The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCobblestone Village CUP 99-005 Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE o Heil M .m .rc CHARLESROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD ' ~ _ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY .a f A Good Place to Live ~~~"~~~~~~CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208)' 887-4813 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (zo8> s8~-22 i 1 PLANNING-AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 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 and~Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: Mav 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: Mav 3, 1999 HEARING DATE: Mav 11, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP-99-005 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY; P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z . KEITH BORUP; P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, 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) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: DEC- 8-1999(WED ): 15:29 MOFFNTT` THOMNS ~ ~ - .,, ~ ~ ~;~ „„ }` 208385538d P. 002 Boise ' ECErvE~ Idaho Falls Pocatello 1V~off~tt Thomas DEC - 8 1999 ' MOFPtiTT Tl-IOMA.S BARkz~'TT ROCK er FIF.Z,1)S, CHTD. C~ QF NlER,IDIAN 10Ann C. B111fIC[ US Bank PVdza Bui{ding 101 5 Capitol Hlvd 10th FI 208.335.5400. direC[ jab@~moffatt.cam Boi a Idaho E37010824 December 8, 1999 FACSIMILE 2oaaassooo 208.3356384 fax www.moffatt.com Mayor Rabert Come. City of Meridian 33 E. Ydaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Cobblestone Village/CUF-99-005/Conditional Use )Permit MTBR&,T File No. 21-671.1 Dear Mayor Corrie: Last night, the Meridian City Council approved the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Cobblestone Village. We appreciate the City's diligent efTorts to approve { these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. However, we believe there is need for clarification in the conditions of approval so that there is no confusion reading these conditions in the months to come. Specifically, these clarifications are: 15.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), 81/z' x 11" copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14- 99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueplint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. Please note that there is no Building type "E." The ten building elevations for Buildings "C" and "D" have already been submitted. To prevent confusion in the future, please delete this pazagraph. 15.25 We recomrinend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer tividths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the cetrter to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. BOI MT1274520.1 DEC 08 '99 15 Q3 2083855384 PAGE.02 utt; tt-1999(WED) 15:30 MOFFRIT TNOMRS 2083855384 P. 003 Mayor Robert Gonie Aecember 8, 1999 Page 2 The neighbors immediately to the south of the development have requested a six foot mlasonry wall. The neitghbor to the south had also requested that this masonry wall be placed on a three foot berm. The applicant had agreed to do this work. To prevent confusion, you may want to restate this commitment. 15.26 The proposed height of Building "b" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 2'/z-story versus 3-story appearance). The information has been provided. The second sentence should be deleted to prevent confusion. 1 x.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). This recommendation not requirement) by AC~iD should be deleted. We believe the testimony at hearings was such to indicate that the property owners to the south do~ not want cross access with this property (for example, they have specifcally requested a 6 foot masonry wall on top of a 3 foot berm alonb the southern boundary). At a minimum, this' paragraph should be modified to read as follows: "Unless modified by Ada County.Highway Aistrict, the applicant shall provide a recorded. cross access easement ...." The paragraphs numbered under the terms and conditions should be revised as follows: ?.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), S 1/z" x 11" copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings' "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14- 99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The bluepzint elevations BOI MT1:274523.1 DEC 08 '99 15=44 2083855384 Prar,~ az UtG 8-19991 WED) 15:31 MOFFRTT TH0~1RS Mayor Robert Come. December 8, 1999 Page 3 2083855384 1P. 004 submitted to P&Z Deparpnent on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. A.s noted above, there is no Building type "E." The ten building elevations for Buildings "C" and "d1" have akeady been submitted. To prevent confusion in the future, please delete this paragraph. 2.25- We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least. three-feet (3') in height to provide for maa:imuin sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. fi-om 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the bezrn height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. See comment for paragraph 15.25. 2.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from fiinished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/a-story versus 3-story appearance). See comment for paragraph 15.26. 2.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). See comment for paragraph 15.34. We are asking that the Council administrativel~- make the above clarifications and changes to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Cobblestone Village. However, if the Council needs to reconsider these Findings and Conclusions in a public hearing, we are asking that the Council place these Findings and Conclusions on the next City Council hearing for reconsideration. BOl MT1274523.1 DEC 08 '99 15 45 2083855384 PAGE_Aa DEC- 8-1999(WED) 15:31 MOFFRTT THOMRS lvlayor Robert Gorrie December.8, 1999 Page 4 ' 2083855384 P. 005 ,, On a related matter, would you please provide me with a fully signed copy of the pevelopment Agreement,between Ionic Entezprises and the City of lvieridian=for my file. E Sincerely, ~, JoArua C. Butler JCB/laa cc: (via facsimile) Meridian City .Council William Crigray Will Berg Bryce Peterson ~. t 601 MT1:214525.1 1 DEC 08 '99 15 46 2083855384 PAGE.05 JJEI-IJti-"77 J:J ~'4~ 3a~~~a~rnuc .~u DEC- 8-) 999(WED) 15:28 MOFFfI'TT THOMHS ~ 2083855384 P. 001 1 Vloffdtt rho~nas MOFFAT'r THOMAS B.A,RRET? ROCK er FIELDS, CH'TD. Return Mailing address: PO Box 829 Boise ID 83701 0829 Return Delivery address: 101 S Capitol Blvd 10th FI Boise ID 83702 f~Q~ Fax: 208 385 5384 Voice: 208 345 2000 Direct: 208 385 5404 5 Pages (including this cover page) Sent: December 8, 1999 File No.: 21-671.1 70: Mayor Corrie and City Council Fax Number: 887-4813 Voice Number: 888-0433 CC: William Gigray Fax Number: 288-2501 Voice Number: 288-2499 CC: Will Berg Fax Number. 888218 Voice Number. 888433 CC: Bryce Peterson Fax Number. 323-8803 Voice Number: 375-1900 FROM: JoAnn C. Butler Description: Cobblestone Village Comment: Please see the attached letter to Mayor Come. a PLEASE DELIVER IMMEDIATELY The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the original document to us. Thank you. 801 MT1:274553.1 a DEC 08 '99 1542 2083855384 PAGE.01 ~ 2 11 L/~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN~j ORDINANCE NO. ~~ AN ORDINANCE .FINDING THAT CERTAIN LAND LIES CONTIGUOUS OR ADJACENT TO THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; AND FINDING THAT THE OWNER HAS MADE A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION IN WRITING TO THE COUNCIL; AND THAT SAID LAND BE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND ZONING DESIGNATED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R~40); AND DECLARING THAT SAID LAND, BY PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS DESCRIBED BELOW, BE A PART OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ADD SAID PROPERTY TO THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO; AND DIRECTING THE CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO FILE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE AREAS TO BE ANNEXED WITH ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AUDITOR, TREASURER AND ASSESSOR, AND THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE SECTION 50- 223 AND SECTION 63-2215. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: r SECTION 1. FINDINGS: That the following described land is contiguous and adjacent to the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation to the City of Meridian, Idaho, by the owner of said Property to-wit: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1 E., Boise Meridian,. Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said_corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North `1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46'18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 4.8.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision. No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: ~~ AI~TNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE - 1 thence along the easterly- boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along. said easterly boundary line extended North 02° 14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. SECTION 2: That the above-described real property be, and the same is hereby annexed and made a part of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. SECTION 3: That the real property herein by this ordinance annexed to the City of Meridian hereinabove described shall be zoned High Density Residential District (R-40). SECTION 4: That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, comprehensive plan and all official maps depicting the boundaries of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 5: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 7: The Cleric of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified.. copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner plainly and clearly designating the boundaries of the City of Meridian, including the lands herein annexed, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho, all in compliance with Idaho Code §63-2215 and §50-223.. ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE - 2 / ~_ P SED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ` ~ day of ol/C'`n-~~'~- , 1999. AP ROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ day of ~~~~n~ , 1999. MA R ATTEST: ~~~ CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO,) County of Ada. SS. `~~~~'~~ OF ~~~'ff~~'-. ~, o ~ o~ ~ TC~ ,' ~~ o ~~~~L _ ~~~ \_ ~~ l~r~tilils~ :a;,~ On this %(~ .day of ~(.U?~Zs . , 1999, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and fQr said State, personally appeared ROBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, and year first above written. .••• ,1~~~~~, OVg~tr ;.• ,~, ~L Q : {O~ Ali Y * ~ - - -~-~.J ~( ~.~ ~,/,~.C.t-~__. (SFy~L ~•~ G S NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO ~ pUBit ~ o ; RESIDING AT: •• ~` '~ MY COMMISSION E IRES: -tz- rE oF~..• msg\Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M1Cobblestone Village~AZ.ORD ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE - 3 \~ V 0 T r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z 1 i _-~ ~. a0 z ~ ~ ~' o Z F' t :~ CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To: The Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor of Ada County, and The State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho _ j I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerlc, of the City of Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, do hereby certify that the attached copy of Ordinance No., ~`~ passed by the City Council of the City of Meridian, on the ~6f'~ day of~l~eh•-~- 1999, is a true and correct copy of the original of said document which is in the care, custody and control of thte„~~~y,~Clerlc of the City of Meridian. ~~~ ~~ Y "Y ~~l ,~ C' ~~,QF~'~dq T~ ~~~~"`"' ~IILLIAM G. BERG, JR. STATE OF IDAHO),~`'~.>;~~~~°°'~~~t„~~~~`~~\ f,, 'ss. County of Ada, On this ~~ ~ day of ~~~~ , in the year 1999, before me, ..~C~ L~ Cir/~'.~2L~h_ , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that h~.~~te~e same on behalf of the City of Meridian. .• ~,~;.....~ L f/~~•., ,, ~~•••~ •nPg Y •,~~ ~ ~ ~'S Q1~ i_. es • ~ art * B yld.: ~ ;~(S~ ~ •.••~~~' Notary Public for Idaho 'wi~'~ TE OF l~ `'~~ Commission Expires:/~ U 1- U ~f msg\Z:\Worlc\M\Nteridian 15360M\Cobblestone Village\CertificationOfClerlcOrd CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ _ ~. E 4 ~. interoffice ~~ ~ MEMORANDUM f ~, a.. ~+;cEl~i To: William;G.. Berg, Jr. s DEC 2 0 1999 cc: Mayor Robert D. Corrie and City Council ~ ~ ~, ' CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ From: Marlene St. George o~~~~ i Subject: Cobblestone Village AZ-99-005 ~, Date: December 20, 1999 Will: After speaking with Mr. Gigray, this memo is~in,response to your question about what Findings areao be•added,as Exhibit "B" to the Development Agreement. This will address the action of the Council from their November 16th meeting, and those approved AZ Findings of Fact which should be the Findings i added as Exhibit "B" to the Development Agreement. Pursuant to the above matter, please note that the revisions that were made to the Findings of Fact were those.acted upon by the Council at their November 16`h meeting. ` If you have any'further questions please advise. ` ,~ t ~, z i msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Cobblestone village\Berg122099,Ivlem ~ ` 1 ~ ~ ~ ' k ~e JAN 06 '00 1101 ~~~ PAGE. ~ ~~ 11~/ 1 NOTICE OF HEARING ~. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian . ' 3 ~± e_k and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold '~`. a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. on October 19, 1999, for the purpose of re"viewing and considering the application Of Stamas Corporation and Ionic Enterprises, Inc. for a conditional use permit for a 96 multi family unit apartmen# complex for proposed Cobblestone Village, which is generally located on the southwest corner of Locust Grove & Franklin. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hail, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy`of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to !3 submit testimony. DATED this 24th day of September, 1999. _ ANG L. S, DEPUTY CLERK PUBLISH September 29 and October 13, -1999. w, ~,. F 5 • '.I tiVIIITE, PETERSON, PRESS, :~(ORROW & (ilt;l~1', 1'.~L. f .\'h'IUNJJEY~Ai G,w ~ ~,\T,I,•,. rlxv,hne IULIC KLEIN FlSCIICR .bO F . v~~'iPA orr~ee . ('.~FLT(1N r\VIiNUC. Slrll'C; ! I \Vh1. F.-IiIGM,'. 111 1'US!' l~Fh'ICt ~U:C ~ 1$n 101 \INTIG avF, i0UT11 J it@N T 1011;J9~~n u. aaow[uuUnson Mr ?nor gpcJCr ?n ~; ; ~ 7 RiDlnrr. InA1 uJ l.i6XU-I I SU vslra, In+Irn ~ :r.>>.nv~ ~~ \vu.l.l:\~I .~. \RJJIItU~~ T[I. ia1~I.r,r_>±,. \41i 1 L\hl I'. vl<'IIUL\ i'19 i?Il$)?yn•: I;Jy ~ ~\\ I:4~1 u~b-y~Uj i'MHISI"I~YIIhR `. V~ 1'. PAC(lUAI'SY~]SVI I'KI I IY .4.1'1; 1'I•.Ftil)n $TC'tIFV 1, ~'Itl,)C 1'Lt.4~L• KEI'LY iU t(ILA`. S. fi:JSi.~l:~n I\9tKIL'1~1~ QhhlCt TrJnnn RIJC~~Inu Da~lp I\t Sw,aRri Fv PACS IMII.E TR A NSM1T'T ~1 L DATE: ~-~t ~ 1 •, .i2. ~~ ~ TIME,: T.. .... 1 .:t. ry. COMPANY: While, Peterson, Pruss, morrow & CJi;ray _ ,__ FAX #:_~,~ .-~~ r ~ ~ -' ~-I Meridian Office r PHONL: ,.,,,_~ PHONY: (208) 288-?499 RE: ~' , rr ~t,t~ ,, ~.. ` v _.._~ NUMt3LK OF 1'AGL'S: ~ (,Including ccwc~r 5heet~_ ••_•__.._ _ CUMMENT5; ~-'~\ s r ~,~~ , -. r ~ ~, _ 1 I a /'1 ~ l ., 3 ~ ( ~~ 1.~.v -~,. Fc J ~...~ Confidentiality Note: 1'he cl~nt~~nt5 cif this transmission are intcn~lec:. to be sc~~~n anit U52tj only by the individual to whc~ir it is a~dressc~d. If you re\'c:ive this trarismissic~n in error pleas~~call \,ur office sc~ Ihat we,ztav arran8e tc, ~iCk up the d~)cutn~nt ~n~( route it to lhc: ~,ffice it was intended lor, Yc,ta nuly Call cc~Ilect iE Iona ~iist~uue: (ZU~) 238-2~9~l. 1~h~nks. JAN 06 ' 00 1100 PAGE. 01 s ~`' t .~,,y NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the'Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the 9 ': hour of 7:30 p:m. on October 19, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the' application of Stamas Corporation and Ionic Enterprises, Inc. for a conditional use +~ permit fora 96 multi family unit apartmen# complex for proposed Cobblestone ~Ilage, which is generally located on the southwest corner of Locust Grove & Franklin. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED, his 24Th day of September, 1999. ANG L. S, DEPUTY CLERK PUBLISH September 29 and October 13, 1999. .~:~ .r s~. ._ ._ c~ ._ a~ ._ O N .Q .