-600 $600-700 $700-1000 $1000+ Median Average Page 2 2.66 3.16 77,896 71.6% 64,794 83.2% 32,833 42.1% 2.03 13,102 16.8% 9,120 11.7% 1.57 30,863 28.4% 78,557 3,810 4,580 5,109 2,971 2,803 2,107 1,246 12,098 705 283 1,807 12,552 22,214 12,266 6,299 1,692 533 263 192 78 60 $65,199 $74,756 1,394 4,389 8,994 9,375 4,087 1,528 675 677 144 $309 $322 68.9% 3.3% 4.0% 4.5% 2.6% 2.5% 1.8% 1.1% 10.6% 0.6% 0.5% 3.1% 21.6% 38.1% 21.1% 10.8% 2.9% 0.9% 0.5°x6 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 4.5% 14.0% 28.8% 30.0% 13.1% 4.9% 2.2% 2.2% 0.5% Demographic Detail Ada & Canyon Counties, ID HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1994 Household Income 1994 FAMILY INCOME 1990 Households 124,337 $12,915 $3,821.0 < $5,000 5,168 4.2% $5T -$9.9T 9,599 7.7% $10T -$14.9T 10,306 8.3% $15T -$24.9T 23,598 19.0% $25T -$34.9T 22,216 17.9% $35T -$49.9T 23,076 18.6% $50T -$74.9T 19,458 15.6% $75T -$99.9T 5,845 4.7% $100T -$149.9T 3,286 2.6% $150T+ 1,596 1.3% Average Income $37,978 6 th N Median Income $31,157 $25T -$34.9T Average Family Inc 1994 $43,903 Nonfarm selfemp Median Family Inc 1994 $36,987 19,815 Page 3 HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1990 Household Income 1994 FAMILY INCOME 1990 20.0% 18.0% PER CAPITA 1990 $12,915 $3,821.0 Households 16.0% 50,464 Families 14.0% Graduated college AGGREGATE ($Mil) 12.0% < $5,000 4,989 10.0% < $5,000 1,969 8.0% 6.0% 9,376 10,470 8.6% 9.6°x6 4.0% 3,340 5,487 4.3% 7.0% 2.0% 1990 $15T -$24.9T 0.0% 21.3% " V r N Wages/Salary $2,759.9 $260.1 6 th N 20,020 18.4% $25T -$34.9T 15,658 HOUSEHOLD INCOME 1990 Population 25+ FAMILY INCOME 1990 Less than 9th PER CAPITA 1990 $12,915 $3,821.0 Households 108,759 50,464 Families 77,896 Graduated college AGGREGATE ($Mil) Graduate/Prof degree < $5,000 4,989 4.6% < $5,000 1,969 2.5% $5T -$9.9T $10T -$14.9T 9,376 10,470 8.6% 9.6°x6 $5T -$9.9T $10T -$14.9T 3,340 5,487 4.3% 7.0% INCOME BY SOURCE ($Mil) 1990 $15T -$24.9T 23,189 21.3% $15T -$24.9T 15,543 20.0% Wages/Salary $2,759.9 $260.1 $25T -$34.9T 20,020 18.4% $25T -$34.9T 15,658 20.1% Nonfarm selfemp $39.8 $35T -$49.9T 19,815 18.2% $35T -$49.9T 16,814 21.6% Selfemployment $291.4 $50T -$74.9T 14,275 13.1% $50T -$74.9T 13,042 16.7% Interest/div/rents $210.4 $75T -$99.9T 3,664 3.4% $75T -$99.9T 3,341 4.3% Social Security $18.6 $100T -$149.9T 1,803 1.7% $100T -$149.9T 1,664 2.1% Public assistance $153.2 $150T+ 1,155 1.1% $150T+ 1,039 1.3% Retirement Average Income $34,767 Average Income $40,088 Median Income $28,155 Median Income $33,276 Avg Inc < $150T $32,167 Avg Inc < $150T $36,959 Avg Inc >$150T $276,920 Avg Inc >$150T $271,538 --------------------------------------------------------------------- EDUCATION 1990 White Black Asian Amer Ind Other Hispanic 7,669 Age 25+ Completed high school+ 172,973 83.6% 550 78.0% 2,089 76.3% 1,120 4,028 75.7% 39.6% 50.5% Completed college+ 21.5% 13.5% 27.0% 11.6% 4.4% 8.1% SCHOOL YEARS COMPLETED 1990 Population 25+ 180,760 Less than 9th 11,162 Some high school 20,610 Graduated high sch 50,464 Some college 60,411 Graduated college 26,863 Graduate/Prof degree 11,251 SCHOOL ENROLLMENT 1990 Preprimary 4,999 Elementary/HS 57,396 College 19,662 61.1% 6.2% 11.4% 27.9% 33.4% 14.9°x6 6.2% % Private 37.1% 6.1% 15.8°x6 DecisionWhere, inc., Copyright, 1994 (714)365-0425 Education 1990 White Black Nay Asian ® High gch+ Amer Ind . , ❑+ Other .. Hispanic 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Demographic Detail Ada & Canyon Counties, ID LABOR FORCE 1990 Male Female Pop 16+ 105,888 112,629 Employed 73.7% 58.2% Unemployed 3.5°x6 2.7% Armed Forces 0.8% 0.1% Not in Labor Force 22.0% 38.9% EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY 1990 Total Employed 143,618 Hshlds, 0 Vehicles Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing 6,920 4.8% Mining 234 .2% Construction 9,656 6.7% Manufacturing 23,442 16.3% Transportation 5,821 4.1% Commercial & Other Public Utilities 3,498 2.4% Wholesale Trade 8,600 6.0% Retail Trade 23,951 16.7% Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 9,885 6.9% Business & Repair Services 7,256 5.1% Personal Services 3,841 2.7% Entertainment & Recreation 1,658 1.2% Health Services 10,554 7.3% Educational Services 10,562 7.4% Other Professional Services 8,764 6.1% Public Administration 8,973 6.2% TRANSPORTATION TO WORK 1990 4,713 3.3% Drove Alone 112,621 79.4% Carpooled 16,196 11.4% Bus/Trolley/Streetcar 887 .6% Subway/Elevated 0 .0% Railroad 0 .0% Ferryboat 10 .0% Taxicab 40 .0% Motorcycle 656 .5% Bicycle 1,418 1.0% Walked 3,865 2.7% Other Means of Transportation 758 .5% Worked at Home 5,471 3.9% TIME LEAVING FOR WORK 1990 12:00 am - 5:59 am 8,363 5.9% 6:00 am - 6:29 am 7,304 5.1% 6:30 am - 6:59 am 13,142 9.3% 7:00 am - 7:29 am 24,136 17.0% 7:30 am - 7:59 am 30,608 21.6% 8:00 am - 8:29 am 14,993 10.6% 8:30 am - 8:59 am 6,772 4.8% 9:00 am - 9:59 am 7,336 5.2% 10:00 am - 10:59 am 3,069 2.2% 11:00 am - 11:59 am 1,882 1.3% 12:00 pm - 3:59 pm 8,851 6.2% 4:00 pm to 11:59 pm 9,995 7.0% DecisionWhere, Inc., Copyright, 1994 (714)365-0125 Page 4 EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION 1990 108,759 Hshlds, 0 Vehicles White Collar 85,427 59.5% Executives, Admin, Managers 19,258 13.4% Professional Specialty 18,904 13.2% Technicians 6,138 4.3% Sales 17,331 12.1% Adminstrative Support 23,796 16.6% Blue Collar 58,190 40.5% Private Household 505 .4% Protective Services 1,987 1.4% Other Services 15,823 11.0% Farming, Forestry, Fishing 5,563 3.9% Precision Production 15,322 10.7% Machine Oper, Assembly/Inspection 8,059 5.6% Transportation & Materials Moving 6,026 4.2% Handler, Equipment Cleaning, Labor 4,905 3.4% TRAVEL TIME TO WORK 1990 < 5 Minutes 4,713 3.3% 5-9 Minutes 20,264 14.3% 10-14 Minutes 29,700 20.9% 15-19 Minutes 30,154 21.2% 20-24 Minutes 23,684 16.7% 25-29 Minutes 7,102 5.0% 30-39 Minutes 13,872 9.8% 40-59 Minutes 4,430 3.1% 60-89 Minutes 1,258 .9% 90+ Minutes 1,274 .9% VEHICLES AVAILABLE 1990 Households 108,759 Hshlds, 0 Vehicles 4,694 4.3% Hshlds, 1 Vehicle 31,613 29.1% Hshlds, 2 Vehicle 45,875 42.2% Hshlds, 3+ Vehicle 26,577 24.4% Average Vehicles Available 1.97 BoiseV4ey ..101, _ A% -j Marketing Information from The Idaho Statesman Ada County employment is expected to double between 1990 and 2010. • For the 20 year period, employment will increase at an average of 3.5 percent annually. Sow= 1993 Idaho Powa Company formuL RB93 - 92 Employment Numbers by Sector 1990 2000 2010 Non-agricultural 106,700 165,500 211,600 Manufacturing 16,100 25,400 31,000 Mining 100 100 100 Construction 6,200 10,100 15,200 Transportation 5,800 7,800 8,600 Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 8,200 13,000 17,400 Trade 27,000 41,700 51,200 Services 23,900 41,300 56,000 Government 19,400 26,100 32,100 Sow= 1993 Idaho Powa Company formuL RB93 - 92 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 17.1995 APPLICANT: LANGLEY & ASSOCIATES ITEM NUMBER; 16 REQUEST; REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 73.5 ACRES TO C -G AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: P & Z MINUTES FOR 5-9-95 CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 6 ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Shearer - Yea, Alidjani - Yea, MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Rountree: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded we pass a recommendation onto the City Council as stated, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 73.5 ACRES TO C -G BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, if there is a representative for the developer or Langly and Associates would they please come forward and present their plan to the Commission at this time. Russell Keithly, 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300, Issaquah, WA, was sworn by the City Attorney. Keithly: As already indicated I am with Langly and Associates, I am one of 2 shareholders, Langly is a real estate development company that was formed in 1984. My partner and 1 have commenced working together in the 79s early 80's as real estate developers with another firm. We have had a long term interest in the Boise valley, we looked here in the late 70's for some opportunities. I was raised in the Nampa area and get back frequently visiting family. So we have kept an eye on the Boise valley. With what has been happening recently with the growth in Boise and watching the Eagle interchange which we consider, a very prime intersection for development and with St. Luke's happening and bringing sewer closer to the interchange we decided last fall it was a good time to look at Boise again and commenced looking for property which we could do a commercial development. We -recently have worked on a couple commercial developments retail development which are similar to the one we are proposing. With your indulgence I would like to show you about 15 slides the City staff suggested because we are an unknown quantity it might be of interest to you the type of projects we have done historically, how we have done them, etc. I think I can run through these in 3 or 4 minutes. (SLIDE PRESENTATION) This is a project we did in the early 80's in Kirfin, Washington it is called Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 7 Kirfin Park Place and I am showing it because it uses some of the metal roof characteristics we are going to use. It was a very innovative mixed use project at that point about 1/4 million square feet. Same project, there is a look at the office. We have a development company that typically does our project in joint venture with major financial institutions. We did this with the Warehouser Venture Company and subsequently sold it to a pension fund. Although not terribly related, just an idea of some of the quality of projects we do. This is a project we did in Denver, Colorado a 20 story elderly housing project which we completed in 1988. We did that with a group of pension funds that were represented by First Chicago Investment Advisors. Getting closer to what we are doing now this is really a small center with some of the types of tenants and I will try to focus that a little. This is a tenant who is not in the Boise marketplace yet, The Good Guys Electronics, it is something similar to the future shop. Next is a store that again isn't in the Boise marketplace yet, Bames and Noble Booksellers and Cafe which is an extraordinary place to buy books and have an espresso or whatever. Again this project is under construction, it is not yet completed. This is looking down from Barnes and Noble at the balance of it. Again, the architecture characteristic of this is not similar to what we are proposing but I wanted to show you, I think it is a quality architecture. This was actually an infill site where we re-habed a mega food store an old grocery store. Just to show you the similarity between another project we are currently doing and what we are proposing this is 1-90 Corporate Center outline is 138 acres right on an interchange, 15 miles from downtown Seattle about 8 miles from Bellevue which is a town very similar in size to Boise and the town Issaquah which is a town that has many similarities to Meridian and it is primarily a bedroom community that has had limited retail. As a business park we constructed this building in 1990 at which time the market softened in Seattle, financing began having a problem and we converted it to a retail project again still under construction called pickering place. That is a Costco, the back of Costco behind it, again many similarities, Overland will be 5 lanes at our property. This is a commuting street SE 56th Street that at where you are looking at it is actually 7 lanes and it is a minimum of 6 lanes. I am showing you this project primarily because our architectural concept while we are using a different architect in Boise this was an agrarian community and we have decided the rural agrarian architectural style is appropriate for Meridian. This is all built out of brick as I indicated we use a lot of metal standing seam roofs, I think that is probably the most attractive Costco in their chain. This is more in the heart of the existing office building in back, I am song there is a little too much light to read it well, but you can see some of the metal roofs and brick and weather on the left. The blue roof building yet to be opened is Blockbuster Music as opposed to Blockbuster Video, on the far right the building you can barely see is a 9-plex cinema and Kachina Kachina is a Seattle based restaurant. This is Barnes and Noble in this project yet to be opened, they don't have their signage up, whatever, again some similar architectural characteristics as contemplated here. We do a lot of things even with parking lots, we broke up the parking lot with a lot of landscaping with a red walkway. We are standing and taking this picture at a computer Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 8 store called Ballard Computer. Again it is a little too light but very rural nature of architecture. This is a tenant you have in Boise, again we tried to make it agrarian and some interesting architectural characteristics for a box store. There has been a great deal of concern by the staff of how we handle loading near the freeway and whatever. If you look on the right hand side that is a truck going by on Interstate 90 that is how close we are to the freeway. The loading dock is totally isolated and we have done a separate building to make it look like a farm building, with metal siding. So when you drive by you don't feel you are looking at a retail store. A major tenant that is now in Denver and Salt Lake and the Seattle marketplace that is not yet in Boise, there is a lot of confusion over this because there was an Eagle Hardware and Garden in Boise apparently but this is unrelated it is Eagle Hardware and Garden. The store you are looking at is 140,000 square feet which is comparable to the Home Depot that just opened in Boise. Again I apologize we can't see it a little better but there is a lot of architectural detail in that building. I will walk you through the site plan, this has been in your packet I know in a reduced version so I will just point out some of the highlights. I apologize to the people behind, has anybody figured out a way to let you and the audience see? Johnson: Not really. Keithly: Our plan right now is to have the larger tenants on the east side of the property, relatively the overall scope those tenants usually like to own the property so those will probably be land sells. We will have architectural control guidelines, we will have an architecture review committee to assure, even though somebody else is building those the architectural characteristics is consistent with the balance of the project and consistent with what we just showed you. We have, I won't go through all of the buffers and whatever but relative to the Meridian codes we have exceeded them dramatically. A 4 foot landscape buffer is required between parking lots and commercial residential uses. We have a minimum of 12 feet and 18 to 24 feet depending on where we are on the property. We are not just throwing in a fence we are putting in a 2 to 3 foot to 4 foot landscape berm with a fence on top of that. Your codes require depending on what part of the code it is a 4 to 6 foot fence and we are putting in a 2 to 3 foot berm plus a 4 to 6 foot fence. So, we understand the concern of the neighbors without them telling us, we expected that. We are going to provide as much buffering as we possibly can. We have done lots of projects in residential neighborhoods the science of cut off lighting and whatever and the ability to have good designers to the parking lot so it doesn't intrude in any way on the adjoining. residential is very positivd now. You can see on nature A we put the loading as far as we could from the residential neighborhood and again relative to the freeway it has a wall so when they are there can't be seen from the freeway. We like in our projects, we don't like one tree landscaping things in parking lots, they tend to get destroyed and not make much of an impact, you will see we have consolidated our landscaping in rows and put more landscaping and consolidated places is •yvnat we find that does is when you are on one Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 9 side of the project you actually get a screen and you don't see the whole parking lot at once and we find that is very effective. Our entry road is approximately 400 feet long, we are paying a lot of attention to that both in screening from the neighbors on both sides of that will be a 3 to 4 foot berm plus a rock wall, a divided median, there is going to be a double left hand turn into that and a divided median makes that work much better so it is a very significant road with very significant walls and landscaping. Johnson: What was the height of those walls along the freeway there, you probably said it and I missed it. Keithly: Along the freeway, we are still negotiating, what the City wants basically, but we are proposing a 2 to 3 foot berm plus a 4 to 6 foot wall and again those are wood walls so it could be a minimum of 6 feet and I think we need to look at that as we go and if more works better adding a couple feet to a berm or wall is very simple. So we need to do elevation studies and studies from the freeway to see how that works. Right now our emphasis and in all candor more on the neighborhood surrounding and we want to buffer them. The freeway is a visual buffer and we think it is very important when you go by on the freeway you see decent architecture and we will show you we have done some rear elevations of the building. So you do have to design the back of a building we are just doing a project that none of the buildings have backs effectively so we had to design them all, they all are on streets and facing office buildings and neighborhoods. We think the building architecture is the most important thing from the freeway, from the freeway it is obviously a commercial center and we don't perceive that as being negative. We have not done all of our storm water counts and whatever, but if you noticed the lake in the project that we did in Seattle that is a storm water detention/retention pond. That is a very pragmatic way to create a lake. Unfortunately your water table is such that we can't easily create a lake here, but we think we can create some grassy park like areas and until we have these tenants we are not going to overcertain if they want to do individual ones on their site so there are a number of these or it will enlarge this one so there is one large park like area. Again we are inclined to break it up with more detention/retention fields and grass and we are also doing some of that on this comer of the building. The flow is in this direction and to the creek. Johnson: Becky do you want to just tum that around for the audience. Keithly: Building heights generally will not exceed 30 feet, the zoning ordinance allows 40 feet. Typically the only thing that will be in excess of 30 feet will be parafoot walls that are used for screening and/or architectural features so we should not come close to your 40 foot maximum in this zone. Before I turn to the elevations, are there any questions on the site plan or would you like to do it all at once? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 10 Johnson: Any questions at this point or should we wait? Keithly: These are conceptual at this point in time, we think a project should not be monotonous as you saw in the other project there were a lot of architectural forms and that is what we are proposing here. We've had the architect take a spot kind of on the east side of the project backing to Eagle and show you a conceptual design with hypothetical tenants. We have effectively used metal siding on the fronts of building again obviously a rural agrarian feel which works well. It is a little hard to see but we have got supports which on the columns which have a very rural feel. The whole thing is covered so you have an entire covered walkway, again the metal roofs obviously tend to be rural in nature. The agrarian theme is our theme of this project, we plan to build it in split face concrete masonry units principally. Most people when they see it think it is brick and we usually use brick highlights, but it is a very rich material that we think we get very good product on. We tend to vary the color of the metal roofs and whatever and vary the color of the masonry. The masonry comes in a significant variety of colors, we like the predominantly what they call rose or red color which is reminiscent of brick, but we like to mix it with beiges and lots of other colors and create lots of visual interest. The back of the building again, you can see the peak roof behind, we are using patterns and whatever in the brick. Your requirements, probably the most difficult requirement you have is the amount of large trees that are required, 1 for 1500 square feet of parking and that is going to give us an awful lot of screening that will be pretty mature when we put in 3 inch caliper trees. We really haven't shown that as thick as it will be because we wouldn't see the buildings real well if we showed that. Somewhat for the edification of the audience but also to explain a little bit to you about how we came to our decision that this was an appropriate use for this site. We did study your 1993 Comprehensive Plan, one of the six key community values is to expand the commercial industrial development within the community so obviously we felt we met that. Most of our property, virtually all of it is designated mixed planned use development area. I think it is important to understand and I will just read the things that are allowed in that, specially retail commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial is allowed in that area, services commercial and public uses so there is a great variety that is allowed and we believe what we are doing is probably the least impactful and economically most beneficial to the community. We found it interesting and I think it is a little gutsy on the City of Meridian's part something we haven't seen before on the part of a comp plat, 28-51-50 and I will just read it, "the mixed use area in the vicinity of Overland Road, Franklin Road, Eagle Road, 1-84 Interchange," exactly where we are,"is a priority developmerif area." So, we were encouraged, we don't like to battle with municipalities so we like to go to areas where we believe we are wanted and everything we read in the comp plan lead us to believe this was an appropriate concept that was actually a priority for the City of Meridian. I really think 1 would rather entertain questions at this point. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 11 Johnson: That is fine, any questions of the Commission? Rountree: Do you have traffic projections? Keithly: Yes, relative to traffic and traffic studies, we submitted to Ada County Highway Department just last week and that was behind our schedule. It was partly behind our schedule we are using Bell Walker, a gentleman named Gary Funkhouser to do the traffic analysis and he had a difficult time getting a handle on traffic for this type of project. We actually approached Costco to find out where their traffic comes from at their store and how much of it comes from Canyon County and etc. and they shared some of that information with us to help in that modeling. I guess in traffic engineering and I call it the black boxes which 1 don't understand, and that is they take a type of development and they put it in the black box, but unfortunately the black box in this case the Ada County Planning Association put together assumes the traffic is going to come within generally a 4 mile radius. We consider for this type of project and I am glad you asked that because I wanted to mention this, our market is the entire area. We consider it to be 450,000 to 500,000 trade area. So we think we will draw from Ontario to Mountain Home to Camas County, it is a large trade area. It is not a frequent visit it is relatively infrequent visit but it is a relatively long visit. The people do come from a significant distance to make, so you are drawing dollars into your community heavily from out of the community as well as providing services that don't currently exist in your community. I actually have the traffic study with me, the County has asked, as you know I am not sure what their current position is they initially asked that you hold off on this hearing until they have had a chance to hear it. I think they subsequently asked that you continue it which is obviously fine with us. We think this warrants a couple of hearings and they are reviewing the numbers that we have presented to them. My recollection on an average day this generates something in the vicinity of 23,000 to 25,000 trips. Johnson: Any other questions? Rountree: I would assume then that you are considering improvements on Overland in terms of lane capacity as well as signalization? Keithly: As I understand it a relatively recent occurrence has been that improving Overland Road to 5 lanes from Cloverdale to Eagle is now in the County's 5 year plan. So that is going, and they are actually out doing surveying and acquisition and stakes and whatever. So, Overland is going to happen to 5 lanes, I doubt that it is going to happen in time to serve our project. So our plan is and it is more detailed in the traffic study we have to make a double left tum lane off of Eagle which we would do and improve Eagle to 5 lanes past our property while we wait for the County to catch up from the other direction. And then as you get a 100 feet past our property our entry Overland will then Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 12 gradually go back down to its current configuration until the County comes from the other direction. We think it is going to be sooner than later. Our intersection is definitely signalized, double left in, right hand acceleration lane in. It is a fairly significant complex intersection. Hepper: Has the Highway Department made any comments about this being one entrance to this project, because I could see where there would potential conflicts there with emergency vehicles or something if something were to happen. Keithly: Emergency is not an issue, because when this road went in the State Highway Department basically took away the Eagle access to these property owners. When they did that and I think you are probably aware of it about 100 feet from this intersection they provided an access into the property, are all of you aware that its exists? We plan to keep that open for emergency access, you have to have a project of this magnitude 2 points of entry and exit for emergency vehicles. That will be only emergency vehicles so if there is ever a problem at this intersection and that gets blocked emergency vehicles will have ingress and egress. Hepper: Will that be a gravel road or paved road? Keithly: Whatever the fire chief wants and the emergency people, it is currently a very good gravel road. I think they are probably going to want, I talked to the fire chief today and he indicated he would probably want grass barriers and whatever to keep it just for his use so we don't get the public using it. That will be up to whatever they desire, we are happy to pave that. I am not sure it warrants that or it may attract too many people wishing to use it if that is paved. It is a difficult site, our entry is only 1200 feet from the intersection and while a single entry into a project of this type is not optimum, 2 entries, 2 signalized entries within 1200 feet our traffic engineers don't feel is pragmatic or practical and you would get more conflicting reports. We initially worked with a Seattle traffic engineer and subsequently worked with Bell Walker and think that