~ O V `\ y~ 0 0 0 M ~~~ • i ** TX CONFIRMA~N REPORT ** AS OF SEP 24~10~01 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM YMODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS 04 09/24 10 00 208 888 1097 EC--S 00'29" 001 096 OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. on October 19, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Stamas Corporation and Ionic Enterprises, Inc. for a conditional use permit fora 96 multi family unit apartment complex for proposed Cobblestone Village, which is generally located on the southwest corner of Locust Grove 8~ Franklin. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 24t" day of September, 1999. l1~' J._ , ANG L. S, DEPUTY CLERK PUBLISH September 29 and October 13, 1999. ~., -- ! -... r~'• ~_ ~ p Ir1~11ofd'tfi iJ '~ _xTocotdto ~tilo///fatt Thr~~Z~.s JJ ..__~.__~~_~_- j gyn. . ~f U(TATT`~1'H(~1~1~15 HA IZ IZ I ~.TT RO(:K t'; I~ l l ~.f :17ti, (~H'1'll. 1 ~ ~ 19 1999 1olinn C. butler wMORF~ P~~ASON, ~'RU33 IIS Bank f'I~~a Fu~lc1~ 2Q3 iS5.S404direa MEAlOfAN CiNGRAl• AA re~e x ~~ ~ al~d ~ Iab~rmoffan mm AnCRIV~Y doix Wdlio 83701 t November 1 S, ] 9~3~) ?oa.~aszooo :UD.3D5S3~ fax w~wv.m~(fatt.corn Marlene St. Geor;ze White, Pererson, Pruss, LVlorrow 8t C;igray, P.A. 200 East Carlton Avenue. Suite 31 !'~st UtTlcc Box 11 SO Meridian, tD $3680- t l 50 Re: Cobblestone Village/Development Agreement/ Annexation/ltezone/Conditional Use Your H ilc A7,-99-005 MTBR&F File No. 21-G71.1 Dear ;Marlene: ~vu~C avauaoiC, wau~ayouu.plcasc torward_to~us ~'In connection with Cobblestone Vil~la~~e; ~ v, v ~/~ , owrng locum !)cvelopmcnt Agreement; Findings oi`Fact and C'csnclusions of i.aw in connection with the conditional use; Conditional Use Permit. Of course, please call if you should have any questions. Sincerely, JoAnn C, Kutler JCB/laa 90i nnrt.27t8621 JAN 06 '00 11 01 PAGE. 02 F '- 8 For Accountable Mail T 0 w 00 V m a 0 3 w N C1 O 3 ~a d :~ O w_ O. a ~ r O m 1 Ui 1 ~ '...1 W 1 N ~ 1 1 1 O co ' Oo ~l a~ Cn .~ W N -~ r m to a 3 a2 ~~'fD .` 3 ay 7 ° ` cna o wa ~ ~ a V" N op ~ ..J ~ ~ A ~ -~ a ~ ~ ~ vy W ~' ~ ~ , ~ ~ w _ ~° a oa ~ x o z oP ~ ~ ~ .a ~ ~ x ~ ~° .~~ ~~ y. o,~' ro ° o 00 ~ r l~ ~. ~ ~~ . . r,a ~ . r ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, ~ x~, ~ xr~ y b~ ~,~ ~ or r~ ,~d Z ~oo N °z ~ -c `~ rp~,, ~ ~, r o x~, e~ O r~y r ~ o _ ~ ~ ~~--yya ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~` ~~ h' yo x ~ ~ h- ~ N ~ ~' ~r z~ ~ ~~ I--I x~ V ya z ~ o ~~ Z 7y ~ ~ ~~ O ; z t-' ro ~ y tr1 y z ~~ C ~~n O~ ~ u z~ ~, - r , ~ ~ c~ b ~ ~ ~ C7r ~ bC z ~ ~ ~ R° r ~n ~ ~ ~ r. ~' ~ `~ ~'r y b r ~ t,- ~a ~ O Z ~ H ~ t~ri w ~ riy ~ "d ~ , ~ ~ ~,' ~ ' 7 ni z d i--i. _ ~ ~ C" ~ ~ A x' d ~ p, m ' '~ y vi vi,. ~ ~ ~ ~t"yy w d ~ ~ o~ ~ ,'nn o N z ~ r r ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ d~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ o~ z ~ ~~ ... Z ~ ~ `~ H ~y W~ N z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ d ~ ~' ~~~ ~ d` ''~ ~ a ~ y -. d . ~ N ~ ~ ~ N O W '• y ~ `~ ~~ ~ ~ Cy Oar ~ J ~ (~~ ~a n N ~ ~ H ~ r N' T N£ ~~c~,N . ~. N ~ - s ~ I' ~ Q dN~ m j .~ 'P V .. - N W m G.o . m ~ ^3 ~ r_ ~ X .~. o m w ~ t 1: c ~ 7 N .. ~. • .a Cl N N ~O ~~ w W ~ N -o.°:~ ov m w a _. ?~. v>~ m m o m= N ~ ^^ .Ov a o$~om ,a s~ wa ~ N S `~ ~co N O n oywa~~w vi v -- _ ~" i,-.. - cps -~ - ~ ~ ~ N 0 ~ o > > .~mc~tmi~~~ .. D m v . » ~_N O_-O o`Dwyw~o - ~.~ y ?' ~ o • ~ j ~ C N .N. c c SI' ~p ~ O Al 0? 7 jm~m~ow Q m w rn~ y w ~ ~ o- ~ oo, omossm~~ rg w ~ m chi k OQ N ~~ ~O ~ e T C~Y. ~ ~ O _ v »w~~~ w c _.~ v- - w o g Lx ~,\ _ d _ m om N°~~°o03 c oc ~ - C ~ .d .. O woD ~ Q.m ~ n i 3 ~ 3 ~ m ~~ - ,SQ ~ ~,m (~ p to a~X ~ o ci o_ o a o~ w m~yQ ,.~., ,~~ p ~.. p m w~ w ~ 3 ~~`Zj NN - ~ X0 ~N ~ ~ p WN W mN ~ - ~ s ~ T~ m . ~ N ~.N~ m~ °~~ . w.o.Q~ ~ :4 . ~NN~NN O ~EAw ~(~ e ~ a ~, .. T(n ~p ~ QOQ - l ~ Nx~~.N N p w ~ - ~~°o3c°~p. W ~. a~w.o~mm ~o ~_ m2 do~~ ~ ~ ~ ~+N7oW w.<mw»3 ~ m a'~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ v w vc i w~ 3 -_-3 m ° ' ~ - m r ~ u' _ = 'o 3 w w 7 ~ X C ~ J 41 ; ~ fD ~ fC O.StnmQ .. a ,~ +.• r }~. s~~ NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hatl, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. on April 13, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Stamas Corporation /Ionic Enterprise Inc. for annexation and zoning of 6.15 acres of land which is generally located on the southwest corner of Locust Grove & Franklin. The applicant requests a zone of R-40. Further the applicant requests conditional use permit. approval of the parcel of land above described for amulti-family, 96 unit apartment complex for proposed Cobblestone Village. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested- persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 22"d day of March, 1999. PUBLISH March 24 & April 7, 1999 WILLIAM G. BERG, J , C CLERK ,`A~ _{1Z~PliQl~//jE~p, r" ~~ _ ' c~ ~: -~ 90,E r is~ • 1 ,,~ ,~~ ,~~~~~~ N I H4 i 111111\\ ** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT ** AS OF MAR 22 '99 1659 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM 21 0322 16 58 208 888 1097 MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDtS STATUS EC--S 00'33" 001 035 OK NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. on April 13, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Stomas Corporation /Ionic Enterprise Inc. for annexation and zoning of 6.15 acres of land which is generally located on the southwest comer of Locust Grove 8 Franklin. The applicant requests a zone of R-40. Further the applicant requests conditional use permit approval of the parse( of land above described for amulti-family, 96 unit apartment complex for proposed Cobblestone Vllage. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 22"d day of March, 1999. PUBLISH March 24 8~ Apri17, 1999. WILLIAM G. BERG, J , C CLERK ~pt,ttrruhnj~ ~p~~ ~ r r z `' $~~ •+~ ~. s O W O O O '77 ~~ (~ - ~ p w 00^ ,. `Y ~ V ~4 ~f~ ~ E O r ~: . ^ ~~ E ~• ~_ r ~ ~ 1 f 1 r ~^ ~ ^ ~^ i x y, ~ I F 2 0 m Q c w A r o ~ m ~ Ut ~ Ja - ~" - ,J -+ j .~ O CO ~ ~l O W I\j ~ ~- ~~ : ~ a m u ~ j ~ ~ ( V ~ ~ ~ P~~ Sl : N ~ ~ ~ D ~ ; " a ~ ~~ V~, ~ Ji ~i Cn ~, Ut -J . V, ;t; C/1 ~ U ~ y a o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~` ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z 3 ~ ~~+J S ~ ~ a w w ~ ti c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ r .' t7 ~ o ~ Z y oY rr~ O O ~ ~ C p~ ~R° o'~ ° p o C w ~~% c~ ,~ "'~ . a 3 ~ .`L"i Z b7 Z ~T1 7 ~`' ~, ["i] ~ Z N ~ ~. ~ n .~ ~ z O ~ ~ o O r, ~i... ~ .~ 4 1 N O RO p W l~~ O ~ r ~p ~ " ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~ y ry I] ~ !~ ] 1y~ y ~ w~~ /I~ ~ ~ ~ v r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ C ~ I ~w ", ~C [ ~ I C ~ ~ Oa- / p • '-~ ~ to CrJ ~ ~ ] . O [ y ~... z + ~ ~..~ to ~ y y . ~ J ' y ~ rn ~ O ~ n~ ~ C ~ O z y ~ V '° ~ - v cn ~ C ~ z ~ ~ v' d ~C1v~ td pn ~~ v~~' ~r' ~fi r Ri o ~ r, ~ y t., y v~ ~ ~ rn n y~ ~,a C7 ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ r" ~ ~,y r ~ r y y ;..,, ~ .. z C tT' ~' z a z ~ ~ ~ r~ r~ ~ d r~~ oC y -' ~ ~ y ~ d o~ z o .. ~ z ~ ~ ~ d~ y ~ N Z ~~ ~ m 2 d ~ oo y ~ w ~ y ~ ~ W a ~ d G~ {~, ~ ~ ~ ~ d ,..~ ~ ~ ~ n W N V1 ..,3 C'i7 ~TJ a. ~ v O ~ O m f7 N' ~ v O c° C N ~ ~ ~ N C~ N m m ~ ~ ~ F ~~ ~ CmJ] W N ~ 0. `G N a O " . ° m DD ~~ 3 O ~ C cD °i (O m `m ~ O. (~ FA ~ • ~.. (D ( 3I w ~ _ ~ aya T . ON nwO~ya-i 3~"O SU ~ w a _. w. t»•c o ~ „ f . ~C)~goQ~ m N O°1m o sd ^~ o ,o. m J ~' ~w.m~m~w m~ x z'~ o`D ~~ = q o' m~ o j ~ C N ,N.. ~--° c < tD c i TJ ~' ~p ~ w p y ~ ~ m ,~ W _ . d~ ~~g~ jm~m~o'O mm w c y'm W a o'' o N a o N c .~ Q ~ O v m O c o o c~nw_Oa .z 3 0 -. o c y a ~ n ~p x A .. am. '.'N 4 fwp ~~?~ O ~ NN C, ~ ~ wc~~o~°-' a ~w~XOma ~ _c c o0 cm 3~'~m3=. O JJ p ~m amp vOi a~X. ~~ry cO p_ ~ ~ w '~fDAN~ ~ n Cn ~N O y ~ O C1 ,~ 41 ~ww N~7Cj= ~ ~`~ N N N ~ ~ n~~ ~ ~ -,. N ~. O. D- ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ N w _ ~ 31 Sb ~ fn ~ C (~ ~~ f0 I ~ N N 3 y ry O L~ ~(O - T CA _ ~ N ~ .,, Q O Q o' ~o~~v ~ o . ' ~tss ~_ mz d n m ~~ '+ a ~ ~ ..W.._ . - - S1 q) ~ ~- w c x. aw a•~~ ~ ~~- . .....,,, _ 37. ~ ~ w -003 w ~ ~- ~ 7'.mmNn w S~ x c m N ^` v ac~~>> x ~' T m ~ ~ ~C O.7 lyn m`Z (p T w ° V V ~,.... ~, HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY r Mayor A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE (208) 884-4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Members PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887=2211 GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD (208) 884-5533 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Half, Attn: Wiff Berg, City Clerk by: April 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 8, 1999 HEARING DATE: April 13; 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP-99-005 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A .MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX BY: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z MARK NELSON, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH ~BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, 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) fNTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: CITY OF MERIDIAN. APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .. ~ _ . GENERAL LOCATION:_,_ o ~1-. •o~-j `..oi,,..n,t DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE:_ Y a ZONING CLASSIFICATION: ~ - y D l` .~~~ 1~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ X11 ~~ ~~~ ~r~~'- ~ 0334 ~: ~I /e...~ ~. ;ti I certify that the information clIon^^tained herein is true and correct. V~ • /i4n- Signature o pp can Social Security Number.S / g' - .3 oZ - ~,~ 35' 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 _.m. 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 TO F t' February" 1, 1999 Stamas Corporation is requesting annexation, rezone and a conditional use fora 96 unit apartment complex located at the southwest corner of Locust Grove and Franklin. The subject property .currently is a single family residential unit on 6.15 acres. The site is located on the eastern City Limits of the City of Meridian. The property contiguous to the west is currently zoned Industrial and was developed as an industial subdivision, Medimont Subdivision No. l . The comprehensive plan indicates that the subject property should be developed as a mixed use planned unit development. The apartment zone as requested would act as a transitional zone between the single family residential neighborhood and the industrial development. Because of the future widening of both Franklin Road and Locust Grove to five lane facilities, the subject property would be located at the intersection of two major arterials. The site slopes to the northeast and would provide the apartment complex nice views of the Boise foothills. The overall site plan was designed to take advantage of the natural topography of the site and to provide as minimal of cut and fill on the existing site. The `buildings consist of primarily two story, eight unit apartment buildings. Two of the proposed buildings will be 2 and 112 stories, for a total of 96 apartment units. The existing house will be renovated to act as the clubhouse for the apartment complex.. The apartment complex will have an exercise facility, swimming pool and a tot lot. February 2, 1999 City of Meridian 200 E Carlton Ave Meridian ID 83642 Attn: Planning & Zoning Dear Sirs: I am selling the property at 1475 E Franklin Road to the Stamis Corporation f Ionic Enterprise, Inc. and they are authorized to submit an application for the development of an apartment complex on this property. Sincerely, ~ J..__. Monte. C. McClure Appeared before me on 2,~ o~ of February-1999. Alisa R. House •••`•'~Kp U ~~~''~., SF Public Notary fig. ~.~` .••••••.•• ` Commission expires - D ~ • : Q ; ~ ,~ ~ • ~• G 1,'~ ~O: ~: i~ '. P t3 B : ~' ~ .~ .•• ~4 ~4~,~ 4. `~ ~ ~ ~~ ,CORPORATION ;~ k ,~ DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, ,CONSTRUCTION ` ' February 22, 1999 ~, _. z To Whom It May Concern: This letter iS "to confirm that Bryce Peterson, President of Homco Inc., is authorized to act as the representative of Ionic Enterprises, Inc.;;a California Corporation.. Please forward to him any and all information'regarding the project m Meridian, Idaho. ~Thanlc you~for your cooperation. ; ,_ Sincergly, ~. ~--'mac'-G Paul Z. s _ . President ~~ Ionic Enterprises` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ,~ i - ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ e~ _ ,, ~. ~ ',~ ~ , ,' One Sierra Gate Plaza Suite 3556 Roseville, CA 95678 '• (916);783-0330 • =FAX (916) 783-3739 ', s ~ 14. I, Bryce L. Peterson, a representative of Ionic Enterprise Inc.1 Stamas Corporation, agree to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any, associated with the use of subject property on the southwest corner of Locust Grove and Frankli r ^. 1.l% • 15. ~3' I, Bryce L. Peterson, a representative of Ionic Enterprize Inc./ Stamas Corporation, have read the contents i application and verify that the information contained he m s true and c 16. I, Bryce L. Peterson, a representative of Ionic Enterprize Inc./ Stamas Corporation, agree,to post the subject roperty on the Southwest Corner of Locust Grove and Fr 1' one week ore e public hearing. ~J u Project: 11488 Date: February 23, 1999 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 250 S. Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR IONIC COPORATION MERIDIAN, IDAHO 208/376-7330 FAX: 208/323-9336 A parcel of ,land being a portion of the Northeast 1 /4 of the Northeast 1 /4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1 E., : Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North ~/a corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46'18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road;; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on-the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Book 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00° 58'43" East. 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line;. thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02° 14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46'18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J-U-6 ENGINEERS, Inc. ~326~ °- N Z_Z3_9g a ~rFOF~Vp~ qRY A. L~ GAL:Ihc Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. Project Manager f: \projects\11488\Descriptions\Boundary. doc is ~~ •~ • OrdKNa 13f3Q1i77U sk; SA a~ _ - r_ ~ a 010'70i?0008 `,~ ~... . f ke S' c e .r -» ... CORPORATE WARRANTY DEED 88~284~ .:FOR VALUE RECEIVED, IGA[,CO, I1C. , ~f\~ i[)AtlO rOP.[~ORA'fi0~, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at of County of, ADA , State of Idaho. GRANTOR; hereby GRANT, BARGAIN; SELL and CONVEY unto "j0~'TE C. ,}1CCLL'P.£ nXU S~CFBi\• J.~ ?1CCI:L'RF, +IILSfSAI;U A\I) hIFE r ~. - ~ GRANTEE whosecurremaddressis: 1375 ;E. Fl2AKhL11 RCt:'~U;~~ NERLUTA~, 11i,11t0 63ri32 the fotlow3ng described real proaerty located in ,aDA County, State o7 Idaho, more particutarry described as,follows, to wi;: As per E`tHI3IT "A" attached'"hereto. and, nade -a part, hereof 6y"",reference. ~ ~ rc ) . 8 x. - s .q .. ~ • ky ~ -. i TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises;-with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. Artd'the said Grantor does hereby covenant to and vnth ute said Grantee(s), that Grantor is the owner in fee simple of said premises;•that said premises are free Iron all encum• brances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done. by 'the Grantee(s): and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, pncluding irrigation and utility assessments, it any) for the current year, whichare not yet due and payable, and that Grantor will warrant and defend the same from all Lawful claims whatsoever. ` The officers vrho sign this deed heieby certify that this deed and the transfer represented thereby was du- ry authorized under a resolution duly adopted by the board of directors of the Grantor at a lawful meeting`dury held and attended by a quorum. , In vritness v:hereof, the Grantor has caused its corporate name to be hereunto. affixed by its duly authoriz- edofhce+sthis• "'6th day of•-.r,~~ust. ,:, ,in the year of 1963 F # IV:\000, I\C. ®'s ~ iii%!~ ~-_ _ ~_~ ~- PRESIDENT -- --•-~. ~~ SECRETARr r .. . K ,fix ~__ - - ~ . -- „: -. , 4 / ' ---------- -- f ~ -- trrs +o:m Iu:nF,h~d courtesy of ST~;~:'~tItT TITI,I~; O'F IDAHO, inc. ~ ~,....r.~,~.r ? :I:\H(t ~\U7~ StatE U: IDAHO. COUN7V Oi /_ STA'iE OF . --• (wwrnr rd ___-• >,. I rwretr/ cemty ttat tors ma u•nen} a~;rd fo• re:Dra at tee :eG~es or c,~a,~_.?9~ ,a,.rf~~~,c~ S~_:','-a TT11lC L7 thr c{af Jf _1L 09 , be!ore mr.:he ucr:ic ~igned. a at -„~ ~ nmutes Gast ~j.~: croo- ~ A~ \oran Put•IFC is a~rw~F f.x ..rd State, rrxmal:e aPPe red ~( L'fi~ ~ .. 4 `~-- ~ krKS~rl O: IdrrF:JFrd N'~ r1r to 19 i~~n m, otfFCe an0 C„ Fy reco• qe0 m i;~'~t/~ e~ ~ y- o Enhe_ - dLJi~r _-A.t,lL i J"vditlJ~s!___.,r :h,r < <,t -eeW at Paye rr:'xratwrr thu carcutrd rh; innn:mrnt {{^^ P r~uc r rmt m n ,•n hr n.lf f .:n1 u.r~ -w , :L.ti P u .it i r. a n. tri[r) i r c rho ~ f ~:jw,uu r c .utr,irfrr i _.___ - E. CifLC.o Fe o•cer .. _... s<~ . ~ ' - r- ~ ~ 7~i~8R S~tb Z rn c m Z Z D Or3cr No.: ST-8HUI577U SR,'S:\ V1V [Vv~VVV9 THAT PORTIuS t)F T?iE k.:~s•r 1.1 uF THE :GUkTt?EAST l14 OF 'fHE SORTHF.AST 1 ; .3 OE' Sk'CTIOti i 24 , -i•Op~SHI F 3 Si~i?TH, R:\!:G« 1 iAST, BOISE ?IFRIUI:\\, yJ:\ c'r.:t;~T~. IDAHO, BUC!~DED 01 THE SOl'TH BT Ttik; ti0?tTti I,I\E Uk THE I~32UP£RTY DESCk18«D _r~ tiARRANTF DP~'1~ Su. 7UU6744, iu~l YDED O\ TFIE BEST EY TiiF: EASTERi.T L11E OF THE F~::Li,Cri~I~G IiESCRI?tED PF.OPEP.'1'T: BEGI~~i:: ~ AT ;~ POIXT O\ T:?r; Ck'\T'£R LIRE OF FRAJSLI~ kUFiU nND THE SOF;';H S; D£ OP SkC1'IO\ 18, TOttiNSfiIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST Ga TH£ BOISE PiERIDIAN, ADA COGNTY, IDAHO, KH I C?i F'O I \T I SOUTH 89 Uk: ,BEES 18' tik;ST. 4H0.7 FEET ALONC.THE SECTIUS LI\'r: PRtly THE XORTHEAST c:n1INF.R OF SAID SI:C'!'lt1X S~)l'TH :;9 i~Ft:k?.t:S 1 ::' tCl:ti'C, l Ef3.1 FiET TO A PORT. 'i'ilE NUkT'IitiEti'1' ~'i)ft\F.it i)k' THE EAST LL/? OF THE NOIt'1'HEAST 1/4 OF TFiE \c~F:7'HEAST 1i4 UP SAID SECTION 18; 7fiE::Cc SO[iTH U DECREES U1' EAST, 1330.7 FEET 1'O A STEEL PI1, THE Sii['THt~'F,ST CUR\ER OF 'PIiE k:AST 213 OF THE ~UItTHk:AST 1/'-t OF Ti?E XORTH£AST 1%4 OF SAID SECTIUX 18; THENCE '~URTH 89 !)ZGREk;S 1=' EAST, 3.4.7 FEET ALUNG THE SUl'TH SIDE OF THk: F:AST li~' OF THE NORTIiEAST 1!4 OF Tii£ NORTHE:\ST 1-"4 OF .SAID SECTION 18 TO A STEFi, PI\; THE\CF. \URTH (' DEGREES 55' EAST, 530.6 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; TH£1t_E X03TH 19 DECREES 39' tiES'1', 135.6 FEET 'TO .\ STEEL FIN; THE\CE NOF.TH U DEc;RE};g 31' EAST, 494.5 FEET TO A STEF,L PI\; TH~tiC}: \ORTH .~. JEGF2~'L'S 43' BEST. 187.4 F££T TO ?'HE PORT OF B£GI\\I:CG, BUCXDED U\ THE SORTH YY THE NOi21'11 SECTIO\ I,ISE, :~XD 30['~UED UN 'f FIE EAST. B1 TiiE EAST SECTI~>X LISE. E\CEFTiVG TF?ERF.FRO>? Tr,° SOUTH 48.5 FEET TH£REt~F, :\S ?~?«?~SC•RrD ALUSG THE CAST ScCT_TU\ LINE. 4CEPTISG THA'I' i'ORTIOX 'rOk ROAD :\tiU UITCH RIGHTS-OF-I:AY. '~ „ ~ , CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPO ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of County of r ~-~ ~- On ~~~~ ~ before e, v ~--~- Dat ~ me d Title of Officer (e.g., "J ne Doe, Notary Public") personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s) ^ personally known to me - OR --~~roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by ofwlEU.E eonE his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), CcmmtsslonA tt3t60d or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, -~ r~rantP~,r~lc-C°~OmO executed the instrument. Placer ~ y 2001 .• My Comm. E~Ires \ WITNESS my hand a d official seal. ~~ of Z?PTIONAL `-' Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on t e ocument and could prevent - fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another documen . Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: ]( ~(~~~ ~' ~~(( ~..~,1~ Y Document Date: ~ ' ©~^` ~ ~ Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ~~~ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: ^ Individual ^ Corporate Officer Title(s): ^ Partner - ^ Limited ^ Gen ^ Attorney-in-Fact ^ Trustee ^ Guardian or Conserv or ^ Other: Signer Is Fjr~presenting: Top of thumb here Signer's Name: ^ Individual ^ Corporate Officer Title(s): ^ Partner - ^ Limited ^ Attorney-in-Fact ^ Trustee ^ Guardian or Conserv ^ Other: s Representing ^ General Top of thumb here ®1995 National Notary Association • 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184 • Canoga Park, CA 91309-7184 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Totl-Free 1-800-876-6827 I ~~ ~,~~ ~~ March 2, 1999 The construction of Cobblestone Village will be built with the following materials: Roofing: Dark Grey Asphalt Shingles Windows: White Vinyl Fascial Soffits: White Aluminum Siding: Combination of masonite and Hardi plank ~a.s ~~. . L°o o is im !c Iii a ~` ~ ~ I I _ ~ m ~ I~ I -O- _ i N u k 1 ~ ~ __ I -_ - _ ~ EL -sue r~, ~.o o ~ ~ _ _-,-- _ p i. ~ .a L---- b I " ; a ` ^ ~ ~--- ~ ~-------- _ e i~~l~ ~ ~~~ -,,^b ~~ - ' e _ 4 p~IL= ii ~~ ~ I I, ~ ------ , - COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~ Ta m u f Q `' 1 ~ FRANKLIN & LOCUST GROVE s & ASSOCIC]r¢5 ! I ~ I '~ ,, ~ S~,e~~. ~. ~~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~a ~ ~a~o. ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 S -293'. ~m =c ~ aP :o 0 -Z ° ~` ad T r O O '0 r D Z .. H A 0 _ \ ~ ,,. ,~ ' COBBLESTONE VILLAGE , ~~ Tamura '~ FRANKLIN RD. & LOCUST GROVE RD. ~ ~ ~ ASSOCIOt¢5 ~ ~~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO ' . m ~ , }_ I ~ _~ ,~ _ J~~ ~ ~~ -, p 1: ~ k~ ~,~ r ,,.. _ aA *"_ .. ~ : -~ c > ~ m , ,~ a . r _ ~.q .,..- a ~ N' f z ~` .. \D ~~ E r £ O ~ t. , °. ~ Y Z ~ I~ _~ : -. n - I ~,e Y '~ i ,~ ,m ~ m s !< m ~ iD ~ . . ~ ~y < +, P S Y ~ ~ ~Z ~ #li 2 g _ ~~ i~ i ~ .~ !r= ~ 7. C a ,.~~` t 10 ,,4 P # I r O :~ Z ! ;D ^ y 4 D r i ~ ~ t a ~..& ~ a . { .? . , r 9 q [ - 3 ~ s. I Y. . "* ~' ~ ,5 1: s. 4 ~ - r x Cv } ~ , ._ ,t .. .:..,.. ~ . '.,:. :.:' a 1 r a ~ m ; .. I ~ t t -, .: r .>_ .. 4 ._.. , s. e- .. aR rt s~. ~ -. ~ ... ~,.e I SS i ~. { / 6 .# A i t~. .. Y ti ,3 ., ~ a a. r. .. ~s _~./. ~. ..,~. ~ .. 3 ~ y..Y. ° k ~ ' ~.f ~. .r R. ,. .{ Y o ' ~ ] s ~ r 3 - ~~ Y' 3= ~A 4 e6 '1 ~ 1 11 ;''. :'; ~ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - - Tamura \ is FRANKLIN 8 LOCUST GROVE & Associa~¢s ! i MERIDIAN, 1DAH0 = ~ L~ ~ • cu. ~~ ~~ _~ U COBBLESTONE VILLAGE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300' BUILDERS MARKETPLACE INC 1300 E FRANKLIN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-5902 TAMURA DOUGLAS W AND BERRY ARTHUR J BERRY-TAMtTRA 960 BROADWAY AVE SUITE #450 BOISE ID 83706-3623 1620 E FRANKLIN RD E FRANKLIN RD ROBERSON A & E TRUST ROBERSON A T & E M LIFE ESTATE ROBERSON A T & E M TRUSTEES 185 S LOCUST GROVE RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6205 BRACKUS NICK & BRACKUS ELIZABETH ANN 10511 ALBANY BOISE ID 83713 180 S ADKINS WAY MCCLURE MONTE C & BEVERLY J 2626 PENNICK POINTE LN MERIDIAN ID 83642 1475 E FRANKLIN RD PROPERTIES WEST INC 1401 SHORELINE DR BOISE ID 83702-6869 E FRANKLIN RD 100 S ADKINS WAY S ADKINS WAY J AND A ENTERPRISES 9272 CHELAN AVE BOISE ID 83714 50 S ADKINS WAY DELSMAN JOHN W & ROLLENE TRUST DELSMAN JOHN W & ROLLENE TRSTE 1244 W HEMPSTEAD DR EAGLE ID 83616 150 S ADKINS WAY- WITHERELL JAMES N & ANN 215 S LOCUST GROVE RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6205 205 S LOCUST GROVE RD S LOCUST GROVE RD . PRESSLEY FRANKIE GENE & VERNADENE 255 S LOCUST GROVE RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6205 DOUBLE JAYCEE PROPERTIES LLC 4192 W PLUMROSE ST MERIDIAN ID 83642 190 S LOCUST GROVE RD CULLIP RODNEY L & SHIRLEY A 1821 E FRANKLIN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-5907 1819 E FRANKLIN RD WEST NATHAN D & CONNIE 160 S LOCUST GROVE RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6204 0 • • ~~ 1 + ~ ~ ~ ` • I- • I • ~~ ~v~ ~ L7 7J (n Z O ~ N m ~ N Z c D ,~ 4 o L~ u cn ~ N ~ ~ .~ N 7 N n 9°~ c O p '~ ' p ~.' d ~ C O ~ ~~ O ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ C Q N ~~ ~ W K ~ J ~ J ~ ~ Q d a ~' f ~ '~ ~ F ~ c n ? , 1 r w ~ n ~ o c o r ~ r a c 1 ~ N '1 N ti '~ P !? n ~ ' _ D ~ m `' 0 ~ ~ ,~ C ~ ~ D ~` V - n C) ~ •q / ~ ~ ~ ~' o ~ N m ~ ~ m o O D r ~ x W ~ W ~ J'-' o a.,, W ~~ ~-`` W o ~ ~ O u. V 0 Q v ~ c O ~, - o r O Q ~ Q V O n" m ~ CD `D ~ ~ = 3. ~ ~ ~ ~ N O ~~ 11 1"- d. ~. d U ry~ W ~?; D N N OD ~ ` m a ` ~c m n ao o ~ m c o ~ N p C ~ O ~ ~ W }( D n' ~ m G 9 : Z o ma a ~ . C ~n Q K n y r cD '~ o W N m ~ A O m ° ~ ~ O -i X D n r o 0 c -i Q n ~ T C ~, Q W O O ~~ m~ ~ d a wo ?~ 177 w°<~ ~ ~ ~ -a l~ ~ ~l C ~ Q. ~ W O O ~j m~ a `° a wo s~ Rl g°a ~ < ~ ~ °-' v_ N .~ # Y Z ~.. , , -, _. _ ... .. , , a IV ~ ~~, s~ ~ im s ~o .,T ;IDS .~ a ~ d (n 4~ R~ .. •m < D i~ ~ ~ ~< z z D i ~ Z C m C r r ~ O ~ C ~ ~ v ~ m z -p . h m~ a. ~ -~ .. m- ,°. m~ rn y ,. O z i C r w_ . iz c~ ~o .+ ~- ~ j ~ i'= O i - -- __~ __- ~ COBBELSTONE VILLAGE ~ ®~ Ta m u r a ~! ~~ ! ~ ~ s i FRANKLIN & LOCUS GROVE ~. o & ASSOCIC7t¢S I T 4.,~~ y ,~ ii ~_ MERIDIAN, IDAHO -• -- ~~___ - ._ ` -- -- - r ~ x~:$ d s a a:$: e 9 8~ d~ 9~ a ~ > ~8~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A p ~~ ~ ~O~ Y aAeF=~?~~ = ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~ g~~nPn ~9~ 5~~~~~~ ~ ~ l ~ss~ > ~ a ~ i ~ 7 7 ~ ~ ddd {~ Y_68~~2D t~ ~--- ^^qq ~JI1G N > ~ ~ = N tD ~ .Z7 ~ p r ~ ii ~ ~ ~` ~ $ 3Y~E€~ g ~~€ n z~n ~ °~ I D ~~~_y~D ~ ~ N ~Qis ° OD D ~ .~ ~ C7 a - ~ D ~ ~~ ~ vN m Z < ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ - m ~ 2 N Y ii ! ~ ~ Y N m m {~ nnl F~ ;m ,~ ar D Z 1 W O m e ,- T a m e a i l COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~= To m u r a i c ~ .a. = : ~ I i FRANKLW ~ LOCUS GROVE 16 8 ASSOgat¢5 O : I •~; MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~ •-I~~,~'" MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 7,1999 APPLICANT: ~~~~-~ u~r~I• ~~bYttL '~I'l°}'.~i'p-F'`i ~-E~ AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REQUEST- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSfONS OF LAW -REQUEST FOIL CONDRIONAL USE PERMR fOR 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) AGENCY CITY CLERK: COMMENTS CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED FINDINGS CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER 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: Jg' ^ -,~S v~'"~ a~~~ ~ ~~~ US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: QTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~~~- ~~q~ ~~,~~~, ~I~~I~' L~F~- 1M~~ --~ 7 , interoffice MEMORANDUM ~ECE'~~ To: ~-William°G~Berg;~J .'' // ~, _ l~~/ DEC 1 1999 From: 'Wm. F: Gigray, III CITY ®F 1lZERIDIAN Subject: IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. /COBBLESTONE VILLAGE File No.: CUP-99-005 Date: November 30, 1999'' Will: Please find attached the original FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, pursuant to action of the Council at their November 16,_.1999, meeting. cThe -Findings ~will~be ~on- he ~-~ ~~ ~Gouncil=s`agenda-for.their_December 7-~1~999 meeting I have also attached the original of the ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, if the Council approves the FINDINGS. Please serve copies of both documents upon the Applicant, Planning and Zoning, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. If you have any questions please advise. msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Cobblestone Village\C1kLtrCUPffcls ,~ y m' 1^ - ~o BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY. COUNCIL w _ ~ 4 E~E~D ,R { DEC - 1 1999 CITY ~~' 1~ERIDIAI~1 I IN THE MATTER OF THE ~') -Case No. CUP-99-005 APPLICATION OF STAMAS ) CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. ,) FINDINGS OF FACT AND FOR ACONDITIONAL-.USE ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY ) DECISION. AND ORDER 96-UNIT.APARTMENT ) :GRANTING CONDITIONAL' COMPLEX (COBBLESTONE ) USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO VILLAGE) LOCATED 1475 E. )+ CONDITIONS FRANIQ.IN ROAD, MERIDIAN, ) ' IDAHO ) ~ - YT ~~ ~ The above entitled conditional use permit application having come before the City Council on November 3, 1999, and Shari Stiles appeared and testified, and the matter~was continued until- November 1`6, 1999, and Shari. Stiles, Planning and Zoning •. Administrator, appeared and~testified at the hearing, and Joann Butler and Bryce Peterson, r - appeared and testified on behalf of the Applicant,,and appearing in opposition `of the application were: ,Alan Fox and Ernie Robertson, and additionally having. held the application to December 7,-1999, to enable Ordinance No. 848 the annexation and zoning . ordinance for the subject parcel to take affect, and the City Council having received the r staff report and the record made before the Planning andyZoning Commission, and being ~~ zV ~ fully advised in the .premises, the Council finds, grid concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF'~FACT~AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISIO_ N AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL x USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC°ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 1 FINDINGS ~OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on'the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for November 3, 1999, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three , , hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days,prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearings having been posted upon'the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing and the copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City~Council at the said November 3, 1999, public hearing; and the ` Applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within. the. planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence: 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing 'requirements set forth in~Idaho Code §§67-6509 and 67-6512; and §§11-2-416E and 11~-2-418E as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 2 s x Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993 Ordinance #629 -January 4, 1994 and Maps and the Ordinance establishing the Impact Area Boundary Ordinance and Map. 4. The property is located at 147,5 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho. 5. The owner of record of the subject property is Monte C. McClure of 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian. - 6. Applicant is Stamos Corp./Ionic Enterprises of 1 Sierra Gate Plaza, 3558 Roseville, California. 7. The subject property is currently zoned Meridian High Density Residential (R-40). [City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 8. The Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., seeks to be granted a conditional use permit for construction and development of a 96 unit apartment complex, located at -1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian,. Idaho. The requested conditional use is described in the Site Plan dated (stamped) AUG 25 1999, Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, File No.: 9834A1_0, SHEET A1.0, TAMURA & ASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, for the development of the aforementioned projects and which property is described hereinbelow to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 3 _ A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1E., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho', said parcel. being more particularly described as follows: Commencing ata a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46' 18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31' 19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24"`West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02°14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. 9. The City Council takes judicial notice that the real property which is the subject of this application was the subject of an application for annexation and zoning in Case entitled."In the Matter of the Application of Stamas Corporation/Ionic FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 4 Enterprises, Inc., the Application for Annexation and. Zoning of 6.15 acres for Cobblestone Village at the Southwest Corner of Locust Grove and Franklin Road, ,Meridian, Idaho, Case No. AZ-99-005", in which certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Granting Application for Annexation and Zoningf 6.15 acres for Cobblestone Village at the Southwest Corner of Locust Grove and.Franlclin Road were entered on the day of November, 1999. 10. The City Council takes judicial notice that the real property which is the subject of this application, and is pursuant to the City Council action in Case No. AZ-99-005 as a part of its Decision and Order therein, and the subject of a Development Agreement, which the City, by authority of the City Council action in Resolution.No. 268, and the Applicant duly entered into. 11. The project is proposed as a conditional use, and through the City's Staff and Planning and Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions.. of approval to ensure that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be minimized. The proposed application requests a conditional use permit for amulti-family 96 unit apartment complex. The R-40, High Density Residential District, zoning designation within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance requires a conditional use permit be obtained. In addition a conditional use permit is required as the property is in a Mixed Planned Use FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION-AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 5 r ~- Development area under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. (Meridian City Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-2-409)... 