they believe, all of their studies show that it operates easily under worse case conditions that level of service. It is a concern, we are meeting with them on May 26th after they have had a chance to digest our traffic study to review that. Johnson: Any other questions? Rountree: Have you had an opportunity to review the comments from the City staff, do you have any concerns or problems with those comments? Keithly: No, I have talked to the fire chief of his comment about needing potentially a fire site and station and he said it is a generic comment. He wanted the Council to know that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 13 St. Luke's is happening and we are happening and there is more stuff proposed south of us that quadrant is probably going to require in the foreseeable future a fire station in his view. He specifically said he felt there probably too much traffic at the Eagle and Overland intersection to put it there. He would want it someplace where there is less traffic congestion and ingress/egress fire station for the vehicles. Hepper: What would your time frame be on this in your phasing? Keithly: An optimum time frame would be under construction by Spring and have some stores open by Christmas 1996, that is optimum. Likely it is 2 phases with the first phase sometime between Winter and Fall of 1996, open between Fall of 1996 and Fall of 1997 and hopefully all of it open by 1998 or 1999. Hepper: Would you have to have tenants before any buildings were built or would you build the buildings first and then try to seek tenants? Keithly: No, with these types of tenants we absolutely have to have tenants first. These are very custom buildings. Each of that we aretalken tenants anddmost they have them now have o prototype and hundreds of stores the national ones t 9 it has to be exactly 130 feet wide and not 120 feet wide and whatever. So they really are build to suits, even when we are building in line they are build to suits. Shearer: Do you have some potential commitments? Keithly: That is proprietary and they ask us not to talk about that, we have a marketing director who is working virtually full time on it. We are in contact with scores of retailers. We don't have firm commitments yet and we will not, I can promise you we won't announce firm commitments and really have understand intil we have been manyparts of the through the country like annexation and zoning process. You have retailers where we do business regularly that process sometimes takes several years. So, are generally very and say we like the concept and lets keep talking, but we will formalize things when you are through with your City process. We have very significant interest from national retailers who are not here yet. People are very aware of the growth that is happening and is projected in Boise and the Boise valley. Johnson: Any other comments? We will give you an opportunity to answer anything that might come up throughout the public hearing as a rebuttal. We would like to do that at the end if that is alright. This is a public hearing, anyone else like to address the Commission on this application. Robert Cox, 3780 East Overland, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 14 Cox: I have been living in this community for 15 years, I work at Hewlett Packard and I design printer circuit boards for them. So you know who I am, I live in the Jewell Subdivision. I am not good at talking in public so I will do the best I can. This is a summary, I will give you a copy of it, I am going to read it. This is a summary of the issues pertaining to the proposed strip mall in Meridian at Eagle Road and Overland. The intention of this document is to review the pros and cons for an objective presentation to Ada County, the proposed developers and the existing neighborhood residents. Property developer issues. Logistically the interstate accessibility is fairly good. When looking at the intersection of Eagle and Overland it makes business sense. Logistically the parcel of property proposed for development is in the worse possible area of the interchange due to the eastbound 1-84 on ramp. The choice of property location seems questionable when several alternate sites exist at both southeast and southwest corners of Eagle and Overland. This property seems much more appealing to the developers due to cost. The proposed single entry/exit limited to Overland is not only poorly thought out but makes absolutely no sense. The basic infrastructure necessary to support this type of development doe snot exist within the City of Meridian or Ada County. The basic proximity to 1-84 for supplying businesses makes good sense. This property is cut in half by Five Mile Creek. I believe this is a federal creek and the federal government may have something to say about this. The proposed strip mall layout was so badly designed it was unbelievable. It is painfully obvious that whoever did this layout did not understand the logistics of this property or the logistics of this area of the county. City and County government issues. The level of improvements required to Overland to provide adequate safety for the residents of Ada County would be significant. Recently accidents on Overland between Eagle Road and Cloverdale have gotten significantly worse. In the past 2 months there have been two serious accidents. This past weekend there was an accident at Eagle and Overland and an accident at Cloverdale and Overland. The level of traffic increase would be substantial to the point that Overland would have to be widened to five lanes to accommodate the traffic between the intersections of Eagle Road and Cloverdale. Sidewalks would be an absolute necessity when Overland is widened between Eagle Road and Cloverdale. The speed limit needs to be reduced on Overland now as it is. The Meridian Sewer District does not extend into this area of the county. A mall of this size would surely require the addition of septic drainage connecting into the main sewers approximately now located one mile east of Overland past Locust Grove. The county, in general, must capitalize on the opportunity to get the sewers in when Overland is widened. The county must capitalize on the widening of the road between Eagle and Locust Grove when the main sewer line is connected. Current power lines supplying Overland are barely adequate to support the small requirements of the community and frequently loss of power is common. The increase on the electrical grid the proposed mall will require is not adequately supported by the current infrastructure. Sewage and drainage due to the extremely high water table in most of this area should be thoroughly understood with an environmental impact statement done to review the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 15 possibility of the following issues: Existing private septics and private wells must be protected from the possibility of loss due to septic flooding or wells with sand. Several wells in this area have gone bad and some septics have had problems due to the high water table. Adequate drainage in the form of storm drains for run off must be provided as to insure adjacent property owners from being flooded. The slope of the drainage from the proposed mall appears to slope directly into the Jewel Subdivision. Has the developer looked at the flood plain map for 100 and 500 years? My guess is you are going to be paying flood insurance premiums for many years to come. This may be very costly to everybody. All added wells, drains and septic systems must have adequate safeguards to eliminate the possibility of children drowning., The five mile federal drainage will be destroyed by the creation of this proposed development. Significant wildlife habitat will be lost or permanently altered forever. The effect of the lighting coming from the parking lot will destroy the beautiful view of the stars at night and the Bogus Basin Mountains. This will be a permanent loss unless parking lot lights are turned off during evening hours as part of the mall grand scheme. (End of Tape) Police and Fire department support in this area of the county is minimal. At what cost to the county taxpayers does Ada County feel it should be spending to promote corporate profits? Costs in general for this kind of development seem prohibitive due to the basically inadequate infrastructure. Road development, increased traffic, major sewage overhaul, major power distribution changes, cost for increased police, fire, disposal services not to mention the money that it is going to cost just to complete all the studies needed to justify the development. Where are the funds coming from to correct the problems that are going to be created in Jewell Subdivision and on Rolling Hills Drive when the wells go bad and septic systems fail due to the significant changes proposed? Summary to the proposed owner/builder of this development. The idea of placing a major shopping center near the comer of Eagle and Overland seems to be basically a sound idea for a large business to naturally evolve in the Boise valley. The actual piece of property that you have selected has so many negative connotations associated with it regarding impact_ to the surrounding community. It is my belief that you are buying a lemon. My suggestion is that if you really want to do this in a way that will cause far less grief and be looked upon as responsible you should re- consider the choice of property and entertain the southeast or southwest comers of Eagle Road and Overland. This will allow for multiple entrances on Eagle and Overland keeping traffic problems to a minimum. Most likely the profitability for your cooperation will be much greater due to the elimination of many of the costly challenges you will face otherwise. Summary to the sellers of the acreages in question. The fifty three acre parcel between the Jewel Subdivision and 1-84 is possibly the worst place to put this kind of development for many of the reasons given. It is my suggestion that the City of Meridian annex this property and it be turned into a city park. There are no city parks in this area of town and the location of this property seems to ideally located. To do so would regain and maintain the beautiful panoramic view of Bogus Basin Mountains for generations to come. The current single access to this piece of property is perfect for placing a parking Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 16 lot on the west end leaving the remainder of the property to be used for Meridian residents in this area to enjoy. The mall developers could participate in this process and it might be to their benefit to have a major city park directly across from this type of retail outlet mall complex. It is my opinion that the cost to the citizens of the community versus the profit you might make could just as easily be attained if this was sold, traded or donated to the city of Meridian or Ada County. In summary, the City of Meridian and Ada County have obligations to their citizens for balanced development. With the new hospital being built north of 1-84 this area is most certainly in need of a more comprehensive plan balancing the citizens needs along with business growth. They must go hand in hand if a development of this size must go into this area then lets be responsible to all parties involved. Common sense dictates this is the wrong location. Johnson: Thank you very much, any questions? Crookston: I just have one Mr. Cox, is that map or drawing still up here, would you grab that. Maybe this doesn't have what you were talking about, you said the southeast or southwest corner. Cox: I am talking about the two 80 acre parcels that are open fields in both of these quadrants that are not shown on the map. For everybody out here I am talking about the quadrant that is here and the quadrant that is over here. They are huge parcels. Crookston: Are you talking about the intersection of Overland and Eagle, those quadrants? Cox: Yes Johnson: Any other questions? Thank you, anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission at this time? Jim Rogers, 1115 Rolling Hills Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Rogers: I like that idea about the park, that will probably happen about the time that place that we heard about in Sunday school freezes over. I represent about 40 residents on the Rolling Hill/Jade/Onyx/Topaz area. We have a petition and a written statement. I would like to present that to the chairman right now. I am also not a good public speaker so bear with me. First I would like to thank the neighbors who are here showing support, many of who signed the petition are here. In Idaho's Centennial Year, 1993, the City of Meridian adopted and updated Comprehensive Plan and in early 1994 put into place a greatly revised Zoning and Development Ordinance. A common theme of both documents is the desire to manage growth and enhance Meridian's quality of life for all residents. Although the neighbors who have signed this petition are not residents of Meridian all reside within Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 17 the impact area boundary. Many have property abutting the development site, and most are within 1000 feet of the property boundary. Every homeowner represented by this petition, living on Rolling Hills Drive, Jade, Onyx, Topaz and Overland will be severely impacted by a retail mall development approaching the size of the existing Boise Town Square mall; and the subsequent. surrounding commercial development which will take place because of the mixed/planned use development designation shown on the generalized land use map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The combined square footage of the available commercial space in the vicinity of Overland and Eagle, shown on the land use map could and very probably will produce a developed area equal the size to that which already exist in the Milwaukee/Franklin area. this is certainly not in keeping with the managed grown vision of Meridian. Neighbors who signed this petition are united in their opposition to Langly Associates, an out of state developer, application for annexation, zoning or granting of a conditional use permit for the property generally located on the SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange. There are many reasons for opposition to this development. Some of those reasons will be discussed in this petition, other have been, or will be discussed during the meeting tonight. I have made an attempt to list issues that were discussed in our neighborhood meeting last week. The numerical order of these issues do not indicate priority. All of us, both long term time residents (+10 years) have those who have recently moved here place a high value on the open aspect of the area. The ability to watch a beautiful Idaho sunset, still be able to see stars, watch and listen to wildlife such as Canadian geese, pheasants or an occasional fox. Some of us personally knew the lady, now deceased, who owned the subject property, and often took time from her irrigation work to chat about her farm and living in the area. She enjoyed the land as much as we enjoyed having her as a neighbor. The property is still being farmed. Today grain is growing, last year it was sugar beets, in other years com. If this development is approved a quality of life which we cherish will be gone forever, as well as the elimination of a very productive piece of high quality farm land. Southwest Ada County has one of the lowest crime rates in the County. The developer, in his proposal has listed what he considers positive aspects of the development. Let's discuss some of the negative impacts. Boise Town Square Mall has experienced all of the following: professional thieves who work the mall every day, perverts, mall rats, including organized and unorganized gangs, vandalism, bomb threats, massive traffic congestion. This will certainly place an additional workload on the Meridian City Police as well as other emergency response groups. One of the stated objectives in the Comprehensive Plan is the preservation of the Meridian Old Town Business District. Not only should the Old Town area be preserved but also the existing business entities already located in Meridian. As a point of interest; not many weeks ago on the TV show 60 Minutes a story ran about communities who are now attempting to zone out stores such as Wal Mart which can come into a community and devastate the existing business infrastructure. If they decide the store is un -profitable they close stop and leave. Is the community a better place because of this? It appears if the developer achieves the stated goal of annexation and rezoning Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 18 he will attempt to sell off parcels to other developers, and perhaps or perhaps not develop the remainder of the property himself. This will result in piecemeal development with lost of control by the City of Meridian to achieve a quality development. Last, but the most important, is the massive impact of traffic, light, noise, and air pollution. Unfortunately, the only way to discuss the impact of traffic is through the use of statistics and numbers which I know can be very boring. I'll try to use comparisons of the thing we know the most about, the Boise Town Square Mall. The information I am using is from a report titled Mall Area Action Plan - Phase 1, prepared by The Hoyt Company for the Ada Planning Association in August 1994. When the Boise Town Square Mail was constructed in 1986, the amount of spin-off retail and office development was originally projected at 1.1 million square feet. That has in realty become approximately 2 million square feet, with a future development potential for an additional 2.0 to 2.8 million square feet. I can't even visualize this much space. What this means from a traffic point of view is the roadway standard level of service has declined from a LOS C to D � or "E", about as bad as it can get. The costs of addressing this traffic congestion from a traditional roadway construction approach has been projected at just under $60 million dollars. These costs would be above and beyond the $80 million already programmed; and are the equivalent of 25% of the entire ACHD capital budget over the next 20 years. If Meridian approves a development of the same size which has the potential to turn into another Town Square mail, from a traffic point of view several things can happen. The cost of improving Overland and Eagle over the next 5 to 10 years to accommodate this amount of traffic could result in a huge license and registration increase on every car owner in Ada County just to pay for the future combined cost of this proposed development and the Boise Town Square mall. The cost of maintaining both Boise Town Square and the proposed Eagle Interchange infrastructure would result in a loss of dollars available to maintain the roads in the rest of the county. We have already seen many of the county subdivision roads starting to deteriorate. Perhaps Meridian and Boise city residents should be required to pay a larger share of road maintenance and improvement cost. They, after all benefit the most from Sales Tax Revenues. It is our understanding the Idaho State Highway Department has refused this proposed development access to Eagle Road. This means the entire traffic burden will be placed on Overland Road with a single entrance approximately 1000 feet from the Overland Eagle Intersection. Existing traffic counts in the vicinity of the Boise Town Square malt indicates approximately 30 to 35 thousand vehicles daily use the area, which as 4 entry and exit locations on three major roads. In the May 1, 1995 draft report titled: 1-84 Power Center Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Bell Walker Engineers of Boise; in review process by ACHD* and not yet accepted for public use, a projected vehicle per day count of 24,885 will enter and exist onto Overland Road. This appears to be on the low side, as the national average trip rates for shopping centers which are based on gross leasable area indicate that nationally, the smaller shopping center, the higher the trip rate per 1000 square feet of gross leasable area. Can you imagine approximately 25,000 to 30,000 vehicles daily using a single entrance into the proposed mail. In discussions with Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 19 Ada County Highway Department, they show no work planned for the next 5 years on the section of road between Cloverdale and Eagle. We realize the developer has stated most traffic would use the existing 1-84/Eagle Road Interchange, so there should be minimal impact on local roads. This is like saying when the Boise Town Square was developed in 1988 there would be no impact on Franklin or Milwaukee past the mall. Southwest Ada County is developing at an unprecedented rate. Traffic generated by this and other developments, both commercial and residential, will be using 5 -Mile, Overland, Cloverdale, Victory, and Eagle. In short every road in southwest Ada County will bring traffic to the area. Overland and the surrounding roads are not designed for this traffic burden, nor do we believe it is realistic to spend Ada County tax dollars for the sole purpose of accommodating developers. I'm almost finished here, but let me take a brief moment of time to discuss noise, light, and air pollution which will be generated in a very small area. The proposed development is surrounded on two sides by single family homes which were constructed sometime between approximately 1963 and 1975. According to the developer, homes adjoining the development are, almost without exception a significant distance from the subject property separated from the development by pastures. Let me state, even though some of us have small pastures, most of our homes are within 100 to 200 feet of the development parking lot or proposed structures. Some of the neighbors who live on the south side of the development have even less space separating their home from the developers property line. I guess we differ with the developer in what would be considered a significant distance. Hardly enough to provide a buffer. Nor, do many of us desire a wall constructed at the back our our property. We will have parking lights glaring in our back yards; at all hours of the night there will be trucks moving through the parking areas loading and unloading freight; during the winter, in the early hours of the morning we will hear snowplows scraping against asphalt and, because of prevailing wind all of the auto exhaust and dust caused by traffic movement will blow right into our homes. Even now, when the wind is blowing out of the northwest, traffic noise from 1-84 is almost intolerable. Residents of this area are not anti -development. We believe there are better places where this development can be located. On Eagle Road, between Fairivew and Franklin are several tracts of land for sale, with the infrastructure already in place. Meridian has been trying for years to get a mail to locate at 1-84 and Meridian Avenue. Both areas are suitable, will have little impact on existing single family homes, and still bring the perceived benefits to the City of Meridian. Develop these areas first. The south side of 1-84 is not the place for this type of development. Because we live within the Meridian impact area boundary, the Ada County Commissioners have indicated that by agreeing to the impact area boundaries in 1993, they no longer represent County residents in Planning or zoning issues. We are unable to vote or have a political voice in the selection of the Meridian City Council or Planning and Zoning Commission. In essence, we have been dis-enfranchised from the political process. Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission: You, after consideration of the developers proposal, input from other interested groups, and the neighbors viewpoint, have the responsibility of making a recommendation to the Meridian Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 22 Meridian, and than not under the thumb of the snfBoise who so desperately 1989 after a long and hard yearned to control and own this commerce crossroad. I fought battle with the Mayor of Boise, over which of the �atioln'es Boise or Board Members 'eachedan la control this vital interchange the Idaho State Transportation sound common sense decision based on irrefutable logic. The shortest distance between 2 points is always a straight line, alias the coupling of Interstate 1-84 and State Highway #55. And this logic and the previous referenced Roman adage of crossroads coming together was re -affirmed by them Chairman of the Idaho State Transportation Board Mr. Carl Moore. When stated, "The 1-84 Eagle Road Interchange will not only become of the State of the Boise Valley, but will become the massive transportation jugular of Idaho. The only connector joining Interstate East-West with State StateIdaho.y #55. Which is the only direct North/South route through thecenter/core Thus, the City of Meridian received a goose with its golden sought after/commerce egg the 1-84 Eagle Road Interchange. Subsequently, in 1993 via the public hearing process, Meridian notified the need to update its Comprehensive Plan. The strategic importance of the Eagle Road Interchange was specifically noted in that document. Eagle Road s final plan resulted in the mixed/planned use classification identified fled around Interchange area. As such, the area was considered a high priority area for the encouragement of mall development and/or for v de a strong tax'basertocthe Cityof technical, businesses, etc. all of which would pro Meridian. To those of you who participated in Meridian's offd'n Ott for the into Meridian's gle final Road Planning or through the Planng pro for you. To those of you who are Comprehensive Plan, I say goody, goody, goodyme transplants from such places as New Jersey or Connecticutspot o as a johnny'come a or �ately other Or tate who have finally arrived at your utopian garde p those who did not become or did not take the time to become involved in the planning process, you're certainly not in a position now to holler the skies are falling, the skies are failing, the skies are falling. And I might add a 5 acre ranchero with a denuded horse pasture in the summertime which becomes a mud bath in the winter time along the roadside is considered by some to be visual blight, not ��PicalComplexlready wh ch the obv obviously Road Interchange has attracted the St. Lukes West selected the Eagle Road Interchange site due to present and future demands/needs for medical services in this southwest area. This medical building is the first of a six phase development. This first phase, presently under construction consists of a $14 million four story, 100,000 square foot west Imedical complex prnsdesol r s�chgrdZleedd for the Meridian's ning ceremonies in December 1995. Understandably a Comp Plan, the Eagle Road Interchange area is becomingthe Westcrossroads cal Complex. For commerce. For commerce like the on-going St. Luke's commerce like this proposed I-84 Power Center, which would negate the need to traverse the miles toward distance shopping. Or would those critics prefer to have a mass saturation of people and their little peoples occupying that same interchange corner Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 23 instead? Given the nature of its strategic location onto Interstate 84 and the easy access throughout the valley, under multiple/mixed use. Theoretically that 73 acre site could be assaulted with a medium density number of 20 units to the acre of three story townhouses/condominiums; which after allowing for common ground usage a reduction of some 20% would allow some 1.200 units on site. Figuring approximately 3.2 to the family who would average 2 automobiles to each unit, some 3800 people could be daily driving some 2400 cars into that interchange comer. Not a dime for commerce, or revenue generating purposes. Just an overload on the already overloaded which is a taxing thought to an already taxing situation. I support the proposed 1-84 Power Center located on the Southeast comer of the 1-84 Eagle Road interchange. I offer this written statement for inclusion in the record. Thank you. Johnson: Any questions of Mr. Lewis? I saw a lady with her hand up. Katherine Mooney, 479 Main Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Mooney: Mr. Chairman, I have written support from the property owner of the southwest corner of Eagle road and Overland. The gentleman who so graciously supported development on that corner isn't here now. I do have Mr. Griffen's written support of this and I also have a copy that I would like to give to the record. With that being part of the public record I don't have any other statements. Crookston: Excuse me, can I ask you a question, Mr. Griffin, what is his first name? Mooney: James Griffin owns the southwest corner, 80 acres. Pam Haynes, 1235 Rolling Hills Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Haynes: I will be very brief I did not intend on speaking at this meeting but there has been a couple of comment that I feel I would like to address. I was bom and raised in Boise as was my father, his father came with his father on the immigrant train from Kansas in the early 1900's. So Mr. Lewis I am not a transplant. 