12. The.Applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following manner: the construction and development of a 96-unit apartment` complex, to include: 6 one bedroom units, 58 two bedroom units, 24 three bedroom units, and 8 four bedroom units, with a density of 15.6 units per acre, parking of I92 spaces with 6 handicap accessible parking spaces, with the following setbacks: . REQUIRED PROPOSED Front ~20' 35' (Franklin) Rear 15' 15' Side 0' 15' Street Side 20' 20' 13. The City Council finds that the application is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and does hereby adopt Findings of Fact nos. 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28 and 29 in Case No. AZ-99-005, and references the. same as if stated herein at length. 14. Residence of the South Locust Grove and Franklin Road intersection area were concerned with the effect of the additional traffic generated by the proposed project to the intersection of South Locust Grove and Franklin Roads, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 6 which the City Council-finds can be minimized by the inclusion of the conditions herein imposed. 15. Giving due consideration to the comments received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, the public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the following conditions of development are imposed and the following is also found to be required to mitigate the effects of the proposed use and development upon services delivered by political subdivisions providing services to the subject real property within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian and given the record in .this matter to minimize the adverse impact of this development application upon other development in the area, and giving consideration to the Council's ability to also impose conditions to control the sequence, timing, duration, and maintenance of the proposed development, the following are found to be reasonable terms and conditions of the granting of this application for conditional, use permit as follows: Adopt the Meridian Fire Department's Recommendations as follows: 15.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 7 .. 15.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. _. 15.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling systems. 15.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. Adopt the Meridian Water Department Recommendations as follows: 15.5 The water main shall be extended to east property boundary on Franklin Road. Adopt the Central District Health Department Recommendations as follows: 15.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health &. Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 15.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 1'5.8 stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 15.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. Adopt the Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District Recommendations as follows: 15.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 15.11 ~ All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 8 ~.. 15.12 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 15.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa &. Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31-3805. Adopt the Planning and Zoning Administrator and Assistant City Engineer Recommendations as follows: 15.14 Any existing. irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this a project. 15.15 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. 15.16 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. 15.17 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 9 15.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 15.19 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 15.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 15.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 15.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 15.23 As stated in the 7-6-991etter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to ` Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creek. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation .District (NMID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the ` revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of- way from the Five Mile Creek centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must-confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies. 15.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 1/2" x 11" copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT• SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC .ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 10 elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B~." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 15.25 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 15.26 .. The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the t buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/z-story versus 3-story appearance). 15.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south properties. 15.28 The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISIONAND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 11 ~4 F the parking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. 15.29 The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning ~ Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan`to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff .authority to negotiate the final parking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 15.30 ~ The garage which is located in the existing structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village Site Plan A1.0, File Tamura SzAssociates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance facility for the development to house equipment and operations required for the repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development.. 15.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. Adopt the Ada County Highway District's Recommendations as follows: 15.32 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of--way from the centerline of Locust. Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or -other required permits), whichever occurs first. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 12 1'5.33 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the'parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 15.34 ~ Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets; prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 15:35 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, Located approximately 340-feet west O1 Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 15.36 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road: 15.37 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a ..pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 15.38 Construct a ~5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. 15.39 Construct a 5-foot wide~detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW .AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 13 15.40 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. 15.41 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. ` The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission offered the' following recommendations: 15.42 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. 15.43 The unimproved right-of-way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 15.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. 16. The uses proposed within the subject application will be subject to the conditions set forth in Finding of Fact no. 15 and will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance or intended character of the general vicinity and that such uses will not change the intended essential character of the same area. 17. The uses proposed within the subject application will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. 18. The uses proposed within the subject application will be served FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 14 adequately by central -public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. i - 19. The applicant has agreed to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any associated with the use. 20. The uses proposed within the subject application will not involve uses; activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 21. The development will not result in `the destruction, loss or damage of natural or scenic feature of major importance relating to the property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Idaho Code § 67-6512 provides in part that: (A) As part of a zoning ordinance the City Council may provide for the processing of applications for special or conditional use permits; .and (B) That a special use permit may be granted to an applicant if the proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the zoning ordinance, but may be allowed with conditions under specific provisions of the zoning ordinance, subject to the ability of political subdivisions, including school districts, to provide services for the proposed use, and when it is not in conflict with. the plan; and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC:/ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 15 (C) That upon the granting of a special use permit, conditions maybe attached to a special'use permit, including, but not limited to, those: 1) Minimizing adverse impact on~other development; 2) Controlling the sequence and timing of development; 3) Controlling;the duration of development; 4) Assuring that development is maintained properly; 5) .Designating the exact location and nature of development; requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in an ordinance; requiring mitigation of effects of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts,. providing services within the planning jurisdiction. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority to provide for the processing of applications for Conditional Use Permits by the enactment of § 11-2-418 Municipal Code and which Section provides at § 11-2-418 C, for the General Standards applicable to all conditional uses which are: 2.1 Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy; 2.2 Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance; 2.3 Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; ,,FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 16 - 2.4 Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; 2.5 Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,. streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that he person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services, ~. 2.6 Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; 2.7 Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; 2.8 Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; and 2.9 Will not>result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or, scenic feature of major importance. and § 11-2-418 H 2 provides as follows: 2.10 Upon granting of a conditional use permit, conditions may be attached to a conditional use permit including, but not limited to, those conditions which: 2.10.1 Minimize adverse impact on other development; 2.10.2 Control the sequence and timing of development; 2.10.3 Control the duration of development; 2.10.4Assure that the development is maintained properly; . FINDINGS OF~FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 17 2.10.5 Designate the exact location and nature of the development; 2.10.6 Require the provision for on-site public facilities or services; and 2.10.7 Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance. 3. Idaho Code § 67-6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which Act is known as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." 4. The City of Meridian has enacted the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4, 1:994. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does Order that: 1. That the Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., is granted a conditional use permit to develop and construct and maintain a multi-family 96 unit apartment complex as depicted in the Site Plan dated "received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995", Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, .~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 18 File No.: 9834A1 0, SHEET A1.0, TAMURA & ASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, upon the following described real property to-wit: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast. l/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R. l E., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting -the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the'-TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears `South 89°46' 18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31' 19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Book 75 of Plats at Page,7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet`an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02°14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 19 2. The applicant is granted a conditional use permit for and subject to the following terms and conditions: 2.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. 2.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. 2.3 Applicant shall install, appropriate fire sprinkling systems. 2.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. 2.5 The water main. shall be extended to east property. boundary on Franklin Road. 2.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 2.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.8 stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 2.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. 2.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. _2.11 All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 20 - 2.12 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review:drainage plans. 2.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of--way occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31-3805. 2.14 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to,be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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 Worlcs 'Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of .any ditches crossing this project. 2.15 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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 2.19 Outside lighting shall be~designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 21 2.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 2.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 2.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2.23 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creek. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of--way from the Five Mile Creek centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and.-submit compliance letters from said agencies. 2.24_ Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 1/z" x 11 " copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "G" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 2.25 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could-also vary with the buffer to provide a more . integrated appearance. 2.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 22 ~- ' from the south shall be no more than two~_(2) story. We request further detail and representation.at the hearing_on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/2-story versus 3-story appearance). 2.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south properties. 2.28 The proposed parking layout will result in~a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The ' applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to the parking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final, plan approved by -the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. 2.29 The Site Plan currently-shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning &. Development'Ordinance for a ,96-unit complex.. In order to accommodate. the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four, (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking design: The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 2.30 The garage which is located in the' existing structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village Site P1anA1.0, File Tamura &Associates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance. facility for the development to house equipment FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW .AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC.% COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 23 and operations required for the repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development. 2.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. 4 2.32 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.33 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 2.35 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west O1 Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 2.36x Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of FranklinARoad. 2.37 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 2.38 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Franlin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 24 2.39 Construct a 5-foot wide. detached'concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.40 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future }development of this parcel. 2.41 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. 2.42,. The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. 2.43 The unimproved right-of--way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 2.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. 3. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Cleric and then a conformed copy shall be served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the, Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney and any affected party requested notice. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION~AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 25 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the~conditional use permit may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, f ,> Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of , 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 26 2.10.5 Designate the exact'location and nature of the development; 2.10.6 Require the provision for on-site public facilities or services; and 2.10.7 Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance. 3.; Idaho Code § 67-6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which Act is known as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." 4. The City. of Meridian has enacted the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4, 1,994. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does Order that: 1. That the Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., is granted a conditional use permit to develop and construct and maintain a multi-family 96 unit apartment complex as depicted in the Site Plan dated "received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995", Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, FINDINGS OF~FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL "USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 18 . MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: i . Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. .By: Dated: City Clerk 5 msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Cobblestone Village\CUPFfCIsOrd r: ti ~: :a FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 27 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) CASE NO. CUP-99-005 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., ) FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA ) ORDER OF MULTI-FAMILY 96-UNIT APARTMENT ) CONDITIONAL COMPLEX (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) ) APPROVAL OF LOCATED 1475 E. FRANIQ.IN ROAD, ) CONDITIONAL USE MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) __ ) PERMIT I This matter coming .before the City Council on the 3'~ day of November, 1999, for final action on conditional use permit application and the Council having received and approving the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Council takes the following action: 1. That the Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC`ENTERPRISES, INC., is granted a conditional use permit to develop and construct and maintain a multi- family 96 unit apartment complex as depicted in the Site Plan dated "received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1999", Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, File No.: 9834A1_0, SHEET A1.0, TAMURA & ASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, for the development of the aforementioned projects and which property is described hereinbelow to-wit: A parcel of land'being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R. l E., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46' 18" West 2,654.20 feet; ` ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 1 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line;. thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02°14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said-Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. 2. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for construction and development of a 96 unit apartment, complex located at 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho, subject to the following conditions of use and development: 2.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. 2.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. 2.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling-systems. 2.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 2 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) 2.5 The water main shall be extended to east property boundary on Franklin Road. 2.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 2.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.8 stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 2.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. 2.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 2.11 All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. 2.12 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the •Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 2.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa Sz Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. Developer must comply,with Idaho Code § 31-3805. 2.14 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be -piped should be shown on the site plans. 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. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 2.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance' ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 3 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) r Section. 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 2.19 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so •as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 2.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 2.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks. in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 2.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2.23 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creelc. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that `the NMID-required 30-feet right-of-way from the Five Mile Creelc ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 4 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the `} high watermark. Applicant must confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies. 2.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 1/z" x 11 " copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commis`sion hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations'submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 2.25_ We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 2.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from .finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and"representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to .roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/z-story versus 3-story appearance). 2.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate.. both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the -south properties. 2.28 "The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to the parking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+• shown). Note, though, ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 5 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be. reduced. 2.29 The Site Plan currently shows 192'parlcing stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning & Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended 'parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 2.30 The garage which is located in the existing structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village Site.Plan A1.O, File Tamura &Associates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance facility for the development to house equipment and operations required for the repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development. 2.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. 2.32 ~- Dedicate 43=feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.33 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of ,recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 6 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) 2.35 Construct a 24-foot wide .driveway on Franklin. Road, located approximately 340-feet west 01 Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to cor-trol left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 2:36 Construct a 24-foot`wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. 2.37 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement'of Locust Grove Road and•Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway. edge. 2.38 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, .elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.39 Construct~a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.40_ As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and .:locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development` of this parcel. 2.41 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. 2.42 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced~to two story buildings. 2.43 The unimproved'right-of-way shall be maintained at the e~cpense of the developer. 2.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 7 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) x t 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the ,,, applicant shall meet such- requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use'permit. 4. Notice to Permit Holder, this conditional use permit is not transferable without complying with the provisions of § 11-2-418 J of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, a copy of-which is attached to this permit. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of 1999. Robert D. Corrie, Mayor City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: Dated: City Clerk msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Cobblestone Village\CUPOrder ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 8 OF 8 STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) x g:. ..- 1r F ~ ' ~ a ~ ' ,~. ~ .. 3Y interoffice MEMORANDUM ,~ To William G. Bergw Jr. Y ~ ' ~~~E~D ` Fryom: Wm. F. Gigray, Ill - DEC t 0 1999 Subject: Cobblestone~VillageCiTP-99=005. C~'~F~+~~ Date: ~ December 8; 1999 t Pursuant to Council action at their December 7, 1999, meeting, please find enclosed the revised Findings in the above matter. Please note the following are ' the revisions: ~. e 4 1. The date of the Site Plan has been changed to reflect the year 1999, not 1995. F 1 2. On pages 12, 13 and 24 at number 15.32, 15.33. 2.32 and 2.33, 43' has been changed to 48'. 3. Additionally, in the Decision and Order in number 1 the language has been added after the site plan reference as follows: "and as modified by these hereinafter contained conditions. `of the conditional use permit," Also,'these same changes have been made within the Order of Conditional Approval of Conditional Use Permit. e If you have any questions please advise. r X msg/Z:AWork~Ni\Meridian 15360M\CobblestoneVillage\ClerlcRevisedFF120899.Ltr . _i F ' .. (- S e ~' A .- m r 9 k BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) LOCATED 1475 E. FRANIQ.IN ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO 12-08-99 Case No. CUP-99-005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS The above entitled conditional use permit application having come before the City Council on November 3, 1999, and Shari Stiles appeared and testified, and the matter was continued until November 16, 1999, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, appeared and testified at the hearing, and Joann Butler and Bryce Peterson, appeared and testified on behalf of the Applicant, and appearing .in opposition of the application were: Alan Fox and Ernie Robertson, and additionally having held the application to December 7, 1999, to enable Ordinance No. 848 the annexation and zoning ordinance for the subject parcel to take affect, and the City Council having received the staff report and the record made before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and being fully advised in the premises, the Council finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 1 FINDINGS OF FACT • A notice of a public hearing on the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for November 3, 1999, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearings having been posted upon the .property under consideration more than one week before said hearing and the copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council at the said November 3, 1999, public hearing; and the Applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §§67-6509 and 67-6512; and §§11-2-416E and 11-2-418E as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 2 Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 2I, I993 Ordinance #629 -January 4, 1994 and Maps and the Ordinance establishing the Impact Area Boundary Ordinance and Map. 4. The property is located at 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho. 5. The owner of record of the subject property is Monte C. McClure of 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian. 6. Applicant is Stamos Corp./Ionic Enterprises of 1 Sierra Gate Plaza, 3558 Roseville, California. 7. The subject property is currently zoned Meridian High Density Residential (R-40). [City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 8. The Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., seeks to be granted a conditional use. permit for construction and development of a 96 unit apartment complex, located at 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho. The requested conditional use is described in the Site Plan dated (stamped) AUG 25 1999, Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, File No.: 9834A1_0, SHEET Al .0, TAMURA &. ASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, for the development of the aforementioned projects and which property is described hereinbelow to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 3 ~ r ~. r~ ~~ A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast l/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.IE:, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as .follows: 1 Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OE BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46' 18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02 14 38 West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480..70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. 9. The City Council takes judicial notice that the real property which is the subject of this application was the subject of an application for annexation and zoning in Case entitled "In the Matter of the Application of Stamas Corporation/Ionic FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE'PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 4 Development area under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. (Meridian City Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-2-409). 12. The Applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following manner: the construction and development of a 96-unit apartment complex, to include: 6 one bedroom units, 58 two bedroom units, 24 three bedroom units, and 8 four bedroom units, with a density of 15.6 units per acre, parking of 192 spaces with 6 handicap accessible parking spaces, with the following setbacks: REQUIRED PROPOSED Front 20' 35' (Franklin) Rear 15' 15' Side 0' 15' Street Side 20' 20' 13. The City Council finds that the application is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and does hereby adopt Findings of Fact nos. 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28 and 29 in Case No. AZ-99-005, and references the same as if stated, herein at length. 14. Residence of the South Locust Grove and Franklin Road intersection area were concerned with the effect of the additional traffic generated by the proposed project to the intersection of South Locust Grove and Franklin Roads, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 6 ~ i which the City Council finds can be minimized by the inclusion of the conditions herein imposed. 15. Giving due consideration to the comments received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, the public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the following conditions of development are imposed and the following is also found to be required to mitigate the effects of the proposed use and development upon services delivered by political subdivisions providing services to the subject real property within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian and given the record in this matter to minimize the adverse impact of this development application upon other development in the area, and giving consideration to the Council's ability to also impose conditions to control the sequence, timing, duration, and maintenance of the proposed development, the following are found to be reasonable terms and conditions of the granting of this application for conditional use permit as follows: Adopt the Meridian Fire Department's Recommendations as follows: 15.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW .AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC.! COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 7 15.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. 15.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling systems. 1.5.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. Adopt the Meridian Water Department Recommendations as follows: 15.5 The water main shall be extended to east property boundary on Franl~lin Road. Adopt the Central District Health Department Recommendations as follows: 15.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health &. Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 15.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 15.8 Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. ' 15.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management ' practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. Adapt the Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District Recommendations as follows: 15.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 15.11 All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC.1 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 8 Enterprises, Inc., the Application for Annexation and Zoning of 6.15 acres for Cobblestone Village at the Southwest Corner of Locust Grove and Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho, Case No. AZ-99-005", in which certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Granting Application for Annexation and Zonin~6.15 acres for Cobblestone Village at the Southwest Corner of Locust Grove and Franklin Road were entered on the day of November, 1999. 10. The City Council takes judicial notice that the real property which is the subject of this application, and is pursuant to the City Council action in Case No. AZ-99-005 as a part of its Decision and Order therein, and the subject of a Development Agreement, which the City, by authority of the City Council action in Resolution No. 268, and the Applicant duly entered into. 11. The project is proposed as a conditional use, and through the City's Staff and Planning and Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions of ~, approval to ensure that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be minimized. The proposed application requests a conditional use permit for amulti-family 96 unit apartment complex. The R-40, High Density Residential District, zoning designation within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance requires a conditional use permit be obtained. In addition a conditional use permit is required as the property is in a Mixed Planned Use FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 5 15.12- If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa Sz Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 15.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa SL Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31-3805. Adopt the Planning and Zoning Administrator and Assistant City Engineer Recommendations as follows: 15.14 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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 Worlcs Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 15.15 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. 15.16 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. 15.17 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 9 15.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 15.19 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 15.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 15.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City J Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 15.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 15.23 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creelc. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of- way from the Five Mile Creek centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies. 15.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 1/2" x 11 "copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 10 elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. l 15.25 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated-with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 15.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/2-story versus 3-story appearance). 15.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south properties. 15.28 The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 11 the parking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. 15.29 The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning & Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 15.30 The garage which is located in the e.Yisting structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village'Site Plan A1.0, File Tamura ~ Associates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1999, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance facility for the development to house equipment and operations required for the repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development. 15.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. Adopt° the Ada County Highway District's Recommendations as follows: 15.32 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting 'the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. ,~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 12 15.33 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-~vay from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building pernzit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 15.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 15.35 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west O l Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 15.36 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. 15.37 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 15.38 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. 15.39 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 13 15.40 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. 15.41 Other than the access- points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission offered the following recommendations: 15.42 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. 15.43 The unimproved right-of-way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 15.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. 16. The uses proposed within the subject application will be subject to the conditions set forth in Finding of Fact no. 15 and will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance or intended character of the general vicinity and that such uses will not change the intended essential character of the same area. 17. The uses proposed within the subject application will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. 18. The uses proposed within the subject application will be served FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 14 adequately by central public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. 19. The applicant has agreed to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any associated with the use. 20. The uses proposed within the subject application will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 21. The development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of natural or scenic feature of major importance relating to the property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Idaho Code § 67-6512 provides in part that: (A) As part of a zoning ordinance the City Council may provide for the processing of applications for special or conditional use permits; and (B) That a special use permit may be granted to an applicant if the proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the zoning ordinance, but may be allowed with conditions under specific provisions of the zoning ordinance, subject to the ability of political subdivisions, including school districts, to provide services for the proposed use, and when it is not in conflict with the plan; and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 15 (C) That upon the granting of a special use permit, conditions may be attached to a special use permit, including, but not limited to, those: 1) Minimizing adverse impact on other development; 2) Controlling the sequence and timing of development; 3) Controlling the duration of development; 4) Assuring that development is maintained properly; 5) Designating the exact location and nature of development; requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in an ordinance; requiring mitigation of effects of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, providing services within the planning jurisdiction. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority to provide for the processing of applications for Conditional Use Permits by the enactment of § 11-2-418 Municipal Code and which Section provides at § 11-2-418 C, for the General Standards applicable to all conditional uses which are: 2.1 Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy; 2.2 Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance; 2.3 Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 16 ~ ~ 2.4 Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; 2.5 Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that he person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; 2.6 Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; 2.7 Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; 2.8 Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; and 2.9 Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. and § 11-2-418 H 2 provides as follows: 2.10 Upon granting of a conditional use permit, conditions may be attached to a conditional use permit including, but not limited to, those conditions which: 2.10.1 Minimize adverse impact on other development; 2.10.2 Control the sequence and timing of development; 2.10.3 Control the duration of development; 2.10.4A.ssure that the development is maintained properly; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 17 • 2.10.5 Designate the exact location and nature of the development; 2.10.6 Require the provision for on-site public facilities or services; and` 2.10.7 Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance. 3. Idaho Code § 67-6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which Act is known as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." 4. The City of Meridian has enacted the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4, 1994. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does Order that: 1. That the Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., is granted a conditional use permit to develop and construct and maintain a multi-family 92 unit apartment complex in substantial compliance as depicted in the Site Plan dated "received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1999", FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND- DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS ~CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - l 8 • • Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, File No.: 9834A1_0, SHEET A1.0, TAMURA ~ ASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, and as modified by these hereinafter contained conditions of the conditional use permit, upon the following described real property to-wit: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18,-T.3N., R.IE., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast comer of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46' 18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with- and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02°14'38" West 187.40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 19 • ` Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. 2. The applicant is granted a conditional use permit for and subject to the following terms and conditions: 2.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. 2.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. 2.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling systems. 2.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. 2.5 The water main shall be extended to east property boundary on Franklin Road. 2.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health SL Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 2.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.8 stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 2.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. 2.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 2.11 All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 20 • 2.12 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa SL Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 2.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-~vay occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31-3805. 2.14 Any existing irrigation/drainage.ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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 Worlcs Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 2.15 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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 2.19 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 21 ~ ~ 2.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 2.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with Citv Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 2.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2.23 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creelc. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of--way from the Five Mile Creelc centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies.. 2.24 Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 '/2" x 11 "copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 2.25 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 2.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 22 • from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 2'/~-story versus 3-story appearance}. 2.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south properties. 2.28 The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to the parking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. 2.29 The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning Sz Development Ordinance for a 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 2.30 The garage which is located in the existing structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village Site Plan A1.0, File Tamura SL Associates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1999, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance facility for the development to house equipment FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 23 and operations required for the.. repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development. 2.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. 