1 also do not have children, so I am not proliferating rapidly in my spare time. I will be brief I just have a couple more things. This proposed development does indeed border our property that we purchased some 11 years ago, my husband and myself. I feel it would have a very definite impact on us. The gentleman here told -us tonight that their bottom line is protecting the homeowners in the area. It is my belief that the bottom line here is profit. I would ask that the Planning and Zoning Commission not approve the application for this proposed development. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, yes sir. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 24 Cameron McGough, 1360 Rolling Hills Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. McGough: I too did not plan on speaking, I will make it brief. I agree with ACHD I would like to see this tabled just because of the recency of the delivery of a draft transportation study. So I would like to see 8 and 9 on the agenda tonight be tabled until the June meeting. ACHD and ITD work very well with the developers and the homeowners and business folks. I have been very impressed since I deal with that on the side as a job. I think given that length of time to review and work with the developer, work with the homeowners, something will work out whatever it may be. I strongly urge you not to go forth on any decision other than a postponement tonight. Additionally Mr. Langly or his representative here maybe with just mis-communication. The section of Overland between Locust Grove and Cloverdale those 2 miles are not in the 5 year plan. They will remain at 2 lanes, we have not begun the transportation improvement program therefore as it stands right now it is going to be a 2 lane road only. Additionally in the transportation plan that was mentioned the transportation study looking trough the trip generation manual the estimates it is reasonable engineering practices but they did choose the low end. We could be looking at anywhere from 25,000 to 45,000 vehicle trips and that is not including, I urge you to also look with a lot of forethought at the southwest and southeast comers because spin off is going to occur. So we can't just have one access and if it does happen we need to have an additional access because a single access won't work especially when you start looking with forethought with what is going to happen in the spin off. Thanks. Johnson: Thank you Virginia Jennison, 4511 North Linda Vista, Boise was sworn by the City Attorney. Jennison: My name is Jennison, my single name was Oliason. I am sure some of you are familiar with Dorothy Oliason my sister who was my sister she passed a year ago. I am sure if she was here today she would be speaking also. So this is sort of personal as well as emotional and financial. My parents came to Idaho in 1919 in a model T Ford on their honeymoon. They bought the farm at that time. We had a beautiful farm out there. Then one day the freeway came along and took a portion of our farm which really hurt because we had a beautiful farm and nice level fields. Then came along the on ramp to the freeway which totally wiped us out. We had a gorgeous house out there, beautiful hard wood floors and bams and chicken houses that my dad built. That hurt a lot, we stood out there and cried while the bull dozer pushed them down. The people in the subdivision, I can feel for them a little, but I drive down that road frequently on Overland and there is an old bam out there that was there when I was little. It is all buried, I think bam and the house, it is all buried in a bunch of dead trees and garbage and fallen down and it looks like an eye sore to me. If these people are so proud of their subdivision I suggest they get out there and do Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 25 something to clean it up because it looks terrible. You'd think they could get that out of there and put another house or 2 in there, it looks bad. This would be a financial thing for us also, we all worked very hard out there on our farm and we went to court and we almost lost our shirt which was not fair. So I think that it is time that we realize something from our place, because it was all taken from us. Excuse me, it is very emotional for me, because it was our home a long time and everything is just gone. So if these people want to live out there they can live there, but I think that it would help the tax base in Meridian it would do a lot of the community. The hospital is going up out there, it is going to be a beautiful facility and I think this would be very advantageous to the City of Meridian. It might not happen tomorrow or a month from now but I think it is a thing that is going to come. Personally I hate to go out there to the mail where it is, it is such a crazy mixed up bunch of traffic and this would be just straight off the road right into this property. They have plans for a beautiful thing and I think we might have a plan for something for my family as a tribute to them since they have lived there since 1919. My dad worked hard out there, and my brother farmed and my sister. A lot of back breaking work has gone into that place and I think it is fair that we have the right to realize something from it whenever that comes. That is what I hope and pray for, thank you. Johnson: Thank you for your testimony, is there anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission at this time? Kenneth Higgs, 3330 East Overland, was sworn by the City Attorney. Higgs: I speak in favor in support of the 1-84 Power Center. I am retired and I live in the Meridian School District. I believe that taxes raised by this power center will help the City of Meridian and keep retired people taxes from increasing for school bonds all the time. Thank you. Johnson: Is there anyone else? Bob Mitchell, 4642 North Zimri Place, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Mitchell: I am also a privileged individual who doesn't live in either Boise or Meridian. My kids attend Meridian schools and I am very anxious to see new things come in that can broaden the tax base. I have an interesting perspective on this, I had the privilege of serving as a general manager of Boise Town Square for seven years. I was able to see some of the things that the developers of the mail did to soften the impact to neighboring homeowners. As you remember there were 7 or 8 homes literally 30 or 40 feet from the mail boundaries and by the creative use of landscaping, evergreen trees and I think meticulous care that some of those areas actually saw an improvement. In that seven year period we never got a single complaint from any homeowner for noise in the parking lot, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 26 late night hours or anything. So I would certainly hope that the Commission would take that into consideration that some of the great things that were done there. I am familiar with the developer a little bit, I have seen one of the projects they have done and I think it would be a great addition to the City of Meridian. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, did I see another hand? Randy Schindel, 1005 Roiling Hills Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Schindel: My biggest concern is, I moved to Idaho 8 years ago, almost nine. I grew up in the town of San Dimas, California that was basically the size of Meridian is now. Now there are over a million people in that town. I moved here for the quality of life, when I moved here there were more people moving out than moving in. I just hope that the City Planners can see to keep this growth to whatever it needs to be. Keep it to where we have a nice place to live without the crime and everything else that goes along with it. That is basically all I have to say. Johnson: Okay, thank you. (End of Tape) Kimberly Keller, 1545 Jade, was sworn by the City Attorney. Keller: I did not plan to speak, I signed the presentation that Mr. Rogers gave. I served for 2 years as Mr. Mitchell's secretary and I am very concerned about the crime issue that comes to a facility of this size. As a secretary you take the buff of all of the people that come through that door. When their stereos have been ripped off, when women and children have been exposed to men exposing themselves in the parking lot or in the mall and the professional thieves, when the purses are taken, when purchased property is stolen on a daily basis. This happens every single day. I don't want that in my backyard. Bob Mitchell knows that one entrance will not do it, anybody that has been to Boise Town Square during Christmas shopping knows that 3 entrances, 4 entrances on 3 roads does not do it. One entrance won't do it Mr. Langly Associates so you had better go back to the drawing board. Johnson: Is there anyone else? Jim Ballantyne, 10250 Whispering Cliffs Drive, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Ballantyne: It seems like part of the credentials this evening is when your ancestors came in or when you came into the valley yourself. I can affirm that when my Great Grand dad Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 27 road in here before Boise was even formed in 1862 he didn't really want to see any of you folks here. He didn't want any roads built, he didn't want any fences stretched and time moves on. My great grand dad, my grand dad, my dad and myself have seen all of this happen. It certainly is a different valley than what we were raised in. I do feel for the people in the subdivision, but I feel .sorry for the people that truly see their lives impacted by development, but it is certainly coming, it is nothing we can do about it. I certainly hope the City of Meridian will make a wise decision as far as traffic patterns are concerned so it makes the least impact possible on the community. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, is there anyone left that would like to testify? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing unless there are some closing remarks by the developer? Keithly: The main thing I wanted to address was ACHD's comments. We have no objections to their request, and I don't know how you gentlemen wish to handle it for a continuation. We acknowledge we got our traffic study in late and we acknowledge it is a complex issue. We had worked with them and actually had scheduled to be in front of their technical committee on May 26th on the premise that it would be in front of their Commission on June 7th, so there would not be a problem getting it to you. So I was a bit surprised that all of that had slipped to June 14. Because the 26th date was predicated on getting it to the next Commission meeting. There was, relative to whether Overland is a 2 lane road and the statistics on that obviously Overland at this intersection will not work as a 2 lane road and we are prepared to upgrade it to a 5 lane road with turning lanes. I am sorry if my advice is incorrect relative to the 5 year plan on this, my advice came from Gary Funkhouser of Bell Walker who said it was a relatively recent occurrence that section had been moved to the 5 year plan and if that is incorrect I apologize for that. That was the information we had. Thank you. Johnson: Any further discussion by the Commission? Okay the public hearing is closed, what would you like to do Gentlemen? Rountree: We have some confusing dates here, if we table it to a date certain it would be our next regularly scheduled meeting and we still don't know if we will have comments from ACHD, Johnson: We have the option of doing that, however we can also table it additionally if there is no information with a date. We need to table it to a date certain. Rountree: Do we have the option to start the findings of fact conditioned upon receipt of the comments from ACRD? Johnson: That would be an option. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 28 Rountree: And table it if we don't get that at the next meeting? Crookston: I would like to have those comments well in advance of having to have the findings of fact prepared for this particular application. Rountree: Sounds like July would be the soonest. Johnson: Unless the 26th fits with the 7th instead of the 14th, there seems to be some mis-understanding there. The chances I think are great that the input from ACHD is material and that anything we did with respect to findings of fact would have to be either amended or re -written anyway. Time does not seem to be a super critical issue in terms of one week or one month. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting which is June 13, 1995, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea FIVE MINUTE BREAK ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PROJECT BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: Johnson: Because this has been noticed we need to handle this item as well even though it is connected with number 8. 1 would only be interested if someone has new testimony and not repetitive testimony for number 8 because those will be incorporated. At this time I will open ,the public hearing, Langley and Associates has advised me they have no further testimony at this time. Is there anyone that would like to address the Commission? Jim Rogers, 1115 Rolling Hills Drive, was swam by the City Attorney. Rogers: All I am asking is that this be tabled in the like with item #8. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, is there anyone else? Seeing no one then I will close this public hearing. We need to address #9 officially. GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: May 5, 1995 To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: I-84 CENTER - (Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) I-84 CENTER - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: ANNEXATION & ZONING 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. CONDITIONAL USE ♦ GENERAL COMMENTS: Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. POWMCM.r&z HUB OF TREASURE ,YALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk A Good Place to Live MAX YERRINGTON JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Work pt. P fl ZCOMM18310N JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chairman DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parke Supt. MI SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM M SHEARER KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief CHARLIE W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888433 a FAX (208) 8874813 Ep WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department QW) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: May 5, 1995 To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: I-84 CENTER - (Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) I-84 CENTER - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: ANNEXATION & ZONING 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. CONDITIONAL USE ♦ GENERAL COMMENTS: Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. POWMCM.r&z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 2 4. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414.D.4 and 11-2-414.D.5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91). 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414. D. 3. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 8. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist. 9. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 10. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 11. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. ♦ SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: 1. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated wastewater flows from the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the Sanitary Sewer serviceability of this proposal. 2. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the water serviceability of this proposal. 3. A 100'x 100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site. The Well site shall meet all of the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and City of Meridian. Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Rd. (approx. 4,700 LF west), and Eagle Rd. (approx. 3,000 LF north) to and through the proposed site, thereby creating a "loop". This "loop" is crucial to the water serviceability of this site. POWFRCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 3 4. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center. Applicant will be responsible to construct the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main and any necessary lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site. 5. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their current points. POWERCTR.P&Z BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION LANGLY ASSOCIATES, INC. ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE NE CORNER OF I-84 AND EAGLE ROAD SOUTH WEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,_ RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO MERIDIAN. IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on May 9, 1995, and June 13, 1995, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner appearing on May 9, 1995 and June 13, 1995, through Russell C. Keithly, the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT A. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing scheduled for May 9, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; the matter was tabled to June 13, 1995, and at the June 13, 1995, meeting additional comments were received and the Commission moved to have Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared for the July 11, 1995, meeting; at the July 11, 1995, meeting the matter was tabled again because the Ada County Highway District Commissioners would FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 1 not be acting on the matter until the end of August, 1995; the ACED comments were finally received on August 24, 1995, and the matter having been duly considered at the May 9, 1995 and June 13, 1995, hearings and the public having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and copies of all notices being available to newspaper, radio and television stations, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby takes action on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. B. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 73.5 acres in size. C. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County as R -T (Rural Transition); that the Application requests that the property be zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) and has requested a conditional use permit to allow retailers; that the Applicant has stated in its Application that it is proposed that a retail center of approximately 700,000 square feet be developed on this site; that the type of center proposed is called a "Power Center"; that Attachment 4 to the Application is a generic description of a Power Center; the Applicant listed the categories of tenants anticipated to be located in the center in Attachment 5; the Application is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. D. Adjacent. to this development is the I-84 Interstate freeway and major arterials of Eagle and Overland Roads; that to the north, across the freeway, is the proposed St. Luke's Medical FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 2 campus; that to the east and abutting the subject property are large lot single family residences; to the south is lana usect agriculturally; and to the west is land used for an interstate on and off ramp. E. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. F. That Langly Associates, Inc., is the Applicant; that the owners have consented to the application and have requested this annexation, zoning and conditional use and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. G. That the owners are the Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust, Virginia Jennison, Trustee, Rackham L.L.C., a limited liability company, and Dolores M. Hartman, who have granted permission for the annexation and zoning request. H. That the Applicant's annexation and zoning application stated that the present use of the land is agricultural; there is one single family home on the west side of the property, the Rackham residence. An approximately 400 lineal feet entry road is proposed to cross the eastern most portion of an acreage that has one single family home, the Delores -Hartman residence. I. That the proposed use is for a commercial retail center, called POWER CENTER; that the Applicant lists the following as a characteristic that make it desirable to be zoned C -G: "The property is located at one of the most prominent intersections in the area." I-84 at Eagle Road, and Eagle Road/Highway 55. J. That Russell Keithly, the Applicant's representative, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 3 testified that Overland Road would be five lanes at their property; that there would be separate buildings for deliveries; that the larger tenants would be in the eastern portion of the project; that there would be an architectural committee and guidelines; that the Meridian codes would be exceeded; that there would be a two to four foot berm with a four to six foot fence; that there would be as much buffering as they could put in; that there would be a wall so that there would be no view of Interstate 84; that the entry road would be 400 feet long with a three to four foot berm plus a rock wall; that the wall along Interstate 84 would be at least six feet high; the highest building would be 30 feet, except for parapet walls; he showed pictures of the concept of the buildings; there would be metal siding, an agrarian theme, roofs and masonry would have varied colors; that this was a mixed/planned use development area which had a priority for development in the comprehensive plan; that traffic projections were submitted to the Ada County Highway District; that traffic would be from a four mile radius, but they will pull from a large trade area; that Overland would be five lanes, but not to meet their schedule; their intersection would be signalized; that there would be no access to the site from Eagle Road; that they would put in what the Meridian Fire Department wanted and would pave if required; that they had no concerns'with the Meridian staff comments; that construction would be started by spring; that there would be stores by Christmas of 1996; that they have no tenants now but they would be lined out before construction commenced; that it was likely that there would FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 4 be no firm commitments and no names would be released until annexation and zoning were completed and commitments signed. He specifically stated, in part, that most of their property is designated mixed planned use development area, that there is a great variety that is allowed and we believe what we are doing is probably the least impactful and economically most beneficial to the community. K. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified at the May 9, 1995, hearing about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: 1. Robert Cox testified that he was a fifteen year resident; that he lived in Jewell Subdivision; that there was insufficient infrastructure in Ada county; that Five Mile Creek cuts the property; that emergency service was inadequate; traffic was too high; that sidewalks should be required; that reduced speed limits were needed; power lines were inadequate; sewage could be a problem; private well and septic systems should be protected; that the lands drains to Jewell Subdivision; that lighting is a problem; that police and fire were insufficient to handle the development; that the costs for infrastructure would be prohibitive; that he had negative connotation of the property; that the southwest or southeast quarters of Overland and Eagle would be a much better location; that this parcel should be City park instead. 2. Jim Rogers testified that he represented about 40 residents on the Rolling Hill/Jade/Onyx/Topaz area; that a petition and written statement were presented to the Commission; that the neighbors who signed the petition are united in their opposition to Langly Associates, an out of state developer; that the negative aspects of this kind of development is vandalism, gangs, mall rats, bomb threats; that this will certainly place an additional workload on the Meridian City Police as well as other emergency response groups; that the objective stated in the Comprehensive Plan of the preservation of the Meridian Old Town Business FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 5 District will be only devastating to this existing infrastructure; that the massive impact of traffic, light, noise and air pollution; that the suggested buffer is not of significant distance and the residents believe there to be a better place where this development can be located. 3. Karen Gallagher, of the Ada County Highway District, testified that the District had just received the traffic study from the Applicant on May 5, 1995 and requested the Commission to table it until the Commission's next regularly scheduled meeting, June 13, 1995. At the June 13, 1995, hearing, Ms. Gallagher stated that the District had not acted on this application, that it was tabled in order to accommodate people from the public who would like to speak but she did have staff recommendation update. 4. David Lewis testified that he is in support of the I-84 Power Center; that the Center will produce commerce f or the City of Meridian and of f eyed his written testimony to be included in the record, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 5. Katherine Mooney testified that she represented Mr. Griffen, owner of the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Overland Road, consisting of 80 acres, and offered Mr. Griffen's written support of this development,which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 6. That Pam Haynes testified that this development borders her property which was purchased 11 years ago and believes this annexation will have a definite impact on her and the developer is only out for a profit. 