2.32 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.33 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 2.35 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west O1 Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 2.36 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. 2.37 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 2.38 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 24 2.39 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.40 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. 2.41 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. 2.42 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. 2.43 The unimproved right-of--way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 2.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. 3. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a conformed copy shall be served by the Clerlc upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Worlcs Department and City Attorney and any affected party requested notice. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL ,. USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 25 • NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date i of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 7~ day of C~~~~ , 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN ANDERSON COUNCILMAN BENTLEY COUNCILMAN BIRD COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED ~~~~ VOTED ~- VOTED_ I~~~ VOTED_ `~i~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 26 • ~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: ~~ _ ! ~~~ MOTION: APPROVF~ . - `~ _- ------IDISAI'~'ROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Worlcs Department and City Attorney. ~~~~"""""'~r~ BY~ /~`'2- - Dated: ~~ ~~ ~ ~ __ rty Cleric 3~ msg/Z:\Wodc\M\Nleridian 1~360M\Cobblestone Village\CUPFfCIsOrd FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC./ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE - 27 +~ '~ ~ ~ .. y~°,y9O ~LsT Y'~ , ~ ~~ `~~ ~1llJ73'E~4tilT444~`~~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) CASE NO. CUP-99-005 STAMA,S CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., ) FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA ) ORDER OF MULTI-FAMILY 96-UNIT APARTMENT ) CONDITIONAL COMPLEX (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) ) APPROVAL OF LOCATED 1475 E. FRANKLIN ROAD, ) CONDITIONAL USE MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) PERMIT This matter coming before the City Council on the 3`~ day of November, 1999, for final action on conditional use permit application and the Council having received and approving the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Council takes the following action: 1. That the Applicant and owner of the property, IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC., is granted a conditional use permit to develop and construct and maintain a multi- family 92 unit apartment complex as depicted in the Site Plan dated "received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1999", Drawn: JTB, Project 9834, File No.: 9834A1_0, SHEET A1.0, TAMURA SzASSOCIATES, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE, and as modified by these hereinafter contained conditions of the conditional use permit, for the development of the aforementioned projects and which property is described hereinbelow to-wit: A parcel of land being a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1 E., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE I OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) • - Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the northeast corner of said Section 18, said corner being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, from which the North 1/4 corner of said Section 18 bears South 89°46'18" West 2,654.20 feet; thence South 00°31'19" West 565.45 feet along the Easterly boundary of said Section 18 and the center line of South Locust Grove Road; thence leaving said section line and center line South 89°41'24" West 474.70 feet parallel with and lying 48.5 feet northerly from the north line of that certain warranty deed recorded as Instrument No. 700676 in the records of Ada County, Idaho to a point on the Easterly boundary of Medimont Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Boolc 75 of Plats at Page 7794 in the records of Ada County, Idaho: thence along the easterly boundary of said subdivision North 00°58'43" East 378.88 feet an angle point in said easterly boundary line; thence continuing along said easterly boundary line extended North 02°14'38" West 187:40 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section 18; thence along said Northerly boundary North 89°46' 18" East 480.70 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 6.16 acres, more or less. 2. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for construction and development of a 92 unit apartment complex located at 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho, subject to the following conditions of use and development: 2.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow. 2.2 Appropriate fire hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. 2.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling systems. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 2 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) • • 2.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinkling system and the appropriate number of exits. 2.5 The water main shall be extended to east property boundary on Franklin Road. 2.6 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health ~ Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 2.7 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.8 stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 2.9 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that preventsq groundwater and surface water degradation. 2.10 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 2.11 All municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. 2.12 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa &. Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 2.13 The Developer must contact the Nampa SL Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31-3805. 2.14 Any existing irrigation drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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 Worlcs Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 3 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) 2.15 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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 2.19 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 2.20 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 2.21 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 2.22 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2.23 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creelc. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also requires separate ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 4 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) • permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of-wav from the Five Mile Creelc centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies. 2.24 Applicant must submit t:en (10), 8 '/z" x 11 "copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 2.25 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 2.26 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south shall be no more than two (2) story. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 2'/2-story versus 3-story appearance). 2.27 Assuming an above-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south properties. 2.28 The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to the parking areas ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 5 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. 2.29 The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning & Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 2.30 The garage which is located in the existing structure which is depicted on the Cobblestone Village Site Plan A1.0, File Tamura SzAssociates, Project No. 9834, received City of Meridian City Clerk's office on August 25, 1995, as "1 STORY BRICK WITH BASEMENT" shall be occupied and used asa maintenance facility for the development to house equipment and operations required for the repair and maintenance of all common areas of the development. 2.31 There shall be no on site parking of commercial or recreational equipment or vehicles. 2.32 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.33 Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 2.34 Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 6 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) 2..35 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west O1 Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 2.36 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. 2.37 Pave the driveways their. full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 2.38 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.39 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewalk with District staff. 2.40 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. 2.41 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. 2.42 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. 2.43 The unimproved right-of--way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 2.44 The applicant shall comply with all conditions and requirements imposed by the Ada County Highway District for this development. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 7 OF 8 STAMAS CORD/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) s ~e 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use permit. 4. Notice to Permit Holder, this conditional use permit is not transferable without complying with the provisions of § 11-2-418 J of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, a copy of which is attached to this permit. • y action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of ti, 1999. ~~ obe t D. Corrie, Mayor City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Worlcs Department and City Attorney. By' Dated: City Clerlc ~~~lJl msg/Z:\Work\M\Nleridian 15360M\Cobblestone Village\CUPOrder `,``++,+-+rtr-rtrrtrfr~rii TFO T O~ ~~i~ ~ ~~ ~rrrTrrrru~ nrr++++~~~~ ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -PAGE 8 OF 8 STAMAS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. (COBBLESTONE VILLAGE -CUP-99-005) ~ ~ ~ ~~ w f October 29, 1999 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: _ NOVEMBER 3. 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION ITEM #: 12 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: AWAITING LEGAL CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~~ -~ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ~`` -~ . ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: ,~. 'F ~-P~ j , y ~" . ~,,,~, CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: !~ ~ '~' NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: `~, SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: SANITARY SERVICE: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. .Meridian City Council~~~9 ~: November 3,.1999 Page 20 licant from R-T to R-4 be to an R-2 I would have the request made by the app zoning and that the Findings also incorporate the recommendations provided to the Council from Planning and Zoning. Bird: Second. ,- Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bird to apprvvC ~~~~ Corrie: Okay. Motion by request for annexation and zoning with the stip ons of Law daawn'up by the'on , and to have the Findings of Fact and Co All those in favor of the motion say ~. attorney.A-Any further discussion . Okay. aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM~12.---~---CONTINUED~PUBLIC~HEARING~FROM UNIT APARTOMENT FOR ~~~ CONDITIONAL'USE•PERMIT=FORA..,~..~._ A COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONEC ILS UT)HWES AMAS CORPORATIONIIONIC ENTERP_RISE_, IN CORNER~OF=LOCUST GROVE.& FRANKLIN: ie: Item No. 12 is a continued public-hearing: Request for. Villalte by use Corr ro osed Cobblestone 9 ) permit fora 96-unit apartment complex (p p tion/Ionic Enterprise, Inc. At this time, I'll re-open the -continue Stamas Corpora the public hearing on Item No. 12. Staff? #, ~: Stiles: I really don't know what's .going on with this. I guess Bill's raising his ~~ hand. a Corrie: Okay. Mr. Gigray. Gigray:. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council,=l believe the hold-up on this particular matter is not.so much with conditional u ~ aption wh c'h I beeelve has to' being continued because of the fact that the earlie do with the development agreement a~ode tee nt the agreementais still not corporation, Ionic, which is supposed ualified to do business in the state of Idaho, and we've jus redlw th the til they~4 } q ro natel re iste were provided with proof that they had app p Y g Secretary of State because you can't do business as a c f e before c m ng touttie so recognized, and so I have not - I double checked the , Council. this evening, and we still have not yet r s that thehpres dent ob theve the, hold-up, the information that we ve received wa or something and corporation's a California corporation was. out of the country wasn't returning until sometime in late October, and probably hasn't got it done3 yet. Meridian City Council~-~g November 3, 1999 Page 21 Bentley:- Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. M Bentley: I move we table -continue the public hearing for conditional use permit fora 96-unit apartment.by Ionic Enterprise until 11/16/99. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made by Mr. Bentley, seconded by Mr. Bird to continue the public hearing on Item No. 12 until 11/16/99. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF .PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TARAWOOD SUBDIVISION BY MICHELANGELO INVESTMENTS, LLC-SOUTH OF LOS ALAMITOS PARK & NORTH OF SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS: Corrie: 'Item No. 13 is a public hearing: Request for reconsideration of a preliminary plat for Tarawood Subdivision by Michelangelo Investments, LLC. At this time, I'll open the public hearing. Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the.Council, just a point of procedure, I reviewed the notes concerning this particular matter and the various motions that-were made, and I, to assist the Council in this regard, it's my opinion in reading those that actually no motion concerning this matter ever passed. The motion that did -`pass was to continue the public hearing, and I think that at least from my standpoint as I would prepare Findings if you reach some type of conclusion would be just to show this as a continued public hearing if that's agreeable with the members. of the Council. That's how I see the minutes as I read them. .Corrie: Okay. Then item 13 will be a continued public hearing rattier than public hearing. Same thing`, but it's continued. Staff, any comments? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, my recollection of what happened was'the public hearing was closed, the plat was denied, and after that happened, the applicant's • representative got up and gave additional testimony that the rest -the people that were in opposition to the project, they had already left because the public ." hearing was closed. I think that was why the public hearing was re-noticed so that those people would get notification of this public hearing so that the applicant's representative could bring forth any new testimony that they had since the public hearing was closed. We probably should be acting on the Findings on the annexation and zoning prior to any action on the plat. • October 15, 1999 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 19 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. `ITEM #: 15 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) " AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: ____ _ - CITY ENGINEER: _--- --~ ~ CITY PLANNING D"~`U ~~t'` ~ ~"~ (/ " '' CITY ATTORNEY: I ,~,~ CITY POLICE DEPT ~.. CITY; FIRE DEPT: ~ ~ ~ CITY BUILDING DEI Y CITY SEWER DEPT CITY WATER DEPT MERIDIAN SCHOOL MERIDIAN POST ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: PL`~ ~~,~ ~~ OTHER: IECOMMENDATIONS r~OJ 3M k All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. J' • WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ' =ATTORNEYS AT LAW KwTtiY J. EDwARDS JuL~KLIIN FISCHF]2 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE WM. F. GIGRAY, Ll r. POST OFFICE BOX 11 SO D. SAMUII. IOFINSON IDAHO 83680-1150 1VIERIDIAN WILLIAM A. MORROW , WII.LIAM F. Nlcxol,s CHRISTOPfiHStt S. NYE TII. (208) 288-2499 ' Pltu.