7. Cameron McGough testified that the section of Overland Road between Locust Grove and Cloverdale, those two (2) miles, are not in the 5 year plan; that the draft of the Ada County Highway District's transportation study needs to be thoroughly looked at and at this time accesses are inadequate and obvious spin off will occur. 8. Virginia Jennison, trustee of Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust, owner of the North 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 16, testified as to the history surrounding the land/farm her parents had started FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 6 on in 1919 and that she is in support of this development and believes it will help the tax base in Meridian and do a lot for the community. 9. Kenneth Higgs testified to being in favor of the Center; that the taxes raised by this Power Center will help the City. 10. Bob Mitchell, former general manager of the Boise Town Square Mall testified in support of the proposed development; that this broadens the tax base; that he suggested that by the creative use of landscaping as in the Town Square Mall, that the impact to the residents in this area will not be as bad as they think. 11. Randy Schindel and Kimberly Keller testified regarding the crime issue that comes to a facility of this size; that although they are in favor of seeing growth, with growth comes crime; that Ms. Keller testified that one entrance won't handle the traffic. 12. Jim Ballantyne testified that development is certainly coming and sympathizes with those residents who see their lives impacted by this development; that a wise decision needs to be made regarding the traffic patterns and the least impact possible on the community. 13. Richard and Barbara Lavender, land owners at Overland and Eagle Road, Fred and Molly Nakaji, residents of Wilton, California, and Christopher Kepus, a resident of Elk Grove, California, but a former resident of Boise and a current land owner in Meridian, submitted written testimony in favor of this project, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. L. That the Meridian Police Department, Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and the Idaho State Transportation Department submitted comments; that those comments are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 7 M. That the comments of the Ada County Highway District, have been incorporated herein as if set forth in full, but the Facts and Findings included the following: 1. From the Facts and Findings, general Information, it is stated in paragraph d. that the site's exposure to the interstate highway makes it highly desireable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of .connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or More) arterials instead of one. In paragraph G. it is state that this project is forecast to cause 13,145 trips per day on Overland Road east from the Eagle Road intersection and 13,217 trips per day west of Eagle Road. Although the traffic volumes are within maximum desirable thresholds on the roadways, the inordinate number of turning movements at the site driveway and the Overland/Eagle intersection require special intersection design 2. The report stated several alternative actions, which included alternative G. and I. Alternative G. was to accept the project with the regular impact revenue that will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. this action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish the four square mile area a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development projects in the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. And alternative I. was to require the developers of all property in the impact area (and District wide) to replace a pro -rata share of the them available unused capacity of all intersections and roadways. The unused capacity would• be quantified including a reserve for background District wide traffic and adjusted downward as each property in the effected area is developed, so there would be no unused capacity in the system when the area is 100 percent developed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 8 3. The ACHD staff recommended that a combination of G. and I. be adopted for this and future applications in the area. Accept the development (s),, requiring the developers to make whatever improvements to the system are necessary to mitigate their site related impacts, and replace any unused capacity in the system that their development uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to make needed capacity improvements as funds are available and the commission budgets funds for the improvements. This will result in the public having to cope with deficient levels of service in some cases until revenue is available to make the required improvements. 4. The report included Site Specific Requirements that included the following: a. The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanes and two northbound traffic lanes. The existing (southbound) lanes shall include two left turn lanes, and one right turn lane. b. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road. the owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way. C. None of the above roadway improvements described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or reimbursement. N. The Assistant City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, commented that an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site be submitted and shall include all portions of the adjacent Public Rights -of Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits; that one half (1/2) of all other adjacent right-of-way shall be included in the perimeter legal description; that any existing irrigation or drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance; that any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems shall be removed from their domestic service except for purposes such as landscape irrigation, per City Ordinance; that off-street parking shall be provided and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements per City Ordinance; that paving and striping, lighting, and signage shall be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 9 in accordance with City Ordinances; that a drainage plan designed by a licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas; determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist; that water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by computer model; that a 100' x 100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site and shall meet all the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and the City of Meridian; that the Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Road and Eagle Road to and through the proposed site creating a "loop" crucial to the water serviceability of this site; that sewer service will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center and that Applicant will be responsible to construct any lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site and that assessment fees for water and sewer service shall be determined during the building plan review process; that "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the installation. 0. ' That the Idaho Transportation Department commented that the developer be aware that no access will be permitted to I-84 or Eagle Road, both of which are full control access. P. That the property included in the annexation and zoning FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 10 application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. Q. That the parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. R. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer, if applicant extends the lines. S. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots and other uses. T. That the following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are specifically applicable to this Application: 1. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17 Retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided. Various commercial activity centers are designated on the generalized land use map. Planning policies pertaining to commercial activity centers are presented in the land use chapter of the plan. MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17 Mined use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as specialty retail/commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 11 and public and semi-public uses. Certain areas have been designated for mixed -planned uses. The development of mixed and planned compatible land uses should be carefully guided through specific project plans, in accordance with the mixed-use policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the Plan. Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 18 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into now or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. (Emphasis added.) 2. Under LAND USE EXISTING CONDITioNS, Page 21 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. Area of Impact, Page 22 Comprehensive Plan Man Tho proposed future land use delineations for the impact area are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map - Generalized Land Uses, . . . The land use element is based upon these objectives: 1. Mixed -planned uses along the I-84 corridor, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 12 which are attractive and compatible with high- volume traffic corridors. (Emphasis added.) COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25 In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: I. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands 8. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. Internal Circulation Design 13. Drainage COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to locate at arterial intersections and near high -traffic intensity areas. (Emphasis added.) Page 27 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. 5.10 Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLy PAGE - 13 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of development should be harmonized with previously -developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential areas, including noise and traffic reduction. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along. arterials and collector streets will be required. 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. 5.15U The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/ Eagle Road/I-84 interchange is a priority development area. (Emphasis added.) Rural Areas, page 29 Land covered by this policy section has characteristics which generally allow for agricultural and rural residential activity due to the ' existence of irrigation systems, soil characteristics and relative freedom from conflicting urban land uses. Where community growth creates pressure for new development, it must be recognized that agricultural land can no longer economically continue to be identified or used as agricultural land to the exclusion of orderly city growth and development." 3. Under TRANSPORTATioN, Page 43 Existing Conditions a. Eagle Road, North of Overland, is listed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 14 as a principal arterial b. Overland Road, East of Linder, is listed as a Minor arterial. 4. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 70 Community Identification Goal Statement Create visual quality and functional identity for the City of Meridian and its surrounding environment. Policies 1.1 All commercial and industrial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning. 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement 2.1U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. 2.5.0 Encourage the use of attractive open space, landscaping, lighting, and street furniture for the benefit of the public. Entryway Corridors Entryway corridors are arterial roadways entering the community that introduce both visitors and residents to Meridian. City -designated gateway arterials include the following streets: a. I-84 (East and West entrances) f. Eagle Road (North and South entrances) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 15 g. Overland Road (East and West entrances) Entryway corridors are a community's front door. It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site character provide the first, and oftentimes the most lasting, impression of the entire community. Therefore, the entire community and, most specifically its governing bodies, have the right and the responsibility to guide the development and redevelopment that occurs along entryway corridors. Entrance Corridors Goal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically -pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. Policies 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. Quality of Environment Goal Statement Policies 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. Neighborhood Identify Goal Policies, 6.4U Limit the conversion of predominantly residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through conditional use permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 16 U. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area and a commercial designation is just to the southwest of the parcel. V. That the requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C -G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: "(C -G) General Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose of the (C -G) District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development."; that although not requested by Applicant, Regional Shopping Center Business District is defined in 11-2-408 10. as follows: "(RSC) Regional Shopping Center Business District - The purpose of the (RSC) District is to provide for and permit the establishment of general and retail business uses that are intended to, and will serve, the entire region of the Treasure Valley; to permit business uses that would be of a larger scale than in the Community Business District; to permit the development of a regional shopping center or mall with adequate off-street parking facilities and associated site amenities to serve customers and employees; to prohibit strip commercial; and encourage the clustering of regional commercial enterprises. All such districts shall be located in close proximity to major highway or principal arterial streets. All such districts shall be connected to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 17 Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian." W. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that Shopping Centers, Community, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail.and Service Commercial (C -G) district; that Shopping Centers, Neighborhood, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district; that individual department stores, retail stores, restaurants, and storage facilities, indoors or outdoors, are allowed uses in the C -G district; that planned commercial developments, are an allowed use in the C -G district and are listed as a conditional use in the Regional Shopping Center district. X. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B. at page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows: "An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely residential, industrial, or commercial or a.mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space or type of residential, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or more created districts or this Ordinance." and a Planned General Development is defined as follows: "A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which the proposed use of interior and exterior spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 18 logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD classification applies to essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or industrial uses." and a Planned Commercial Development is defined as follows: "Any development in which the principal use of land is for commercial purposes." Y. That in 1992 the Idaho,State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population, and the housing for that population, does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 19 Providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students; that the industrial and commercial developments do provide taxes for providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation] services for people that are here, and which will come here. Z. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. AA. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide." AB. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 20 AC. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" AD. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi -improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." AE.' That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: "Bicycle and -pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 21 can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments." AF. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses." AG. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD, provided such exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section." AH. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: 1. Planned••Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this Ordinance. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 22 8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall post financial guarantees for all approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C." AI. As stated above in Paragraph C, the Applicant submitted materials on the conditional use application for location of buildings, parking and loading areas, service roads, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces, storm retention areas, utilities, signs and yards; that such material on the conditional use is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; that the Applicant submitted materials on the conditional use request but did not specifically address the conditional use at the public hearing. AJ. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS A. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. B. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 23 exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. C. That the City Council has judged these annexation, zoning and conditional use applications under Idaho Code, Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. D. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter -65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. E. That the Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. F. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. G. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant with the consent of the property owners, and is not upon the,initiation of the City of Meridian. H. That since the'annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 24 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). I. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. J. That this Application has been difficult for the Commission to decide because of opposition to the Applications; that the Commission understands the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis; that the duty of the Commission, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns; that the duty of the Commission is to assess the applications on the basis of the overall good of the City and its citizens; that the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinances of the City have measures to try and insure that adjacent property owners are impacted by development as little as possible; that it is with this duty and background that the Commission has undertaken to make these Findings and Conclusions. K. , That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the a Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 25 L. The Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to construct and operate a 700,000 square foot retail shopping center and has stated that the area is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area which requires planned use development; the Applicant has requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), which does not allow for a community shopping center but does allow for a commercial planned development; the Applicant has requested a conditional use for a retail project of 700,000 square feet. M. That the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, but has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan; thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the use. N. That the Comprehensive Plan calls for Mixed/Planned Use Development at the northeast corner of the intersection of Overland and Eagle Roads; that a shopping center could be allowed in the C -G district under a Planned Development procedure; that the Applicant suggested that it would develop the area of the property planned for a shopping center under a planned development procedure, when it applied for a conditional use permit. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 26 O. That it is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it C -G but the Applicant could still not construct a community shopping center, because under 11-2-409 a community shopping center is not an allowed use; but under C -G zoning, a Planned Commercial Development is a permitted use, which would allow the Applicant to develop a 700,000 square foot commercial center. P. That it is concluded that since the Applicant has suggested that it would develop the property as a planned commercial development and since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed -Use Area at Franklin, Overland/I-84, in 5.14U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permit processing, and the City should have control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it is therefore concluded that the development should be conditioned on being developed as a Commercial Planned Development, which is allowed in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district. Q. Therefore, it is concluded that since the Applicant has that it is agreeable to developing the property as a retail center under a commercial planned development process, the property should be annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), but only capable of being developed as a FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLy PAGE - 27 planned commercial development. R. That, as a condition of annexation and the zoning of C- G, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: 1. Inclusion into the development, including but not limited to, the requirements of 11-9-605 a. C, Pedestrian Walkways. b. G 1, Planting Strips. C. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. d. K, Lineal Open Space Corridors. e. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. f. M, Piping of Ditches and 11-9-606 a. Bicycle Pathways. b. Storm drainage. C. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways. d. Greenbelt. e. Pressurized Irrigation. 2. The concerns of the owners of property in Jewell Subdivision concerning sidewalks, drainages, lighting, noise, and buffering; that also of concern to the City is having lights, particularly automobile headlights, shine into the yards and homes in Jewell Subdivision and other adjacent homes and measures shall be undertaken prevent this. 3. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fees, adopted by the City, as agreed to by the Applicant in statements by its representative during the public hearing. 4. Addressing access linkage, screening, and buffering. 5. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 28 difficult to enter into prior to the annexation ordinance being passed; that it is concluded that the development agreement shall be entered into prior the final plat being approved and prior to issuance of any building permits. T. That it is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian and should be enacted. U. That regarding the conditional use permit request for retailers, it is concluded that Russell Keithly, a representative of the Applicant, stated that Applicant desired to develop the retail center under a commercial planned development; that the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded that if the Applicant agreed to develop the all of the property as a commercial planned development and enter into a development agreement, the property would then be annexed and the Applicant could pursue the development; that it is concluded that under a conditional use and a development agreement, the same controls on the retailers could be had by the City as under a planned unit development for the developer. V. , That it is concluded that 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the City Council shall review applications for Conditional Use Permits; that upon a review of those FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 30 6. Appropriate berming and landscaping. 7. Submission and approval of any required plats. 8. Submission and approval of individual buildings, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans under the Planned Development guidelines. 9. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the existing residential development. 10. Establishing a 35 foot landscaped setback as suggested under the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same. 11. Addressing the comments of the Planning Director. 12. The sewer and water requirements. 13. Agreeing that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is applicable to the land and any development. 14. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. 15. Meeting the representations made as part of the application and hearing process. 16. And any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing as required under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. S. That Section 11-2-417 D of_the Meridian Zoning Ordinance states that a development agreement should be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed ttr by the owner of the parcel. That it has been the experience of the City that development agreements are FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 29 requirements and a review of the facts presented and the conditions of the area, the City Council concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, not constitute a conditional use as under the Meridian Zoning Ordinance planned commercial development is a permitted use in the C -G district, but since the Comprehensive Plan states that all development requests in the Mixed Use Areas on Franklin, Overland and I-84 will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility, the conditional use application is deemed to be appropriate, as is the granting of such conditional use. b. The use should be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, if the requirements in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are met, but the Comprehensive Plan requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. C. The use apparently would be designed and constructed, to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of the general vicinity as long as development is undertaken to meet the representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses as long as development is undertaken to meet the representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. e. The property will have sewer and water service available if the Applicant extends the lines. f-, The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 31 would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use will be required and the parking ordinance shall be met including the preparation of a parking plan and landscaping plan. i. The development..and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. W. It is concluded that the conditional use permit should be granted, but as a condition of the conditional use permit a development agreement should be entered into regarding the development of the retail uses and such is hereby made a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. X. That the requirements of the Meridian City Engineer's office, Meridian Fire Department, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. Y. That Applicant and the City should address the requirements and policies listed on Page 27 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan for the of mixed -planned use development and all proposed uses shall obtain conditional use permits. Z. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition.of--annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de -annexation. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 32 AA. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement. AB. That proper and adequate access to the property is a problem; that the Ada County Highway District has approved the development with only one road for ingress and egress; it is concluded that this one road will allow development, but at least one more access for ingress and egress would make the development more acceptable to the City and Applicant should take all measures to obtain additional access; it is concluded that this additional access should not be a condition of annexation, but that all efforts to obtain the access should be undertaken and performed. AC. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. AD. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), and the issuance of a conditional use permit would be in the best interest of the'City of Meridian. AE. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall either not be annexed and the conditional use FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 33 permit shall not be granted or the property shall be de -annexed and the conditional use permit revoked. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) DECISION VOTEDA��- VOTED I� J VOTED"" VOTED_Y""- VOTED The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application should be approved for annexation, zoning and issuance of a conditional use permit under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. There shall be no development or use, whatsoever, of the property set forth in the Application as being used for anything other than a Planned Commercial FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - LANGLY PAGE - 34 Development for retail, even if annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G), and such is approved by the City of Meridian prior to c MOTION: APPROVED;A/)(' t of construction. DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAN - LANGLY PAGE - 35 OFFICIALS .IAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY 0. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Pollee Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Bu"n8 Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT 0. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 3 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by:Max 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, CIC MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PR & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES D OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMA K APR 2 0 ;*: CITY 3 OF OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P 3 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEI A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJAN I JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER APR 18 191?5 (.I i ,I . Ui aiC;Y4t a� MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM S FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES i / OTHER: `r — / 0 YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: r I i !Z /= 1e !i luck r RECEIVED Ada Planning Associ.ati�*' 1 1995 CITY OF MERIDIA 413 W. Idaho, Suite 100 Boise. ID 83702 (208) 345-5274 Fax (208) 345-5279 -SPA Serving Governments in Ada County Since 1977 Date May 15, 1995 The following is APA's response to Application # Retail at Eagle/1-84 Traffic Analysis Zone 284 APA Planning Area. Meridian Description of Application: 700 000 ft.2 retail center on Southeast corner of Eagle and 1-84 Findings Road/Street. Classifications and Traffic LOS: Eagle Road is a princigal arterial with a capacity of 34,000 ADT and 1993 model traffic counts of 17,000 ADT. Overland is a sub -standard minor arterial with a capacity/ of 15,000 and 1993 model traffic counts of 13,000 east of Eagle Road. 184 has a capacity of 90,000 East of Eagle and 1993 model traffic counts of 60,000 ADT This development will generate between 21,000 - 41,000 ADT. Pathways ITD is constructing a Bike/Ped bridge over 1-84 on the Eagle overpass. Transit Planned Improvements ACHD has plans to improve Overland Road between Eagle and Locust Grove in 1997. Comments There is some concern over the issue of a single access into a development of this size At this point it is difficult to determine the impacts this development would have on the regional transportation system. APA has not had the oppo�rtunily to review the traffic study. We need to have a better understanding of the relationship of how this development fits into the city's comprehensive plan. Recommendation APA will defer recommendations until further analysis of the traffic study. Ada County Highway L)istrict, Ada County, Cities of Boise, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, and Meridian Boise Auditorium District, Boise independent School District, Meridian Joint School District, and Boise State University Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer Printe,.+ on Recycled Paper JAMES E. BRUCE, Presiaent SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTIAKE, Secretary ECE" V E AUG 2 8 1985 CITY of loom►., TO: Langly Associates. Inc.. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 FROM: Karen Gallagher. Coordinator. Development Services Divisi SUBJECT: MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 1-84 and Eagle Road Power Center August 24, 1995 Your application for the above referenced project was acted on by the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District on August 23, 1995. The attached staff report lists conditions of approval and street improvements which are required. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 345-7680. KG cc: Development Services Chron John Edney Chuck Rinaldi City of Meridian Baylis Brand Wagner/10801 Main Street/ Bellevue, WA 98004 ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680 ADA Cu UNTY HIGHWAY DISI DICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 - Eagle Rd n/o Overland Rd - I-84 Power Center - Meridian The applicant is requesting annexation to the City of Meridian, approval for a rezone from RT to C -G and a conditional use to construct a commercial project of approximately 700,000 -square feet. The 73.5 -acre site is located on the southeast side of I-84 and Eagle Road with a narrow portion of the site abutting Overland Road. This development is estimated to generate 24,885 additional vehicle trips per day. A traffic study has been submitted for this application. Ada Planning Association (APA) has also prepared a special transportation study for the four square mile area including this site. Both studies indicate that the Eagle/Overland/Franklin corridors will be seriously impacted by this and other anticipated development in the four square mile area and that the planned roadway system will not be adequate to support the proposed level of development. Roads impacted by this development: Eagle Road - Principal arterial with bike route designation - Traffic count 9,094 (1993 estimate by APA) Overland Road - Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown - Traffic count 5,290 in 1993 !g I FAIRVIEW 7300 P AVE. 2 121M a I = Ia 1 a 8000 72 600 } 4200 10600 800o ■ ■ O Q = W g$ � C ;��'W J7. � > W J O O > W EMERALD J ■ Od \�y C9 8 FRANKLIN 8 RD. � 8 FRANKLIN RD.. 8 a000 O F 1600 8 3300 g 4200 8 12000. 10600 8 ® 9800 8000 $ ■ 7. 46 0 49 M 0 OREGON TRML HWY. 1 J $ VERLAND 12000 RD. ■ 8000 800° 600 3300 40 10800 $ S ITE L. -NA ACHD Commission Date - August 23, 1995 7:00 P.M. a L ;I • iii} C, 71 aldo4q.10� c. rw : �st>; ' ► ... '!1` is CLULC EW �g i W IMMz W V SAWAV so.r gal gg 1 .`' ` A�� ►f fit .= . T.:, � Q t 1 Io i j ib Ilk Is IU av011 319V3 i •�L I ec Ln � o � cz£S9`2T S£T'6T IT0'TT W £00`01 Q � co r --r Q � o cz o• O � 58E`EZ Q M 0 C62'2 T cc �c IajEp.zanOID •• E62`z1 a N 09E'9 •. 06t`S 7 I& co OL9`ST Cli • �m ano.zf) ISTIDO aitZ4 ant, ; • LLi`L L9T`OT L- . f rz r tr O U's +-; m U co . P-4 • LE9`z �Lvl IRr. o Q� Q� M MCI ut>tpt.zaN I I �_z I ... a I � I � 1 atjNt ani3 OOZ`Zt 009'et 000`9£ OOV6T 006`9T 0 co .z 0 0 OOV6T 006`9T 0 .z 0 0 O � S-+ o OOV6T 006`9T 0 O 0 0 U U 4 O � J � O O O d' lajEp.zanoj�� oos`SZ 009`9T ''d 0 cz O OOZ`95 oorz'tz 000`£2 i Lf; uEtpliaw o �—Z cit . wa 283 .ar• SW ' Table 4 •- I 15 - ---•--- 653,400 163.35 1,139 283 SW TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION 15 653,400 FAZ Section Land Use j Acres SQF GFA Trip 261.36 10,630 I SW I 12 000 Generation 130.68 162 NE 1SF,R1, Ed eview i 79 3,441,2401 2,580.93,1 754 162 INE jSF,R8 SF,R1 251 1,089,000! 816.751 1,910 283 162 NE MF,R3 25 1,089,000 816.751716 283 SE 162 INE IFree Standino Retail 161 696,9601 174.24 7,086 Office 162 NE Office 10 435,600 108.90 3,721 4 162 NE Canal, etc. 1 5 217,800 NA NA 1-84 R -O -W 67 162 NW SF,R1, Montview Park. 30 1,306,800 980.10 287 27,878,400 162 NW SF,R3 20 871,200 653.40 573 162 NW St. Luke's Hosoital 40 1,742,4001 475.20 7,974 162 NW I Nursing Home, 300 bed 5 217,800 54.45 780 162 NW I Office 40 1,742,400 435.60 14,884 162 NW General Retail 21 914,60 228.69 9,301 162 NW Canal, etc. I 4 174,240 NA NA 162 SUBTOTAL 320113.939 . 9nn 7.3251 47,986 284 SW SF,R1 40 1,742,400 1,306.80 382 284 SW Park and Ride 2 87,120 82.76 1,726 284 SW Power Center 73 3,179,880 714.40 24,885 284 SW Flood Plain 45 1,960,200 NA NA 284 SE5F,R1 80 3,484,800 2,613.60 764 284 SE SF,R3 44 1,916,640 1,437.48 1,261 284 SE Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 284 SE panal,, 1-84 Hwy 21 914,760 NA INA 284 SUBTOTAL 320,13,939 200 6,318 35,667 283 NE SF,R1 135 5,880,600 4,410.45 1,289 283 NE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 NE Retail 10 435.600 108.90 4 429 283 NE Office 5 217,800 54.45 886 283 NW SF,R1 38 1,655,280 1,241.46 363 283 NW SF,R3 100 4,356,000 3,267.00 2,865 283 NW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 283 NW Flood Plain etc 12 522,720 NA NA AAA A... ...� ...A �Q '207 RAn saR_26 2.235 wa 283 .ar• SW ' vr,�.� Industrial Park •- I 15 - ---•--- 653,400 163.35 1,139 283 SW Golf/Recreation 15 653,400 653.40 125 283 SW Retail 24 1,045,440 261.36 10,630 283 SW Office 12 522,720 130.68 1,718 283 SW 1-84 R -O -W 16 696,960 NA NA 283 SE SF,R1 35 1,524,600 1,143.45 334 283 SE SF,R1 10 435,600 326.70 96 283 SE Retail 34 1,4811040 370.26 15,058 283 SE Office 10 435,600 108.90 1,497 283 SE Light Industrial 4 174,240 43.56 304 283 SE 1-84 R -O -W 67 2,918 520 NA NA 283 SUBTOTALI 640 27,878,400 15.2681 47,493 CI es i 286 1 NE I Retail i 1141 %""'v v' nae• 1110. I e. f- mO i vai 1 di7_490 1.078.111 9451 286 I NE Light Industrial 1 13 566,280 141.57 987 286 NW SF,R1 39 1.698-8401 1,274.13 372 2861NW SF,R3 97 4,225,320 31158.99 2,779 286 NW School Site 15 653,400 653.40 7,004 286 NW Retail 5 217,800 54.45 2,214 286 NW Canal, etc. 4 174,240 NA NA 286 SW SF,R3 145 6,316,200 4,737.15 4,154 286 ISW Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 286 ISW Canal, etc 5 217,800 NA NA 286 ISE SF,R3 1 117 5,096,520 3,822.39 3,352 286 1 SE Office 30 1,306,800 326.70 3,4341 286 ISE lRetail 10 4350,600 108.90 4,429 286 ISE Canal, etc. 3 -130,680 NA NA 286 1 SUBTOTAL 6401 27,878,400 '16.71161 84,589 285 NE SF,R1 69 3,005,640 2,254.23 659 285 NE SF,R2 65 2,831,400 2,123.55 1,242 285 NE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 NE Flood Plain, Canal 16 696.960 NA NA 285 INW SF R3 60 2 613 600 1 960.20 1,719 285 1 NW Retail 65 2,831,400 707.85 28,788 285 JNW Office 27 1,176,120 294.03 3,171 285 NW Flood Plain 8 348 480 NA NA 285 SW SF,R2 122 5,314,320 3,985.74 2,330 285 SW Retail 15 653,400 163.35 6,643 285 SW Office 15 653,400 163.35 2.033 285 SW Canal, etc. 8 348,480 NA NA 285 SE SF,R1 54 2 352,240 1 764.18 516 285 ISE SF,R1 93 4,051,080,0 38.31 888 285 SE Retail 10 435,600 108.90 4,429 285 SE Canal etc. 3 130.680 NA NA 2851SUBTOTALI 1 640 27,878,400 16,673 56,847 !GRAND TO AL 25NA 11,513,600 62,3001 272,576 Facts and Findings: General Information A. RT - Existing zoning C -G - Requested zoning 73.5 - Acres 714,000 - Square feet of proposed building 284 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Overland Road Minor arterial with no pathway designation shown Traffic count 5,290 in 1993 140 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 108 -feet required right-of-way (54 -feet from centerline) Overland Road is improved with 28 -feet of pavement without curb, gutter or sidewalk. The roadway is elevated about three feet above the surrounding property as is common in rural roads and will probably require lowering when reconstructed as an urban roadway. B. The consideration of this application has been deferred by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission until September 12, 1995. C. Access to the site from Interstate 84 and Eagle Road is prohibited by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Without acquiring additional property, the site can only be provided with one point of access that is proposed to be a private driveway connection to Overland Road. The proposed access road is approximately 1,200 feet east of the Eagle Road intersection. D. The site is currently under agricultural production. Two single family residences occupy a portion of the site. It is inevitable that this site will develop for some highly intensive land use. The site's exposure to the interstate highway makes it highly desirable for the type of land use being proposed, however the site's single point of connection to the arterial system causes severe problems of traffic dispersal. It would be much better if the project were to be located on a site that has direct access to two (or more) arterials instead of one. This report points out the problems that intensive development of this property (and others in the area) will cause the local transportation system in a rapidly developing rural area. E. An unimproved gravel roadway borders the western portion of the project site and Eagle Road that currently serves a single family residence and an unimproved parcel owned by ITD. This roadway is proposed to become secondary access to the site. The ITD owned parcel is planned to be developed into a park-and-ride lot. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 2 Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • Westbound Overland Road will need an additional right -turn lane at the site access road intersection. • The segment of Overland Road between Eagle Road and the site access road will require ultimate widening to seven traffic lanes; two eastbound through lanes, two eastbound left turn lanes, two westbound through lanes, and an added westbound right turn lane. • The southbound approach of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require ultimate widening to three left turn lanes with the prohibition of pedestrian crossings or the accommodation for pedestrians with an over crossing. • The south and west legs of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection will require widening to match the added lanes north and east of the Eagle Road/Overland Road intersection. • The east leg of the site access road/Overland Road intersection will require widening to match the added lanes west of the site access road/Overland Road intersection. B. ACID staff has analyzed the operation of the Overland/Eagle intersection and found that it currently operates at LOS B, with an average delay of about 10 seconds per vehicle, and uses about 15 percent of the intersection's capacity of critical volumes. (Critical volumes are the specific intersection volumes that conflict with each other, e.g., the southbound left turns conflict with the northbound through movements.) If this project is developed, and the recommended improvements have been constructed, the traffic will use 44 percent of the capacity of critical volumes of the intersection. Staff recommends that the developer be required to replace the 29 percent of capacity of critical volumes that the development will use over and above the capacity provided by the recommended improvements. This can be accomplished by adding a through lane to each of the four legs of the intersection. C. Based upon the submitted traffic study and District policy, staff recommends that the developer be required to make the following roadway improvements that are necessary to accommodate the site generated traffic in the short term, prior to the build out of the four square mile impact area. These improvements will replace the current unused capacity of critical volumes of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection: On-site • The access road will be constructed to include three southbound and two northbound lanes. • A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Off-site - Overland Road/Eagle Road • A continuous right turn lane on westbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Eagle Road north of the intersection. • A continuous through lane on eastbound Overland Road between the site access road and Eagle Road. This includes the transition on Overland Road east of the site driveway and. on Overland Road west of Eagle Road. • A second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. This includes the transition on Eagle Road south of Overland Road. • A separate right turn lane on westbound Overland Road for the site access road. • A separate through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. MCU-7-95/NM-2-95 Page 4 D. No stub streets are planned for the project. All internal roadways are private. One additional site access is possible in the future as adjacent residential land redevelops and should be preserved along the eastern portion of the project site. If the adjoining residential area redevelops, connecting access to the site is possible. ACRD recommends to the City of Meridian that no buildings be allowed to develop along the southern 100 feet of the eastern site boundary, so the potential additional access road will not be blocked. Sub -Regional Transportation Study A. This application was before the Commission on June 14, 1995. At that meeting, the Commission deferred action on the application and requested Ada Planning Association (APA) to conduct a sub - regional land use/transportation analysis of the four square miles surrounding this site. That analysis was completed by APA on August 1; 1995. The volumes of traffic forecast by the APA study to be generated within the four square mile area are shown in Table 4, immediately following the maps at the front of this report and its findings have been summarized by District staff as follows: • The analysis was requested by ACHD in response to the Power Center application, the St. Luke's project north of I-84, the Bews application (north of I-84, east of St. Luke's), and other anticipated developments in the Eagle Road corridor. The conceptual plans for the referenced properties indicate a much higher level of development than is assumed in the Long Range Transportation Plan. The purpose of the transportation analysis was to determine the transportation impacts of these plans and determine the amount of additional roadway improvements that may be needed to accommodate those impacts. • The conceptual planning area represents approximately four square miles (2,560 acres), including the entire area bounded by Locust Grove Road, Franklin Road, Cloverdale Road and Victory Road. Approximately 150 acres (6% of the total) are undevelopable, including the I-84 corridor, canals, and flood plains. • The 2015 forecast trip generation from the entire area is estimated at 272,500 daily vehicle trips. This is roughly equivalent to 27,000 single family homes or seven Boise Town Square Malls. The forecast trip generation was based on a land use scenario developed by E.J. Smith and Associates under contract to APA and reviewed by ACHD staff, City of Meridian staff and some officials, and APA staff. The analysis assumed that the entire area would be built out by 2015. Maps 5 and 6 show the traffic in the study area now and in 20 years assuming full build out of the study area. • This project will generate 9.1 percent of the total traffic in the study area by year 2015, but occupies only 3.1 percent of the land area and directs that traffic to the arterial system at only one location. • APA's modeling effort used the Bench to Valley Transportation Study network which included the Five Mile Road interchange. The roadway volume forecast in the Eagle Road corridor will increase over the estimated traffic volumes in this report if the Five Mile interchange is not constructed. The Five Mile interchange was included in the network assumption because this system improvement would be necessary to support the proposed high level of development and its resulting traffic. The Bench/Valley network used in the analysis is the proposed network developed as a result of the March 2, 1995 community -wide meeting, and it is essentially equivalent to several versions that are currently under consideration. With respect to this area of the County, it is most important to note the Five Mile interchange assumption. It is not feasible to consider such an intense sub regional development without a Five Mile interchange. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 5 Eagle Road and Franklin kudd are principal arterials and Overland Rudd is a minor arterial. ACHD Traffic Services staff ran computer analyses of the operation of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection analyzing its current operation, its operation with this project but no other development, and its operation with this project plus the full build out of the four square mile impact area. The results of that analysis indicate that the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection currently operates at LOS B or better, having less than 10 seconds of average delay per vehicle and currently uses approximately 15 percent of its capacity of critical volumes. Both the Franklin Road/Eagle Road and Overland Road/Eagle Road intersections fall below Level of Service D using any conventional intersection and arterial roadway design with the planned level of development.. Assuming build out of the four square mile impact area without this project, the intersection will require additional lanes but will operate at LOS D, with an average delay of 34.5 seconds per vehicle. Adding the forecast traffic from the Power Center and the improvements to the intersection proposed by the developer, the intersection will operate worse than the described range of LOS F, with an average delay of 62.8 seconds per vehicle. Extensive roadway widening and some form of grade separated interchanges would be required to attain an acceptable level of service (D or better) at the Eagle/Franklin and Eagle/Overland intersections. ACHD staff has sketched a possible configuration of an interchange for the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. It shows a grade separated intersection with the north -south traffic on Eagle passing unimpeded beneath a structure on which Overland Road traffic would pass over Eagle Road. Two separate intersections east and west of Eagle Road would split the northbound and southbound turning movements to Overland Road and the traffic on Overland Road trying to access Eagle Road. The southbound leg of this split intersection would operate at LOS F (average delay of more than 60 seconds per vehicle) because of the high number of left turns by southbound Eagle Road traffic turning east onto Overland Road to the Power Center. The northbound leg would operate at LOS C because the predominate turning movement would be right turns from the Power Center going back to I-84 on Eagle Road. Alternative interchange designs are possible. The costs of the grade separated intersection improvements ($5 million to $8 million per intersection) would be the predominant extra -ordinary cost of the high level of development being considered in the area if right-of-way for major roadway widening is obtained with development and mitigation requirements do not escalate between the time of the adjacent development and the construction of the ultimate roadway section. The APA analysis indicates that Eagle Road will have 57,000 trips per day along the one mile plus segment from south of Overland Road to north of Franklin Road, requiring widening to a minimum of eight lanes. Overland Road will have a maximum of 30,400 and 24,600 trips per day east of Eagle Road, and east of the site driveway, respectively, and would require widening to four lanes for most of its length with special treatment at the Eagle Road intersection in order to operate at an acceptable level of service. The special treatment will probably require a grade separated intersection as described above. Left turn lanes would be necessary at other intersections of existing and future local roads. Overland Road would bound right turn require six lanes from Eagle Road to the entrance to the Power Center (plus the west lane to Eagle Road), because of the,site related traffic. Overland Road west of Eagle Road will have 26,400 trips per day upon build out of the impact area, including the traffic from the Power Center. Franklin Road will have a maximum of 23,000 trips per day west of Eagle Road and 25,500 trips per day east of Eagle Road. Severe problems with left turns at the Eagle Road intersection (westbound to southbound) will also require some form of special intersection design similar to Overland Road described above. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 6 B. Prior to the receipt of this application, another traffic analysis was prepared for the District covering the area north of I-84 and east of Eagle Road in connection with the E. L. Bews annexation and conditional use application. Mr. Bews owns 80 acres of land east of the St. Luke's property. In contrast to the analysis conducted by APA, the St. Luke's/Bews, et at traffic analysis did not assume that a Five Mile interchange would be built, as the development of the projects north of I-84 seem to be likely regardless of the Bench -Valley outcome and results. Although that analysis did not include the Five Mile interchange, it used the previously assumed APA 2015 land use in the sub -regional area and the remainder of Ada County so the lower trip generation in the surrounding area somewhat counterbalanced the lack of a Five Mile interchange. Thus, the two studies yield similar and compatible results. The conclusions of the St. Luke's/Bews traffic analysis are, summarized below: The provision of an east -west connection across the St. Luke's property to the Bews property provides a significant improvement to the operation of the Franklin Road/Eagle Road intersection. However, the added traffic from the east -west connection across the St. Luke's property would seriously degrade the operation of the St Luke's driveway intersection with Eagle Road. The addition of this roadway would delay the need for an interchange at the Franklin/Eagle intersection, similar to that described above for the Overland/Eagle intersection. The proposed intensity of development in the area will require unanticipated and unfunded inordinate widening of the arterials in the area. Alternatively, in order to maintain currently accepted Levels of Service and the avoidance of these inordinate widening requirements using more conventional roadway designs, limitations of development intensity will be necessary. C. Both traffic analyses indicated that, under long term conditions, the existing transportation system is not adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the developments proposed and anticipated in this area. The proposed project, expected spinoff projects and other known projects north of Interstate 84 are all unanticipated in the Long Range Transportation Plan. D. The build -out of this project, the ensuing spin-off development in the immediate area, and the anticipated longer term development in the four square mile impact area will negatively impact the District's Five Year Work Program, if currently acceptable levels of service are to be maintained, and will create a need for transportation system improvements that are currently unanticipated and for which funding has not been identified. These findings must be established and adopted as a basis for the imposition of extraordinary impact fees. E. Based on the need for these unanticipated roadway improvements, it would follow that some form of extraordinary impact fee could be required to fund the offsite roadway improvements needed to make the system operate at the current level of service, or that the needed improveme4ts be constructed by the developers of the impacting projects. Eagle Road, which requires widening to eight lanes, is not eligible for the expenditure of extraordinary fees that might be imposed by the District. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 7 F. Facilities Financing Districts are used in other states to finance a combination of state, local and private roadway improvements. This would be extremely helpful in this (and other) cases, but cannot be done without special authorization by the Idaho Legislature. G. An ironic twist to this application/site allowed by the impact fee ordinance is the developer's option to prepare an individual assessment and potentially obtain a substantial reduction of the regular impact fee, because of the usage of the Interstate Highway and State Highway systems by some customers of this project to make part of the trip to this development. Although much of the volume of traffic to and from the site will use I-84 for most of the length of the trips getting to the vicinity of the Power Center, the turning movements that are necessary to get to the specific site are the cause of serious degradation of level of service and exhaustion of existing capacity of critical volumes at the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection. Alternative Actions: A. Adopt and impose an extraordinary impact fee for all development within the four square mile affected area. This may tend to drive the development to other locations, causing problems there. A disadvantage of extraordinary impact fees is that they are collected over a long period of time, when the improvement they are to pay for may be needed immediately. This would require additional accounting efforts, major commitments of staff time to administer contracts with developers providing the design and construction, and the provision of construction inspection and oversight. The extra -ordinary impact fee could be calculated by either of the following methods: i. Compute the total estimated cost of the off-site improvements that are required to maintain an acceptable LOS and divide by the total number of estimated trips in the four square mile impact area). The result would be applied to each land use as development was being approved as a fee for each forecast vehicle trip generated by the proposed use. A staff estimate indicates that the cost of needed improvements in the area is $27 million and the number of trips is 272,500, resulting in an extraordinary impact fee of $99.08 per trip. Relating this to actual land uses, a single family dwelling would have -an extraordinary impact fee of $990.80 in addition to the regular impact fee of $900 ($687 if smaller than 1500 square feet). A 30,000 square foot office building would have an extraordinary impact fee of $36,248 in addition to a regular impact fee of $102,060. A 3,000 square foot convenience store would have an extraordinary impact fee of $131,834 in addition to the regular impact fee of $27,729. This is the method used in the calculation of the regular impact fee and assigns the fee to the source of travel demand. ii. The cost of the off-site improvements could be divided by the number of developable acres of land in the impact area. The result would be assessed on each acre of land as it is developed. This would place an unfair share of the cost on residential development, $11,220 eliminate ci'e any land $2805 uses with low traffic generation rates. ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres / dwelling, at four dwellings per acre). MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 8 B. Require the construction by this developer now, of the off-site improvements that are needed to accommodate the traffic needs of the future development anticipated in the four square mile impact area that would impact Overland Road, since that is the only road to which the project would take access, then use regular or extra -ordinary impact fees over the long term of growth to reimburse the developer for his cost. The developer would be reimbursed for some or all of the construction costs, but may have to absorb the cost of carrying the expense until he is totally reimbursed. (Extra -ordinary impact fees would not be collected from the developer that constructed the improvements, but they would be computed for his development and subtracted from the total cost of the improvements to be reimbursed). This action would be in lieu of establishing an extraordinary impact fee for the area. A variation of this option would be to require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from regular impact fees collected within the impact area. This is allowed by the impact fee ordinance and is currently being used by the District to finance capacity improvements. Overland Road from Cloverdale to Meridian and Eagle Road from Overland to Victory are currently qualified by the Capital Improvements Plan for the use of impact fee revenue. Victory Road along the south boundary of the impact area is not currently eligible for the use of impact fee revenue to increase capacity because the CIP does not anticipate this level of development in this area. This would require less additional staff time and accounting than described in A. above. It would provide the needed improvements as development occurs and assess the costs of those improvements to the developments causing the need. C. Form a Local Improvement District (LID) to finance the construction of the off-site improvements and assess either extra -ordinary impact fees or the usual property tax liens to pay off the cost of the improvement. This would require the cooperation and cost of some landowners that may not have plans to develop their property and it would cost all owners the same per unit of land regardless of the ultimate use of their property. However it would provide all of the improvements needed to meet the anticipated impacts prior to all the development occurring. The cost to be financed would equal the cost of the extraordinary impact per acre under A.B. above ($27,000,000 / 2406 acres = $11,220 per acre). D. Accept the responsibility to meet the challenge created by the intensive development that is forecast in this area and fund whatever level of roadway improvements are affordable using the revenue currently available to the District and accept a deficient Level of Service until needed improvements can be funded and constructed. The regular impact fees from the fforecast development will be a substantial sum, but will be collected as the traffic is being generated will not provide sufficient time for project design, right-of-way acquisition and construction (usually a three year time frame). This could last several years, while the District was trying to build itself out of the shortfall. The developer of this proposed project has estimated the regular impact fee revenue to be generated by the level of development forecast by APA in the four square mile impact area to be $22 million at build out. Staff agrees with this amount, based on current published trip lengths and network adjustment factors. However, using new trip length and network MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 9 adjustment data provit...d by APA, ACHD staff calculated thu amount of regular impact fee to be $16,700,000, if the area develops according to the land use scenario developed by APA. ACHD staff estimated the cost of accommodating the traffic from the same level of development at $27 million, including: • two grade separated intersections for Eagle Road at Overland Road and Franklin Road, • widening Overland Road and Franklin Road to five lanes between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Victory Road to three lanes between Cloverdale Road and Locust Grove Road, • widening Eagle Road to five lanes from Overland Road to Victory Road. A variation of this option would be modified impact fee offset agreements with developers as they construct their projects, requiring improvements to the system that are relative to their project. The difference between these and regular impact fee offset agreements would be that reimbursement to the developer would be deferred until the revenue was available from other development within the impact area. Again, the developer would be required to absorb the interest on his money until he was reimbursed. That would be his contribution to the solution of the problem, in lieu of an extra -ordinary impact fee. No mechanism is available to reimburse the developer if the other proposed developments never occur. E. Pursue enabling legislation to allow "partnering" between the State (ITD), ACHD and private parties within an impact area to provide joint funding for the required improvements. Staff recommends that this legislation be pursued anyway, whether this development occurs or not. F. Recommend denial of the application on the basis that the development will exceed the ability of the Highway District to maintain current levels of service on the impacted roadways and intersections. This action ignores the likelihood that this property and the surrounding property will eventually be developed for some intensive form of land use, with or without the District's approval. G. Accept the project with the regular impact fee revenue that will be collected, recommending to the City of Meridian that the developer be required to construct the site related improvements to Overland Road and to the Overland/Eagle intersection, including the additional lane on each leg of the intersection. This action will replace the lost unused capacity at the intersection, but will make no provision for other growth in the area. An alternative to this option would be to establish the four square mile area as a separate impact fee benefit zone and commit all of the impact fee revenue from the new zone to construct arterial improvements only within the zone as development occurs along them. This action would alter the schedule of capacity improvement projects in the balance of the Meridian area, since it would take revenue that currently go to the construction of those projects. y H. Require developers of property abutting the four arterial roads in the four square mile impact area to install additional system improvements along those roadways and be reimbursed from extraordinary impact fees imposed on the properties in the interior of the sections. This would result in spreading the cost of the improvements among all the MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 10 properties in the impact area as they developed, and the needed improvements would be provided more quickly than the District could program, design and construct them if they were to be done as District sponsored projects. I. Require the developers of all property in the impact area (and District wide) to replace a pro -rata share of the then available unused capacity of all intersections and roadways. The unused capacity would be quantified includinga reserve for backgrod in the effected area is developedt, so there ct wide traffic and adjusted downward as each property would be no unused capacity in the system when the area is 100 percent developed. Recommended Alternative: Staff recommends that a combination of Alternatives G. and I. be adopted for this and future applications in the area. Accept the development(s), requiring the developers to make whatever improvements to the system are necessary to mitigate their site related impacts, Bpd replace any unused capacity in the system that their development uses up. Use regular impact fee revenue to make needed capacity improvements as funds are available and the Commission budgets funds for the improvements. This will result in the public having to cope with deficient levels of service in some cases until revenue is available to make the required improvements. Staff Recommendation: If the application is approved, the following requirements should be forwarded to Meridian as conditions for approval. Site Specific Requirements: Prior to the construction of Phase I of this project: 1. Comply with requirements of TTD for Interstate Highway 84 and Eagle Road frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements. 2. The main site access shall be provided through an acssanroadway o northbound traffic lanes.pThe The access road shall have three southbound traffic lanesturn lane. exiting (southbound) lanes shall include two left turnoad intersectioanes, and one n with Overland oady actuated traffic signal shall be installed at the site access with design and construction acceptable to the District. The access road and traffic signal improvements shall be constructed at the initial phase of site development. Easements shall be granted to ACHD for the maintenance of signal detectors that are located outside the public right-of-way. - -- 3. Dedicate 54 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland Road abutting the parcel (29 additional feet) and abutting the parcel between the site and Eagle Road. The owner 1145 will be compensated for this additional right-of-way. The additional right-of-way would not otherwise be required for several years without the development of this parcel, therefore it is a project related impact, not reimbursable under either the District's ordinance or the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page I1 -of -way at oth ers the 4. Dedicate a 25' x 25' triangle (or appropriate ��curve) ovements in the public right-of-way.Tf The Overland Road/site access road to keep the p owner will = be compensated for this additional right-of-way. 5. Maintain public access along the western border of the project to the planned park and ride lot. This access will also serve as secondary access to the project, the park and ride lot and for emergency vehicles. 6. Maintain a 100 -foot clear zone/non-build area along the eastern site border between the building fronts and the southeast corner of the site to allow for a future external site connection to abutting parcels. 7. Roadway improvements to Overland Road and Eagle Road may be constructed in two or three phases as the site is developed, as described below: ome f following owing roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the first phase of development, approximately 425,000 square feet (60% of the proposed development): • Construct the site access road with three southbound and two northbound traffic lanes. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Install a traffic signal at the intersection of the site access road with Overland Road. Coordinate the signal design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct a continuous westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road intersection. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct an added right turn lane on westbound Overland Road east of the site access road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Trafficr arvnd Road from the sices staff. Obtain ite's ddriv way to edicate 54- feet of right-of-way (27 -additional feet) along O the east terminus of the added right turn lane and required tapers. • Construct one left turn lane (eastbound) on Overland Road at the site access road. • Construct, or deposit the cost thereof, a median island in Overland Road for the access road into the Park and Ride lot. Thome following additional roadway improvements shall be constructed prior to the development of phase H, approximately 645,000 square total feet (90% of the proposed development): • Construct a second southbound left turn lane on Eagle Road at the Overland Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Eagle Road south of Overland Road needed to match the roadway widening north of Overland Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services staff. MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 12 The following lowing additional roadway improvements shall be constructed Prior to completion of the 714,000 square foot development (100% of the proposed development): • Construct a second westbound traffic lane on Overland Road between the site access road and the Eagle Road intersection. Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road east of the project site that is needed to match the roadway widening west of the project site. • Construct any additional roadway widening on Overland Road west of Eagle Road that is needed to match the roadway widening between them project site and Eagle Road. Coordinate the roadway design with District Traffic Services • Construct one additional through lane on each leg of the Overland Road/Eagle Road intersection to replace the current unused capacity. Coordinate the design with District Traffic Services staff. • Construct curb, gutter and seven foot wide sidewalk along Overland Road, from 500 -feet east of the site's driveway to the end of the intersectiontransition west of Eagle Road. Coordinate the design with District Traffic Serve staff. 8. Construct pedestrian ramps on the comer of Overland Road and the main site driveway in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 40-1335. 9. Locate proposed sign(s) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle of all street and driveway intersections. 11. None of the roadway improvements described above will be eligible for impact fee offset or reimbursement. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall �,tPn ar days of the be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. A permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utilityo r�i ti pavemeon within nt public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where PracticalP Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. 3. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACRD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public that h -ofuseay or There hall o neo otrn lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable) MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 13 El Locate driveway curb cu,- a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot p- perty lines when driveways- are rivewaysare not being shared with the adjacent property. 5. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 6. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 7. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by ACHD . 8. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. pate of Commission Approvale AUG 2 3 1995 -------------- MCU-7-95/MRZ-2-95 Page 14 CENTRAL REVIEW SHEET •• DISTRICT Environmental Health Division –� Return to: 1WHEALTH A 2 s� "S] E] Boise DEPARTMENT[:1Eagle - l t.4# .;'So, El Garden city Rezone # � �'"°'" '�''� �"�� ^� —T -TE�+1eridian Conditional Use # ❑ Kuna Preliminary / Final / Short Plat ❑ ACZ ANG-C�y massae• ��� �.rf ��zc 1�. ❑ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ❑ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ❑ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ❑ 4. We will require more data concerning 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 ❑ solid lava from original grade ❑ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ❑ 2 feet ❑ 4 feet ❑ 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for. ❑ central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage ❑ central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water ❑ 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ❑ central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines ❑ central water ❑ 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. M ❑ 12. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. We will require puns be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store k ❑ child care center /�D/e Date: Reviewed By: CDHD 10/91 rcb, rev. 11/93 CENTRAL i0 DISTRICT ''HEALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OffICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL 9 BOISE, ID. 83704*25 • (208) 375.5211 • FAX: 327-8500 To prevent and treat disease and disability, to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOIVIlVIENDATIONS We recommend that the first one half inch of stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality - The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: 1) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc.; Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada / Boise County OMCO WIC Boise - Meridan ft" Courity 018ce Elmore County omce valley County Office P.O. Box 1448 707 N. Armstrong Pl. 1606 Robert St. 520 E. 8th Street N. Mountain Home, ID. of Emrironmedd Health 190 s. 4th Sheet E. Mccol. 11)- 83638 Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Boise. ID. 83705 Ph. 334.3355 83647 Ph. 587.4407 Mountain Home, ID. Ph. 6347194 Enviro. Health: 321.7499 83647 Ph. 587.9225 Famtly Planning: 327.7400 324 Meridian Rd. immunizations: 327.7450 Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrition: 327.7460 Ph. 888525 0 WIC. 327-7488 To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 519/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of I-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P2 JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM NEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the annexation and zonin of -the property at the southeast corner of I-84 and Eagle Road. We will comment at the time of development. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS RONALD R. TOLSMA A Good Plasm to Live MAX YERRINGTON Wi •_IAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clark ROBERT D. CORRIE JANirE L GASS, City Treasurer WALT W. MORROW GARY 0. SMITH, P.E. City CITY OF -MERID I AN BRUCE D. STUART, Water WSorks Supt. P 8 Z COMMISSION JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chaimun DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Puke soot. SHARI S. STILES, P a Z Adm. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire ChiefCHARLIE W. L "BILL" GORDON. Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 8874813 ROUNTREE j'-- TIM NEPPER WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., AttorneyPublic Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 `.,.L•�J ' '' GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor �:!,.y.'.•^^ � ;fie.-�._ . TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELi'�`1'V-1'�PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 519/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of I-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P2 JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM NEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the annexation and zonin of -the property at the southeast corner of I-84 and Eagle Road. We will comment at the time of development. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P 3 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 88"33 a FAX (206) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hail, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Annexation and Zoning of 73.5 acres to C -G BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE corner of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER _ r��t�S? �c/�iT 5ne4irG.Ttl�F CITY PLANNER © JPA4EA-r CA-reE /A1 AZZA Ebas'T CIE E.a► Gu APR 2 7 192' TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DISTRICT 3 • P.O. BOX 8028 • BOISE, 10 • 83707-2028 • (208) 334-8300 May 1, 1994 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83647 Re: Langley and Associates application at Eagle Road and I-84 Dear Sirs, E; Wiz:-.,.,�I,,� EL ,�i.kr3Zlfi; EEL" MAY - 5 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAIN The Idaho Transportation Department has no objection to this annexation or zoning change. The developer needs to be aware that no access will be permitted to I-84 or Eagle Road both of which are full control of access. If you have any questions please, call Ed Pettinger or Larry Strough at 334-8339. Sincerely, Ja"' L) Gary W Moles, P.E. District Traffic Engineer GWM:LDS:Ids - An Equal Opportunity Employer - MY NAME IS DAVID LEWIS. I SUPPORT THE I-84 POWER CENTER. I LIVE AT 1494 TANAGER WAY, HvIMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO OVERLAND ROAD - APPROXIMATELY ONE AND A QUARTER MILE EAST OF THE PROPOSED I-84 POWER CENTER. MANY OF US WHO LIVE OUT THERE CALL THIS HUGE IN - BETWEEN SOUTHWEST AREA "A NO MAN'S LAND". ACCORDING TO SOME PLANNERS - WHO ARE SUPPOSE TO KNOW - WE'RE SOME 17,000 STRONG. BIG ENOUGH TO BE A CITY IN ITSELF. BUT, WE'RE NOT. WE CALL THIS AREA... "NO MAN'S LAND".... BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN BOISE, ("THANKFULLY") AND, YET, IT'S NOT IN MERIDIAN. AND LIKE SO MANY HERE TONIGHT - WHO MIGHT HAVE AN OPPOSING VIEWPOINT - NEITHER I NOR THEY CAN VOTE IN MERIDIAN'S POLITICS....... BUT REGARDLESS, THROUGH VARIOUS TAXING ENTITIES WE STILL HAVE PAID AND WILL CONTINUE TO PAY THE PRICE TO LIVE OUT THERE AND HOPE OUR VOICE IS HEARD ELSEWHERE. IT ..IS.. OF..OUR..CHOOSING... AS A SINGLE PERSON, AND WFnE LIVING IN THIS "NO MAN'S LAND" - AMONG ALL THE OTHER TAXES I PAY, FOR THE LAST 20 SOME ODD YEARS I'VE PAID MY SCHOOL TAXES TO THE MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND OVER THAT SAME 20 YEAR PERIOD, I'VE CONSISTENTLY VOTED FOR THE VARIOUS SCHOOL BONDS AND THEIR OVERRIDES I BELIEVE IN EDUCATING THE YOUNG. WHETHER THOSE YOUNG BELONG TO THOSE WHO HAVE LONG SINCE RESIDED HERE IN THE VALLEY THE NEW COMERS COMING IN OR YES, EVEN THOSE OTHER LESS -THAN - DISCRIMINATE PEOPLE WHO VIEW "PROCREATING" AS THEIR GOD-GIVEN RIGHT TO PRODUCE THEIR NUMEROUS OFFSPRING, BUT THEN CRY FOUL WHEN THE SUBJECT OF A "HEAD TAX' ARISES. A HEAD TAX FOR EDUCATING - THESE - THEIR YOUTH WHO CONTINUE TO ADD TO THE BURDEN OF THE ALREADY OVER - CROWED AND OVER -TAXED SCHOOL SYSTEM. MIND YOU - WHAT SOME DO WITH THEIR SPARE RELAXING MO vlE TS IS THEIR PERSONAL BUSINESS. BUT IF THOSE SAME INDIVIDUALS ARE GOING TO STAND UP TONIGHT TO VOICE THEIR COMPLAINTS AGAINST A TAX - PRODUCING ENTITY LIKE THE I-84 POWER CENTER'S WITH ITS In ANNUAL TAX CONTRIBUTION FUNNELED INTO THE COFFERS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 111 io =THEN THEIR PERSONAL/PRIVATE BUSINESS BECOMES MY TAXING CONCERNS. FOR THOSE ONES HERE TONIGHT NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORY OF THE EAGLE ROAD I-84 INTERCHANGE OR MERIDIAN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY BACKGROUND THIS APPROXIMATE $7,000,000.00 DOLLAR INTERCHANGE AND THE TAXING POTENTIAL IT REPRESENTS TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN VIA THE MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE, IS AN ANCIENT ADAGE, SO CREDITED TO A ROMAN PHILOSOPHER, WHO ONCE STATED,..."WIZEN CROSSROADS COME TOGETHER, HENQEFORTH SPRINGS CONUVIERCE..." THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE FALLS UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, AND THANKFULLY, NOT UNDER THE THUMB OF THE CITY OF BOISE WHO SO DESPERATELY YEARNED TO CONTROL AND OWN THIS "COMMERCE CROSSROADS". IN 1989, AFTER A LONG AND HARD-FOUGHT BATTLE WITH THE MAYOR OF BOISE ,OVER WHICH OF THE TWO CITIES - BOISE OR MERIDIAN - WOULD CONTROL THIS VITAL INTERCHANGE, THE IDAHO STATE TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEMBERS REACHED A SOUND COMMON SENSE DECISION BASED ON IRREFUTABLE LOGIC..... ...."THE SHORTEST DISTANCE BETWEEN TWO POINTS IS ALWAYS A STRAIGHT LINE... ."ALIAS, THE COUPLING OF INTERSTATE I-84 AND STATE HIGHWAY #55 AND THIS LOGIC AND THE PREVIOUS REFERENCED ROMAN ADAGE OF "CROSSROADS COMING TOGETHER" WAS RE- AFFIRMED BY - THEN - CHAIRMAN OF THE IDAHO STATE TRANSPORTATION BOARD, MR. CARL MOORE, WHEN HE STATED...." THE I-84 EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE WILL NOT ONLY BECOME THE "HUB OF THE BOISE VALLEY" BUT WILL BECOME THE MASSIVE TRANSPORTATION JUGULAR VEIN OF THE STATE OF IDAHO - THE ONLY CONNECTOR JOINING INTERSTATE EAST -WEST I-84 WITH STATE HIGHWAY #55 - WHICH IS THE ONLY DIRECT NORTH/SOUTH ROUTE THROUGH THE CENTER/CORE OF THE STATE OF IDAHO...." THUS, THE CITY OF MERIDIAN RECEIVED THE GOOSE WITH ITS 4OLDEN SOUGHT - AFTER/COMMERCE EGG..."TIE I-84 EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE". SUBSEQUENTLY, IN 1993 VIA THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, MERIDIAN NOTIFIED THE NEED TO UPDATED ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. . . THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE WAS SPECIFICALLY NOTED IN THAT DOCUMENT RESULTED IN THE MIXED/PLANNED USE THIS FINAL PLAN CLASSIFICATION IDENTIFIED AROUND THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE AREA. AS SUCH, THE AREA WAS CONSIDERED A HIGH PRIORITY AREA FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF MALL DEVELOPMENT, AND/OR FOR COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, SERVICE CENTERS, TECHNICAL, BUSINESSES, ETC. ALL OF WHICH, WOULD PROVIDE A STRONG TAX BASE TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN. TO THOSE OF YOU WHO PARTICIPATED IN MERIDIAN'S FIGHT FOR THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE OR THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESSES, OFFERED INPUT INTO MERIDIAN'S FINAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, I SAY, "GOODY, GOODY, GOODY FOR YOU........,, TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE TRANSPLANTS FROM SUCH PLACES AS NEW JERSEY OR CONNECTICUT OR CALIFORNIA OR SOME OTHER STATE WHO HAVE FINALLY ARRIVED AT YOUR UTOPIAN GARDEN SPOT AS A "JOHNNY COME-LATELY", OR THOSE WHO DID NOT BECOME OR DID NOT TAKE THE TIME TO BECOME INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING PROCESSES, YOU'RE CERTAINLY NOT IN A POSITION NOW TO HOLLER, "THE SKIES ARE FALLING, THE SKIES ARE FALLING, THE SKIES ARE FALLING..." (....AND I MIGHT ADD - A 5 ACRE RANCHERO WITH A DENUDED HORSE PASTURE IN THE SUMNffiRTRv E WHICH BECOMES A MUD BATH IN THE WINTER TIME ALONG A ROADSIDE IS CONSIDERED BY SOME TO BE A VISUAL BLIGHT, NOT A UTOPIAN SIGHT....) ALREADY THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE HAS ATTRACTED THE ST. LUKE'S WEST MEDICAL COMPLEX, WHICH OBVIOUSLY SELECTED THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE SITE, DUE TO PRESENT AND FUTURE DEMANDS/NEEDS FOR MEDICAL SERVICES IN THIS SOUTHWEST AREA. THIS MEDICAL BUILDING IS THE FIRST OF A SIX PHASE DEVELOPMENT. THIS FIRST PHASE, PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, CONSISTS OF A $14 MILLION /FOUR STORY, 100,000 SQUARE FOOT WEST MEDICAL COMPLEX PRESENTLY SCHEDULED FOR DOOR -OPENING CEREMONIES IN DECEMBER, 1995. UNDERSTANDABLY AND SO RECOGNIZED IN THE MERIDIAN'S COMP PLAN, THE EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE AREA IS BECOMIING THE CROSSROADS OF SERVICE AND COMMERCE. FOR COMMERCE LIKE THE ON-GOING ST.LUKE'S WEST MEDICAL COMPLEX FOR CONIlVIERCE LIKE THIS PROPOSED I-84 POWER CENTER, WHICH WOULD NEGATE THE NEED TO TRAVERSE THE MILES TOWARD DISTANCE SHOPPING. OR WOULD THOSE CRITICS PREFER TO HAVE A MASS SATURATION OF PEOPLE AND THEIR "LIT'T'LE PEOPLES" OCCUPYING THAT SAME INTERCHANGE CORNER, INSTEAD....?. GIVEN THE NATURE OF ITS STRATEGIC LOCATION ONTO INTERSTATE I-84 AND THE EASY ACCESS THROUGHOUT THE VALLEY, UNDER MULTIPLE/MLNED USE, THEORETICALLY THAT 73 ACRE SITE COULD BE ASSAULTED WITH A - MEDIUM DENSITY NUMBER - OF 20 UNITS TO THE ACRE OF THREE STORY TOWNHOUSES/CONDOME4R MS; WHICH, AF'T'ER ALLOWING FOR COMMON GROUND USAGE, (A REDUCTION OF SOME 20%), WOULD ALLOW SOME 1200 UNITS ON SITE. FIGURING APPROXIMATELY 3.2 TO THE FAMILY, WHO WOULD AVERAGE 2 AUTOMOBILES TO EACH UNIT - SOME 3800 PEOPLE COULD BE DAILY DRIVING SOME 2400 CARS INTO THAT INTERCHANGE CORNER. NOT A DIME FOR COMMERCE ,OR REVENUE GENERATING PURPOSES. JUST AN OVERLOAD ON THE ALREADY OVERLOADED, AN WHICH IS A TAXING THOUGHT TO"ALREADY TAXING SITUATION....! I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED 1-84 POWER CEN'T'ER LOCATEDHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE 1-84 EAGLE ROAD INTERCHANGE. I OFFER THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT FOR INCLUSION IN THE RECORD. THANK YOU. .� j �/\. STATEMENT AND PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED MALL DEVELOPMENT In Idaho's Centennial Year, 1993, the City of Meridian adopted an updated Comprehensive Plan and in early 1994 put into place a greatly revised Zoning and Development Ordinance. A common theme of both documents is the desire to manage growth and "Enhance Meridian's quality of life for all residents Although the neighbors who have signed this petition are not residents of Meridian, all reside within the Impact Area Boundary. Many have property abutting the development site, and most are within 1000 feet of the property boundary: Every homeowner represented by this petition, living on Rolling Hills Drive, Jade, Onyx, Topaz and Overland will be severely impacted by a Retail Mall development approaching the size of the existing Boise Town Square Mall; and the subsequent surrounding commercial development which will take place, because of the Mixed/Planned Use Development designation shown on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The combined square footage of the available commercial space in the vicinity of Overland & Eagle, shown on the Land Use Map could and very probably will produce a developed area equal in size to that which already exist in the Milwaukee/Franklin area. This is certainly not in keeping with the "managed growth" vision of Meridian. Neighbors who signed this petition are united in their opposition to Langly Associates, an out-of-state developer, application for annexation, zoning or granting of a conditional use permit for the property generally located on the SE corner of I-84 and Eagle Road Interchange. There are many reasons for opposition to this development. Some of those reasons will be discussed in this petition, ethers have been, or will be discussed during the meeting tonight. I have made an attempt to list issues that have been discussed in our neighborhood meeting last week. The numerical order of these issues do not indicate priority. 1. All of us, both long time residents (+10 years) and those who have recently moved here place a high value on the open aspect of the area. The ability to watch a beautiful Idaho Sunset, still be able to see stars, watch and listen to wildlife such as Canadian Geese, Pheasants or an occasional Fox. Some of us personally knew the lady, now deceased, who owned the subject property, and often took time from her irrigation work to chat about her farm and living in the area. She enjoyed the land as much as we enjoyed having her as a neighbor. The property is still being farmed. Today grain is growing, last year it was Sugar Beets, in other years Corn. If this development is approved, a quality of life which we cherish will be gone forever, as well as the elimination of a very productive piece of high quality farm land_ traffic congestion from a traditional roadway construction approach has been projected at just under $60 million dollars. These costs would be above and beyond the $80 million already programmed; and are the equivalent of 25% of the entire ACRD capital budget over the next 20 years. If Meridian approves a development of the same size which has the potential to turn into another Town Square Mall, from a traffic point of view several things can happen. a. The cost of improving Overland and Eagle over the next 5 to 10 years to accommodate this amount of traffic could result in a huge license and registration increase on every car owner in Ada County just to pay for the future combined cost of this proposed development and the Boise Town Square Mall. b. The cost of maintaining both Boise Town Square and the proposed Eagle Interchange infrastructure would result in a loss of dollars available to maintain the roads in the rest of the county. We have already seen many of county subdivision roads starting to deteriorate. Perhaps Meridian and Boise City residents should be required to pay a larger share of road maintenance and improvement cost. They, after all benefit the most from Sale Tax Revenues It is our understanding the Idaho State Highway Dept. has refused this proposed development access to Eagle Road. This means the entire traffic burden will be placed on Overland Road, with a single entrance approximately 1000 feet from the Overland -Eagle Intersection. Existing traffic counts in the vicinity of the Boise Town Square Mall indicates approximately 30 to 35 thousand vehicles daily use the area, which has 4 entry and exit locations on three major roads. In the May 1, 1995 draft report titled: I-84 Power Center Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Bell -Walker Engineers of Boise; in review process by ACHD, and not yet accepted for public use, a projected vehicle per day count of 24,885 will enter and exit onto Overland Road. This appears to be on the low side, as The National Average Trip Rates for Shopping Centers, which are based on Gross Leasable Area indicate that nationally, the smaller the shopping center, the higher the trip rate LZer 1000 square feet of Gross Leasable Area. Can you imagine approximately 25,000 to 30,000 vehicles daily using a single entrance into the proposed mall. In discussions with Ada County Highway Department, they show no work planned for the next 5 years on the section of road between Cloverdale and Eagle. We realize the developer has stated most traffic would use the existing I-84/Eagle Road Interchange, so there should be minimal impact on local roads. This is like saying when the Boise Town Square was developed in 1988 there would be no impact on Franklin or Milwaukee past the Mall. 2. Southwest Ada County has one of the lowest crime rates in the County. The developer, in his proposal has listed what he considers positive aspects of the development. Lets discuss some of the negative impacts. Boise Town Square Mall has experienced all of the following: a. Professional thieves who work the mall every day. b. Perverts c. Mall rats, including organized and unorganized gangs. d. Vandalism e. Bomb Threats f. Massive traffic congestion This will certainly place an additional workload on the Meridian City Police, as well as other emergency response groups. 3. One of the stated objectives in the Comprehensive Plan is the preservation of the "Meridian Old Town Business District". Not only should the Old Town area be preserved, but also the existing business entities already located in Meridian. As a point of interest; not many weeks ago on the TV show, 60 Minutes a story ran about communities who are now attempting to ZONE OUT stores such as WalMart which can come into a community and devastate the existing business infrastructure. If they decide the store is un -profitable, they close stop and leave. Is the community a better place because of this? 4. It appears if the developer achieves the stated goal of annexation and rezoning, he will attempt to sell off parcels to other developers, and perhaps, or perhaps not develop the remainder of the property himself. This will result in piecemeal development with loss of control by the City of Meridian to achieve a quality development. 5. Last, but the most important, is the massive impact of traffic, light, noise, and air pollution. Unfortunately, the only way to discuss the impact of traffic is through the use of statistics and numbers, which I know can be very boring. I"11 try to use comparisons of the thing we know the most about, the Boise Town Square Mall. The information I am using is from a report titled MALL AREA ACTION PLAN - PHASE I. Prepared by THE HOYT COMPANY for the ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION in August 1994. When the Boise Town Square Mall was constructed in 1988, the amount of spin-off retail and office development was originally projected at 1.1 million square feet. That has in realty become approximately 2 million square feet, with a future development potential for an additional 2.0 to 2.8 million square feet. I can't even visualize this much space. What this means from a traffic point of view is the Roadway standard Level of Service has declined from a LOS "C" to "D or E", about as bad as it can get. The costs of addressing this traffic congestion from a traditional roadway construction approach has been projected at just under $60 million dollars. These costs would be above and beyond the $80 million already programmed; and are the equivalent of 25% of the entire ACHD capital budget over the next 20 years. If Meridian approves a development of the same size which has the potential to turn into another Town Square Mall, from a traffic point of view several things can happen. a. The cost of improving Overland and Eagle over the next 5 to 10 years to accommodate this amount of traffic could result in a huge license and registration increase on every car owner in Ada County just to pay for the future combined cost of this proposed development and the Boise Town Square Mall. b. The cost of maintaining both Boise Town Square and the proposed Eagle Interchange infrastructure would result in a loss of dollars available to maintain the roads in the rest of the county. We have already seen many of county subdivision roads starting to deteriorate. Perhaps Meridian and Boise City residents should be required to pay a larger share of road maintenance and improvement cost. They, after all benefit the most from Sale Tax Revenues It is our understanding the Idaho State Highway Dept. has refused this proposed development access to Eagle Road. This means the entire traffic burden will be placed on Overland Road, with a single entrance approximately 1000 feet from the Overland-Eagle Intersection. Existing traffic counts in the vicinity of the Boise Town Square Mall indicates approximately 30 to 35 thousand vehicles daily use the area, which has 4 entry and exit locations on three major roads. In the May 1, 1995 draft report titled: I-84 Power Center Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Bell-Walker Engineers of Boise; in review process by ACRD, and not yet accepted for public use, a projected vehicle per day count of 24,885 will enter and exit onto Overland Road. This appears to be on the low side, as The National Average Trip Rates for Shopping Centers, which are based on Gross Leasable Area indicate that nationally, the smaller the shopping center, the higher the trip rate per 1000 square feet of Gross Leasable Area. Can you imagine approximately 25,000 to 30,000 vehicles daily using a single entrance into the proposed mall. In discussions with Ada County Highway Department, they show no work planned for the next 5 years on the section of road between Cloverdale and Eagle. We realize the developer has stated most traffic would use the existing I-84/Eagle Road Interchange, so there should be minimal impact on local roads. This is like saying when the Boise Town Square was developed in 1988 there would be no impact on Franklin or Milwaukee past the Mall. Southwest Ada County is developing at an unprecedented rate. Traffic generated by this and other development, both commercial and residential, will be using 5 -Mile, Overland, Cloverdale, Victory, and Eagle. In short every road in Southwest Ada County will bring traffic to the area. Overland and the surrounding roads are not designed for this traffic burden, nor do we believe it is realistic to spend Ada County Tax dollars for the sole purpose of accommodating developers. I "in almost finished here, but let me take a brief amount of time to discuss Noise, Light and Air Pollution which will be generated in a very small area. The proposed development is surrounded on two sides by single family homes, which were constructed sometime between approximately 1963 and 1975. According to the developer, homes adjoining the development are, almost without exception a significant distance from the subject property separated from the development by pastures. Let me state, even though some of us have small pastures, most of our homes are within 100 - 200 feet of the development parking lot or proposed structures. Some of the neighbors who live on the south side of the development have even less space separating their home from the developers property line. I guess we differ with the developer in what would be considered a significant distance. Hardly enough to provide a buffer. Nor, do many of us desire a wall constructed at the back of our property. We will have parking lights glaring in our back yards; at all hours of the night there will be trucks moving through the parking areas loading and unloading freight; during the winter, in the early hours of the morning we will hear snowplows scraping against asphalt and, because of the prevailing wind all of the auto exhaust and dust caused by traffic movement will blow right into our homes. Even now, when the wind is blowing out of the Northwest, traffic noise from I-84 is almost intolerable. Residents of this area are not anti -development. We believe there are better places where this development can be located. On Eagle Road, between Fairview and Franklin are several tracts of land for sale, with the infrastructure already in place. Meridian has been trying for years to get a Mall to locate at I-84 and Meridian Ave. Both areas are suitable, will have little impact on existing single family homes, and still bring the perceived benefits to the City of Meridian. Develop these areas first. The South side of I-84 is not the place for this type of development. Because we live within the Meridian Impact Area Boundary, the Ada County Commissioners 'lave indicated that by agreeing to the Impact Area Boundaries in 19:33, they no longer represent County residents in Planning or Zoning issues_ We are unable to vote or have a political voice in the selection of the Meridian City Council or Planning and Zoning Commission_ In essence, we have been dis- enfranchised from the political process_ Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission: You, after consideration of the developers proposal, input from other interested groups, and the neighbors viewpoint. have the responsibility of malting a recommendation to the Meridian City Council concerning this development_ We would urge, that while you are making this decision, please keep in mind; you have the additional responsibility of being THE ONLY POLITICAL REPRESENTATION that we and other county residents, living within the Impact Area Boundaries have_ Decisions you make will have a lifelong impact on the quality of life for everyone now living and who will eventually relocate into this area. Thank You. SIGNATURE GHEET Name �i /(-�Xaf=ts ' t 7. 941',Z -L C Address ///I- /Z/ANb H/%r V12. v12 //30 Rolli-5 Tel ophono 8.87_ /° S 3 888-7ZeZ �- ,7 3,1, iJ' (J � C �� ��► raj ���-� � 1'r. � � Y- % l � / 12.3 ` r 3 16. 17. M9 -•7,7Q7 �A (( /;�� 4- V Y -7 - VYi ©?S 7 r T- -1G FZ �g -i-� aJ SIGNATURE SHEET Name 4ddr-ess Tel eplhone ?s6- LSAT �)/k Y�, ilk) C% I� 10. 11. en, I Ifi45, '',r#ks SIGNATURE SHEET Name Address Tel ephone .- ��4 - qkck- Av, 2. G r yl �V' ti b� I ✓� V • AY V , ` ' �rv� � t V �Cd� VL U i � e- 3. �`yA-1 3 `f9 4. 8y�-Z� si 7- 6. 8. 9. q5 Top Z moi/ 11.0 PS 12. 7771Vfl 13. -� 14. 15. 16. 17. This is a summary of the issues pertaining to the proposed strip mall in Meridian at Eagle Road and Overland. The intention of this document Ali is to review the pros and cons for an objective presentaion to Ada County,�,L�' the proposed developers and the existing neighborhood residents. PROPERTY DEVELOPER ISSUES 1.Lo isticall the interstate accessibility is fairly good. When looking <<l� g Y at the intersection of Eagle and Overland it makes business sense. 2.Logistically the parcel of property proposed for development is in the worst possible area of the interchange due to the eastbound I-84 onramp. 3.The choice of property location seems questionable when several alternate sites exits at both southeast and southwest corners of Eagle and Overland. 4.This property seems much more appealing to the developers due to cost. 5.The proposed single entry/exit limited to Overland is not only poorly thought out but makes absolutely no sense. 6.The basic infrastructure necessary to support this type of development does not exist within the city of Meridian or Ada County. 7.The basic proximity to I-84 for supplying businesses makes good sense. 8.This property is cut in half by Five Mile creek. I believe this is a federal creek and the federal government may have sometihing to say. 9.The proposed strip mall layout was so badly designed it was unbelievable. It is painfully obvious that whoever did this layout did not understand the logistics of this property or the logistics of this area of the county CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT ISSUES 1.The level of improvements required to Overland to provide adequate safety for the residents of Ada county would be signifigant. Recently accidents on Overland between Eagle Rd and Cloverdale have gotten signifigantly worse. In the past two months there have -been two serious accidents. This past weekend there was an accident at Eagle and Overland. There was also an accident at Cloverdale and Overland. 2.The level of traffic increase would be substantial to the point that Overland would have to be widened to five lanes to accomodate the traffic between the intersections of Eagle Rd and Cloverdale. 3.Sidewalks would be an absolute necessity when Overland is widened between Eagle Rd and Cloverdale. The speed limit needs to be reduced on Overland as it is now. 4.The Meridian Sewer District does not extend into this area of the county. A mall of this size would surely require the addition of septic drainage connecting into the main sewers approximately now located one mile east of Overland past Locust Grove. S.The county, in general, must capatalize on the opportunity to get the sewers in when Overland is widened. The county must capatalize on the widening of the road between Eagle and Locust Grove when the main sewer line is connected. 6.Current power lines supplying Overland are barely adequate to support the small requirements of the community and frequently loss of power is common. The increase on the electrical grid the proposed mall will require is not adequately supported by the current infrastructure. 7.Sewage and Drainage due to the extremely high water table in most of this area should be thouroughly understood with an environmental impact statement done to review the possibility of the following issues: A. Existing private septics and private wells must be protected from the possibility of loss due to septic flooding or wells with sand. Several wells in this area have gone bad and some septics have had problems due to the high water table. B. Adequate drainage in the form of storm drains for run off must be provided as to insure adjacent property owners from being flooded. The slope of the drainage from the proposed mall appears to slope directly into the Jewel Subdivision. C. Has the developer looked at the flood plain map for 100 and 500 yrs? My guess is you are going to be paying flood insurance premiums for many years to come. This may be very costly to everybody. D. All added Wells, Drains, and Septic systems must have adequate safeguards to eliminate the possibility of children drowning. E. The five mile federal drainage will be destroyed by the creation of this proposed development. Signifigant wildlife habitat will be lost or permanently altered forever. 8.The effect of the lighting coming from the parking lot will destroy the beautiful view of the stars at night and the Bogus Basin Mountains. This will be a permanent loss unless parking lot lights are turned off during evening hours as part of the mall grand scheme. 9.Police and Fire Department support in this area of the county is minimal At what cost to the county taxpayers does Ada County feel it should be spending to promote corporate profits? 1O.Costs in general for this kind of development seem prohibitive due to the basically inadequate infrastructure. Road development, increased traffic, major sewage overhaul, major power distribution changes, costs for increased police,. fire, disposal services not to mention the money it is going to cost just to complete all the studies needed to justify the development. 11.Where are the funds coming from to correct the problems that are going to be created in Jewel Subdivision and on Rolling Hills Drive when the wells go bad and septic systems fail due to the signifigant changes proposed? SUMMARY TO THE PROPOSED OWNER/BUILDER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. The idea of placing a major shopping center near the corner of Eagle and Overland seems to be basically a sound idea for a large business to naturally evolve in the Boise Valley. The actual piece of property that you have selected has so many negative connotations associated with it regarding impact to the surrounding community. it is my belief that you are buying a lemon. My suggestion is that if you really want to do this in a way that will cause far less grief and be looked upon as responsible you should re -consider the choice of property and entertain the Southeast or Southwest corners of Eagle Rd and Overland. This will allow for multiple entrances on Eagle and Overland keeping traffic problems to a minimum. Most likely the profitability for your corporation will be much greater due to the elimination of many of the costly challenges you will face otherwise. SUMMARY TO THE SELLERS OF THE ACREAGES IN QUESTION The fifty three acre parcel between the Jewel subdivision and I 84 is possibly the worst place to put this kind of development for many of the reasons given. It is my suggestion that the city of Meridian annex this property and it be turned into a city park. There are no city parks in this area of town and the location of this property seems so ideally located. To do so would regain and maintain the beautiful panoramic view of Bogus Basin Mountains for generations to come. The current single access to this piece of property is perfect for placing a parking lot on the west end leaving the remainder of the property to be used for Meridian residents in this area to enjoy. The mall developers could participate in this process and it might be to their benefit to have a major city park directly across from this type of retail outlet mall complex. It is my opinion that the cost to the citizens of the community versus the profit you might make could just as easily be attained if this was sold, traded or donated to the city of Meridian or Ada County. SUMMARY TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND ADA COUNTY The City of Meridian and Ada County have obligations to their citizens for balanced development. With the new Hospital being built north of I 84 this area is most certainly in need of a more comprehensive plan balancing the citizens needs along with business growth. They must go hand in hand If a development of this size must go into this area then lets be responsible to all parties involved. Common sense dictates this is the wrong location. Jim Johnson Chairman Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission City Hall 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 JUDITH K. HOLCOMBE JAMES A. MCCLURE OF COUNSEL DAVID E. MAGE LEGISLATIVE SPECIALIST TELEPHONE (206) 342.6671 FACSIMILE (208) 343-9492 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL (208) 388-1237 Re: Langly & Associates I-84 Annexation and Conditional Use Permit Application Our File: 2515-18 Dear Chairman Johnson: I represent James Griffin who is the owner of an 80 acre parcel located on the Southwest corner at the intersection of Eagle Road and Overland. After close review of this conditional use permit application and the accompanying traffic analysis, Mr. Griffin has asked me to express his strong support of this development. The applicants are clearly strong and qualified developers and at this stage of development planning have done a good job in preparing their proposal. As a land owner on the Southwest corner of this same Eagle Road intersection, this application will directly affect my 80 acre property. I would, therefore, like to ask the commission to address a few considerations during its review process. LAW OFFICES GARY G. ALLEN GIVENS PURSLEY & HUNTLEY JOSEPH H. BAIRD CHRISTOPHER J. BEESON MICHAEL C. CREAMER SUITE 200, PARK PLACE ROY L. EIGUREN 277 NO. 6TH STREET JEFFREY C. FEREDAY JULIE KLEIN FISCHER POST OFFICE BOX 2720 RAYMOND O. GIVENS BOISE, IDASO 83701 L. W. GRANT, III J. BART GREEN ROBERT C. HUNTLEY, JR. KARL T. KLEIN DAVID R. LOMBARDI KENNETH R. MCCLURE CHRISTOPHER H. MEYER L. EDWARD MILLER May 9, 1995 PATRICK J. MILLER JUDSON S. MONTGOMERY TERRY L. MYERS RAMONA S. NEAL STEVEN L.OLSEN W. HUGH O'RIORDAN KENNETH L. PURSLEY GREGORY J. VIET2 CONLEY WARD STEVEN R. WEEKS STEPHANIE C. WESTERMEIER Jim Johnson Chairman Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission City Hall 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 JUDITH K. HOLCOMBE JAMES A. MCCLURE OF COUNSEL DAVID E. MAGE LEGISLATIVE SPECIALIST TELEPHONE (206) 342.6671 FACSIMILE (208) 343-9492 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL (208) 388-1237 Re: Langly & Associates I-84 Annexation and Conditional Use Permit Application Our File: 2515-18 Dear Chairman Johnson: I represent James Griffin who is the owner of an 80 acre parcel located on the Southwest corner at the intersection of Eagle Road and Overland. After close review of this conditional use permit application and the accompanying traffic analysis, Mr. Griffin has asked me to express his strong support of this development. The applicants are clearly strong and qualified developers and at this stage of development planning have done a good job in preparing their proposal. As a land owner on the Southwest corner of this same Eagle Road intersection, this application will directly affect my 80 acre property. I would, therefore, like to ask the commission to address a few considerations during its review process. Jim Johnson May 9, 1995 Page 2 • An effective pedestrian system should be designed and implemented at this location to allow access between the St. Luke's project and other future commercial and residential development in the Eagle and Overland vicinity. • Provision should be made in the site design and access for this project for the ultimate anticipated width and configuration of Eagle Road to the south of I-84 and at the Eagle and Overland intersection. This should, of course, assume development in the area consistent with the uses and densities indicated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Again, Mr. Griffin believes that this project is well planned and will be a great asset to the City of Meridian. Sincerely David R. Lombardi DRL jao cc: James Griffin 2515MWERIDIAN101 12� -'5 il Z, -, R,ex / (ye a ,�1 ale'e'2 a-e'l r &6 z2ealz Als 6��Z_Lz z ou/nz-r �} �-L, o14d- Christopher J. Kepus 8633 Wilmot Court Elk Grove, California 95624 May 5, 1995 Shari L. Stiles Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83640 Dear Ms. Stiles: As a former resident of Boise and a current landowner in the Meridian area, I would like to comment on the announcement of the proposed Power Center mall that would be located at I-84 and Eagle Road. I strongly support such development for several important reasons: 1. The Meridian commercial tax base will need continuing growth to support future infrastructure improvements. This type of commercial development is precisely the type that is needed. 2. The location of the proposed mall is not only very suitable for the available land, it is right at the crossroads of the developing valley. Access for a significant portion of the valley would be very convenient. 3. The mall would be, if properly architected, a real plus for the Meridian area in terms of a beneficial development that would likely influence potential residents and businesses to locate in the area, further enhancing the ability of Meridian to grow within an balanced economic base. This development is sure to stir controversy but I urge the City Council to support this project. Jt is a perfect addition to the area. Sincerely yours, Chris Kepus RECEi VicAj MAY 0 9 1995 S"TIA Oi motiviAl G' r L�✓`"P iii 9�� �lYlctr.-- 1,7 RECEIVED MAY 0 9 1995 Fred and Molly Nakaji CITY 01- MthwlA; 12712 Lee School Road Wilton, Calif. 95693 Ms. Shari Stiles Meridian Planning Director 33 East Idaho St. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Meridian P&Z Dear Ms. Stiles: We are excited to hear of the proposed Power Center Mall at Eagle and Overland Roads. Being frequent visitors to the Meridian area, we believe the planned mall will provide a much needed retail outlet center for area residents, and it will also provide a boost for the area's economy. We wholeheartedly support locating the mall at the proposed site. Sincerely, MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 17, 1995 APPLICANT: LANGLEY & ASSOCIATES ITEM NUMBER; 17 REQUESTSEQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL PROJECT OF APPROXIMATELY 700.000 SQUARE FOOT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: P & Z*MINUTES FOR 5-9-95 CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 28 Rountree: And table it if we don't get that at the next meeting? Crookston: I would like to have those comments well in advance of having to have the findings of fact prepared for this particular application. Rountree: Sounds like July would be the soonest. Johnson: Unless the 26th fits with the 7th instead of the 14th, there seems to be some mis-understanding there. The chances I think are great that the input from ACHD is material and that anything we did with respect to findings of fact would have to be either amended or re -written anyway. Time does not seem to be a super critical issue in terms of one week or one month. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting which is June 13, 1995, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea FIVE MINUTE BREAK ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PROJECT BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: Johnson: Because this has been noticed we need to handle this item as well even though it is connected with number 8. 1 would only be interested if someone has new testimony and not repetitive testimony for number 8 because those will be incorporated. At this time I will open ,the public hearing, Langley and Associates has advised me they have no further testimony at this time. Is there anyone that would like to address the Commission? Jim Rogers, 1115 Rolling Hills Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Rogers: All I am asking is that this be tabled in the like with item #8. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, is there anyone else? Seeing no one then I will close this public hearing. We need to address #9 officially. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 9, 1995 Page 29 Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting June 13, 1995. Shearer: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting on June 13, 1995, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 20.67 ACRES TO C -G BY W.H. MOORE COMPANY: Johnson: I will now open that public hearing and invite the applicant to come forward and address the Commission. Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, 1111 South Orchard, Boise, was swom by the City Attorney. Bowcutt: This particular item before you this evening is an annexation of property just west of Kuna-Meridian Road and on the north side of Overland. It adjoins 1-84. On our west boundary is Mountain View Equipment, to the east of us is an undeveloped parcel currently zoned general commercial or C -G and within the City limits. And then adjoining that particular parcel to the east is the Sandman Motel and the JB's Restaurant. This parcel is within Ada County's jurisdiction right now but within your area of impact and contiguous to the City limits. The particular parcel as you can see from this map here is right here is currently zoned C-2. Under Ada County jurisdiction that is a highway commercial zone, it is comparable to your C -G, the fad is that it has a few uses that could be designated as more intensive than what your C -G allows. My client Mr. Moore is purchasing this C-2 parcel which we are annexing and rezoning this evening. He has also purchased this existing C -G piece that is approximately 18.5 acres. So basically our intent is we have a particular parcel of ground that is split between Meridian and Ada County's jurisdiction. They are both zoned commercial, all we want to do is annex this 20.67 acres so that it is consistent with this eastern portion. I have worked on these parcels for about the past 3 years, they were owned by Tower and Associates. They at one time owned the entire comer and they sold this for the Sandman Motel and just recently we came through with a convenient store application and a motel addition for this comer here. The parcel has existing sewer, the intersecter runs along its boundary, it comes across and bores 1-84 and runs parallel with the creek and comes out and goes south out to the Elk Run Subdivision and also goes in an easterly direction. City water is also available on Overland Road, it is right here at this point, it is approximately 13 feet to the west from the property OFFICIALS HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clark JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parke Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & 2 Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO M ERIDUN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) BU -4433 a FAX (208) 8874813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD MYa MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P A 2 COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER May 5, 1995 Re: I-84 CENTER - (Annexation & Zoning of 73.5 Acres to C -G) I-84 CENTER - (Conditional Use Permit for Approx. 700,000 SF Retail Project) by Langly Associates, Inc. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: ANNEXATION & ZONING 1. Submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site in lieu of the individual property descriptions. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent Public Rights -of -Way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No 659 and 660, 8/2/94). One half (1/2) of all other adjacent Rights -of - Way shall be included in the perimeter legal description. CONDITIONAL USE ♦ GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. 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. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. POWERCTR.P&z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 2 4. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414.D.4 and 11-2-414.D.5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91). 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 7. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 8. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist. ' -- 9. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 10. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 11. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. ♦ SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: 1. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated wastewater flows from the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the Sanitary Sewer serviceability of this proposal. 2. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. This information is very critical for determining the water serviceability of this proposal. 3. A 100'x100' well site shall be donated to the City of Meridian at the proposed site. The Well site shall meet all of the criteria of the State of Idaho Department of Water Resources and City of Meridian. Applicant will be required to construct 12 inch diameter water mains from the City's current points of terminus in Overland Rd. (approx. 4,700 LF west), and Eagle Rd. (approx. 3,000 LF north) to and through the proposed site, thereby creating a "loop". This "loop" is crucial to the water serviceability of this site. P0VnRCTR.P&Z Mayor and Council March 30, 1995 Page 3 4. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main currently under construction for the St. Luke's West Medical Center. Applicant will be responsible to construct the Five Mile Trunk Sewer main and any necessary lateral lines from the point of St. Luke's serviceability to and through the proposed site. 5. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their current points. POWERCTR.P&Z OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL' GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCILMEMBERS A Good P11we to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON CITY OF MERIDIAN ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 J M SHEA ERI Phone (208) 8884433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail {2roject BY: Langly Associates Inc LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES /� OTHER: _ YOUR CONCISE REMARK AI"`? 2 0 19 CITY OF MERIi3IA11 OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parke Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON. Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 8874813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER TRANSMITTAL 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail project BY: Langly Associates, Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comet- of I-84 and Fgale Road lnferchan�e _ JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: / J YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: i s PI.AnJ eA i LL IV.JLQ-M, 70,-- {�e„�,;-J-s APR 18 1995 Cl I I est IALI'a ul RECEWEE, lAda Planning Associati,6*1 I I'll CITY OF MERIDIAi 413 W. Idaho, Suite 100 Boise. ID 83702 (208) 345-5274 Fax (208) 345-5279 APAServing Governments in Ada County Since 1977 Date May 15, 1995 The following is APA's response to Application # Retail at Eagle/1-84 Traffic Analysis Zone 284 APA Planning Area Meridian Description of Application: 700,000 ft.' retail center on Southeast corner of Eagle and 1-84 Findings Road/Street Classifications and Traffic LOS: Eagle Road is a principal arterial with a capacity of 34,000 ADT and 1993 model traffic counts of 17,000 ADT. Overland is a sub -standard minor arterial with a capacity of 15,000 and 1993 model traffic counts of 13,000 east of Eagle Road 1-84 has a capacity of 90,000 East of Eagle and 1993 model traffic counts of Pathways ITD is constructing a Bike/Ped bridge over 1-84 on the Eagle overpass Transit Planned Improvements ACHD has plans to improve Overland Road between Eagle and Locust Grove in 1997. Comments There is some concern over the issue of a single access into a development of this size. At this point it is difficult to determine the impacts this development would have on the regional transportation system APA has not had the opportunity to review the traffic study. We need to have a better understanding of the relationship of flow this development fits into the city's comprehensive plan Recommendation APA will defer recommendations until further analysis of the traffic study. Ada County Highway District, Ada County, Cities of Boise, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, and Meridian Boise Auditorium District, Boise Independent School District, Meridian Joint School District, and Boise State University Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer Printed on Recycled Paper CENTRAL •• DISTRICT WHEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # REVIEW SHEET Environmental Health Division Return to: 2 i ❑ Boise ito❑Eagle ❑ Garden city Conditional Use # -70 I,e 7 -al L i ;iEsmeridian ❑ Kuna Preliminary / Final / Short Plat Z- 47U y 1471-9 •0-sJa C - ❑ ACz ❑ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ❑ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ❑ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ❑ 4. We will require more data concerning 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 ❑ solid lava from original grade 6. We can Approve this Proposal for. individual sewage disposattabeiocatedabnve solid lava layers: ❑ 2 feet ❑ 4 feet After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage 5Eg-central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines central water 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store pO 13. /,1 457 GoM�rl Er® /fit o lVIV'On nay 7%i E 7-; EC� Date: 26 / !S h-7— 7-9/s .s/ 70 Yoawet Reviewed By.'� WA,rL--z. i F Sw*WS q[%=-- NOT ds CD ryrz. 570A -Al .vwL- 77ZG-fr/"Wn/7-. .S'6E A--r7WCHF_-0 QC=GO/'1MEn��i977�n� . ® 114, -n+(S p ropea5� WA -1 By tSEPT<L n►NI� �rl�vi.✓�- co�tjo�rry ?ZEVic: W �3y 7ci C��t T [S 2ECaNM�n�Dt� , CDHD 10/91 rcb. rev. 11/93 jll CCENTRAL •f DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL • BOISE, ID. 83704.0825 • (208) 375-5211 • FAX: 3274,00 To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the first one half inch of stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: 1) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT _ _ _ 3�--CALIFORNIA- BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee. Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ado ( Boise County Office WIC Boise - Meridian 707 N. Arnuhong PI. 1606 Robed St. Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Boise. ID. 83705 Enviro. Health: 327.7499 Ph. 334-3355 Family Planning: 327-7400 324 Meridian Rd. Immun¢altons: 327-7450 Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrition: 327.7460 Ph. 888-525 WIC: 27.7488 enme County Office errors County Office 520 E. 8th Sheet N. of 6nmanmedd Health Mouddn Home, ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. 83647 Ph. 587.4401 Mountain Home, ID. 83647 Ph. 587-9225 Valley County Office P.O. Box 1448 McCo1.ID. 83638 Ptr. 634.1194 To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail project BY: Langly Associates, Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MOE ALIDJANI, PIZ COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION VWLLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk A Good Place to Live GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN BOB CORRIE, C/C ROBERT 0. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C P a 2 COMMISSION JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO FIRE DEPARTMENT JIM JOHNSON, Chairman STILES, MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 CITY ATTORNEY MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER KENNETT KENNETH H W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL"GORDON,Police Chief � Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 L % i n r1 CITY PLANNER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER WAYNE G. CROOKSTKSTON, JR., Attorney ^ Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 v ' Nampa &. Meridian Trrigatinn Distrier rpquirpc that a Land Use Change/Site GRANT P. KINGSFORD Development annlic-atinn hp filad for rPvipw prior to final platring_ Cnntanr Mwr Donna Mnnrp at l4l— I R84 or 466-7R61 fn r fttrthpr i n fnrmar i nn _ TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOP )ANT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 2. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/17/95 HEARING DATE: 5/9/95 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for approx. 700,000 square foot retail project BY: Langly Associates, Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SE comer of 1-84 and Eagle Road Interchange JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, PIZ MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: All laterals and waste ways POLICE DEPARTMENT must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must CITY ATTORNEY be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves CITY ENGINEER the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must CITY PLANNER review drainage plans. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. Nampa &. Meridian Trrigatinn Distrier rpquirpc that a Land Use Change/Site Development annlic-atinn hp filad for rPvipw prior to final platring_ Cnntanr Donna Mnnrp at l4l— I R84 or 466-7R61 fn r fttrthpr i n fnrmar i nn _ Bill Naucon Acci ctnpr Ureter C�incrintcnrlcnt Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District rr 0 a 19.E CITY Of ME:tl��i 5 May 1995 Langly Associates, Inc. 999 Lake Drive, Suite 300 Issaquah, WA 98027 r All 1 / / ♦ ♦ i 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for 700.000 Sct. Ft. Retail Project Dear Langly Associates: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the-Di-strict's--Water--Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent Doris Kathleen Oliason Family Trust Rackham, L.L.C. Dolores M. Hartman /City of Meridian enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 Christopher J. Kepus 8633 Wilmot Court Elk Grove, California 95624 May 5, 1995 Shari L. Stiles Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83640 Dear Ms. Stiles: "IFY Uk r."I'tioutp. As a former resident of Boise and a current landowner in the Meridian area, I would like to comment on the announcement of the proposed Power Center mall that would be located at I-84 and Eagle Road. I strongly support such development for several important reasons: The Meridian commercial tax base will need continuing growth to support future infrastructure improvements. This type of commercial development is precisely the type that is needed. 2. The location of the proposed mall is not only very suitable for the available land, it is right at the crossroads of the developing valley. Access for a significant portion of the valley would be very convenient. 3. The mall would be, if properly architected, a real plus for the Meridian area in terms of a beneficial development that would likely influence potential residents and businesses to locate in the area, further enhancing the ability of Meridian to grow within an balanced economic base. This development is sure to stir controversy but I urge the City Council to support this project. It is a perfect addition to the area. Sincerely yours, Chris Kepus E Z., %.I itt M-ritluw. y� ���� �%-� �=�— • ��t. c Cam,,-�-� • '1��. „yam' RECEIVED MAY 0 9 1995 Fred and Molly Nakaj i CIT V U!• MthWiP 12712 Lee School Road Wilton, Calif. 95693 Ms. Shari Stiles Meridian Planning Director 33 East Idaho St. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Meridian P&Z Dear Ms. Stiles: We are excited to hear of the proposed Power Center Mall at Eagle and Overland Roads. Being frequent visitors to the Meridian area, we believe the planned mall will provide a much needed retail outlet center for area residents, and it will also provide a boost for the area's economy. We wholeheartedly support locating the mall at the proposed site. Sincerely, RECEIVE MAY 0 9 1995 Fred and Molly Nakaji f ITV O} Mtha)(A: 12712 Lee School Road Wilton, Calif. 95693 Ms. Shari Stiles Meridian Planning Director 33 East Idaho St. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Meridian P&Z Dear Ms. Stiles: We are excited to hear of the proposed Power Center Mall at Eagle and Overland Roads. Being frequent visitors to the Meridian area, we believe the planned mall will provide a much needed retail outlet center for area residents, and it will also provide a boost for the area's economy. We wholeheartedly support locating the mall at the proposed site. Sincerely, L� I ly)� ttiL I �1 GARY G. ALLEN JOSEPH H. BAIRD CHRISTOPHER J. BEESON MICHAEL C. CREAMER ROY L. EIGUREN JEFFREY C. FEREDAY JULIE KLEIN FISCHER RAYMOND O. GIVENS L. W. GRANT, III J. BART GREEN ROBERT C. HUNTLEY, JR. KARL T. KLEIN DAVID R. LOMBARDI KENNETH R. McCLURE CHRISTOPHER H. MEYER L. EDWARD MILLER PATRICK J. MILLER JUDSON B. MONTGOMERY TERRY L. MYERS RAMONA S. NEAL STEVEN L. OLSEN W. HUGH O'RIORDAN KENNETH L. PURSLEY GREGORY J. VIETZ CONLEY WARD STEVEN R. WEEKS STEPHANIE C. WESTERMEIER LAW OFFICES GIVENS PURSLEY & HUNTLEY SUITE 200. PARK PLACE 277 NO. 6TH STREET POST OFFICE BOX 2720 BOISE. IDAHO 83701 .- May 9, 1995 Jim Johnson Chairman Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission City Hall 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 .. w a.A-, MAY 1 1 1Q-95 Ott U JUDITH K. HOLCOMBE- JAMES A. MCCL'JRE OF COUNSEL DAVID E. MABE LEGISLATIVE SPECIALIST TELEPHONE (208) 342-6571 FACSIMILE (208)343-9492 WRITER'S OIREC7 "!AL (208) 388-1237, Re: Langly & Associates I-84 Annexation and Conditional Use Permit Application Our File: 2515-18 Dear Chairman Johnson: I represent James Griffn who is the owner of an 80 acre parcel located on the Southwest corner at the intersection of Eagle Road and Overland. After close review of this conditional use permit application and the accompanying traffic analysis, Mr. Griffin has asked me to express his strong support of this development. The applicants are clearly strong and qualified developers and at this stage of development planning have done a good job in preparing their proposal. As a land owner on the Southwest corner of this same Eagle Road intersection, this application will directly affect my 80 acre property. I would, therefore, like to ask the commission to address a few considerations during its review process. Jim Johnson May 9, 1995 Page 2 • An effective pedestrian system should be designed and implemented at this location to allow access between the St. Luke's project and other future commercial and residential development in the Eagle and Overland vicinity. Provision should be made in the site design and access for this project for the ultimate anticipated width and configuration of Eagle Road to the south of I-84 and at the Eagle and Overland intersection. This should, of course, assume development in the area consistent with the uses and densities indicated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Again, Mr. Griffin believes that this project is well planned and will be a great asset to the City of Meridian. Sincerely David R. Lombardi DRL jao cc: James Griffin 251 S 18WIERI D IAN.LO 1