~ A. PL-I~RSOx FAX (208) 288-2501 STFPIIIN L. PRUSS ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R STfrt>Fa~rRuTI>ExFORD DAVID 1~L SwrutTl.F.r ` TratRNa~cER WIIl1'E E'MAII.: RSRCR WPPMG.COM October 14, 1999 f William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk `Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NIxTx AYFavOFSouTII POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA, IDAHO 83653-0247 TEL. (208)466-9272 FAX (208)466-4405 PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE Re: Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-Family 96 Unit Apartment Complex, Cobblestone Village Applicant: Stamos Corp./Ionic Inc. Dear Will: Please find enclosed the original of the Recommendations to the City Council by the Planning and Zoning Commission on the above referenced application. Please note this matter will be heard before the City Council on October 19, 1999. Shari Stiles and Gary Smith have been given copies of the above Recommendations so they can be prepared at the hearing to specifically address the Recommendations of the Plaiuiing and Zoning Commission. Very truly yours, ~y L Ye ry, Legal Assi taut to R. Stephen Ruth ord Enclosure ey/ ' ~ ~~ ~. BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF~THE ) Case No. CUP-99-005 REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL ) USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI- ) RECOMMENDATION TO CITY FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT ) COUNCIL COMPLEX (COBBLESTONE ) VILLAGE) ) STAMOS CORP/IONIC INC. Applicant INTRODUCTION , 1. The property is located at 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian, Idaho. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Monte C. McClure of 1475 E. Franklin Road, Meridian. 3. ..Applicant is Stamos Corp.%Ionic Enterprises of 1 Sierra Gate Plaza, 3558 Roseville, California. 4. The subject property is currently zoned Meridian High Density Residential (R-40). The zoning district of R-40 is defined within the City of Meridian Zoning. and Development Ordinance, Section 11-2-408(B,6). n 5. r The proposed application requests a conditional use permit fora multi- family 96 unit apartment complex. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan designates 3 RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. i.. + .. ~,: ... 4 e 9 • &... r, ~ •~ 4 ti '~ , y ~{, F this area. as Mixed Planned Use Development. As such a conditional use permit is required for this development. v x 6. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission recognizes that the proposed application is in compliance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as enumerated in the Recommendations of Approval to the City Council for Annexation and Zoning of the Subject Property. 7. The use proposed within the subject application will in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City Policy. d: `' 8. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission takes note of and recognizes the concerns of surrounding neighbors regarding the additional traffic generated on Franklin Road and Locust,Grove Road°as well as the impact of an { apartment complex on property values to neighboring properties. A RECOMMENDATION 1. The Meridian, Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends ,to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit as requested by the applicant, subject to the following: Adopt the Meridian, Fire Department's Recommendations as follows: 1.1 Applicants shall satisfy all fire code requirements including those pertaining to water flow: RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 2 CONDITIONAL~USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. A ~ 4. S 1.2 ~ Appropriate fire*hydrants shall be added throughout the complex. a 1.3 Applicant shall install appropriate fire sprinkling systems. 1.4 Basement of the brick building shall be constructed with a sprinting system, and the appropriate number of exits. ~ 1.5 ~. Adopt the Meridian Water Department Recommendations as follows: 1.6 The,water main. shall be extended to east. property boundary on Franklin Road. ~ , Sc Adopt the Central District Health Department Recommendations as follows: ._ , 1.7 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health SZ Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 1.8 Run-off is not. to create a mosquito breeding problem. ., 1.9 Stormwater.shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 1.10 The Engineers and architects involved with the. design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. Adopt the Nampa SZ Meridian Irrigation District Recommendations as follows: 1.1.1 Requires all laterals and wasteways be protected. 1.12 All`municipal surface drainage shall be retained on site. 1.13 If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. 1.144 The Developer must contact the Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right- ~of-way occurs. Developer must comply with Idaho Code § 31- 3805. Adopt the Planning and Zoning Administrator and Assistant City Engineer Recommendations as follows: 1._15 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 1.16 ~ 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. 1.17 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. T .18 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. l . i 9 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. 1.20, Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D.3. 1.21 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section l 1-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 1.22 Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 1.23,- All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ' 1.24 As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari ~'~ Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water y mark of Five Mile Creek. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) also. requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30- feet right-of--way from the Five Mile Creek centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and submit compliance letters from said agencies. 1.25 Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 1/a" x 11" copies of building elevations for the"proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9- 14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations .submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 1.26 We recommend the proposed landscaping along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in ' ;£ height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the variance RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 5 ` CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX = STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. a t. ~ .~ ~ d F -. of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width,could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 1.27 The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33,feet. The proposed height of the other three. building types is approximately 26 feet - a difference of 8 feet. We request further ' ~ detail and,r'epresentation at the hearing on the actual height of ` the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 21/z-story versus 3-story appearance). ~ _,1.28 Assuming anabove-ground height difference of $-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current~location of Building ` ,, u ~~ ~ "B" on the west boundary and move~Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimize the view obstruction to the south „ properties. „1.29 The proposed parking layout will result in~'a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence' of, any landscape islands or 'landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorpor' ate a visual`break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at leasttevery fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees °from he west or~east buffer area to the parking areas since the number°of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance-requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, x . ,though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced: ~- 1.30 The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which;is the minimum number' required by the Zoning ~ Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four' (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staff recommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council "grant Staff authority to negotiate the final parking ' ~. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE. VILLAGE 96 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX = STAMOS CORP/IONIC, ENTERPRISES INC. ~~ ., . s r ,. , f • ~~. ~: k r t design, The Applicant~may need to reduce the total number of dwelling'units to accommodate;this requirement. .A, 1.31 No apartment maintenance building is shown. Applicant should ° be prepared to discuss this feature at the.public hearing. Ordinance 9-607.H.3., "Design Standards for Planned . A Developments -Residential" (pg. 35) states "A maintenance building or approved area shall be provided that is suitable for the services required .for the repair °and maintenance of all common areas." 1.32 There does not appear to be any storage areas provided on the site. Ordinance 9-607.H., Design Standards for Planned ~'` Developments -Residential (PD-R), requires storage areas to be ' provided for the anticipated needs of boats, campers and trailers. Applicant should revise plan to provide for appropriate number of ' storage stalls OR submit a letter to the Commission justifying reason(s).for not providing a storage area. , Adopt the Ada County Highway District's Recommendations as follows: 1.33 Dedicate 43-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat. or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a•building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs ` ~ first. 1.34 Dedicate '43-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franldin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final sub_ division plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs .first. 1.35 -Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 1.36 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west O 1 Locust Grove Road. The RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX -- STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. `J `% ~t driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and H sight distance should be`' reviewed and approved by Development Service's" staff. 1'.37 Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 3'15-feet south of Franklin Road. `' ' Ott . ,~. 1.38 Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 1.39 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of-way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewallc with District staff. 1.40 Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewallc shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and trade of the sidewallc with District staff. 1.41 As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel: 1.42 Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission offered the following recommendations: 1.43 The two buildings identified as "D" type buildings shall be reduced to two story buildings. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT'COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. • 1.44 The unimproved right-of--way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer. 1-.45 The applicant shall contribute a proportionate share for improvement of the Locust Grove/Franldin Road intersection as determined by ACRD to a fund maintained by ACRD. ey/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 153601~1\Cobblestone Village\CUP.Rec a F r s# RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 9 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -COBBLESTONE VILLAGE 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX - STAMOS CORP/IONIC ENTERPRISES INC. Meridian City Counc~~ting ~~r-' October 19, 1999 ~ ~~ Page 59 department to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. ti Bentley: Development agreement? Bird: And development agreement. This is a conditional. use. Development agreement was on the other. I'm done. ` a Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on the request for the approval for conditional use permit and the Decision of Order: Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I just wanted to make sure and see if we could. include the condition in there of the sterilization and then the other changes that we talked about on the waiver of tiling of Creason Lateral. Bird: My conditions meant what the developer and staff agreed to at the public testimony and Planning which that was stated wrong. It was part of the conditions. Corrie: Sterilization - Bird: Sterilization and the non-tiling of,the Creason and the planting of the trees was changed from the 200 to the - Corrie: Okay. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Will be interesting to see what the record reflects. I think our intent is there. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Motion carried. Mr. Gigray, if you'd get that all in there, we'd appreciate it. ITEM'15" ~°,-PUBL-IC HEARING:- REQUEST FOR GONDITIONAL.USE -` ~' °PERMIT FORA 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX P.ROP_OSED r Meridian City Counc~ting October 19, 1999 Page 60 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE, INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: i Corrie: Okay. We've got two public hearings yet. How many is here for the public hearing on No. 15, request for conditional use permit for 96-unit apartment complex at Cobblestone Village? Okay. And how many are here for the public hearing, request for St. Luke's? Okay. Why don't we move to table the public hearing on No. 15 until the next meeting? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we continue the public hearing on Item 15 until our next regularly scheduled meeting, November 3~d Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a second? Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made to continue the public hearing on Item No. 15 until the 3~d of November. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Motion's carried. That will be a continued public hearing on No. 15 for November 3~d ITEM 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PHASE 3 OF ST. LUKE'S MERIDIAN MEDICAL CENTER -- BY ST. LUKE'S REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AT 520 S. EAGLE ROAD: Corrie: Therefore, I'll open No. 16, the public hearing: Request for conditional use permit for Phase III of St. Luke's Meridian Medical-Center by St. Luke's Regional Medical Center at 520 South Eagle Road. At this time I'll open the public hearing on No. 16 and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we have nothing to add to our comments that have been presented. The major issue seems to remain the public road issue. The residents in Montvue Subdivision are concerned about their inability to gain access to Eagle Road, and I don't believe I see Mr. Sale in the audience or anyone else from Ada County Highway District. We did receive a letter from him today unsigned. Other than that, staff has nothing to add. Corrie: All right. Since this is a public hearing, let's hear first from the St. Luke's Regional Medical Center representatives. ~'.~•+,. ~[~ >vember 12, 1999 _RIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: NOVEMBER 16 1999 ~PLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION ITEM #: 16 EQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA 9COMMENTS TMENT (COBBLESTONE) r,~ENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: L MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED AD/A COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: e~~~ PI 'J~ a ~ ~,hi ~`~~lk 3~l SANITARY SERVICE: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of N~ridian. '~'' Meridian City Council M~g November 16, 1999 Page 29 Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 848 with suspension of rules, Mayor to sign, Clerk to attest. Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITE 1M 6. CONTINUE+PUBLIC HEARING:- REQUEST FOR-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -FOR 96-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED _COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LO~Cl1ST~GROVE & FRANKLIN:, Corrie: Item No. 16 is a public hearing, continued public hearing. This is request for conditional use permit for a 96-unit apartment complex (proposed Cobblestone Village) by Stamas Corporation /Ionic Enterprises, Inc., southwest corner of Locust Grove and Franklin. Since this is continuous of the public hearing, I'll open the public hearing and Staff first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor, Council, I believe the applicant is here tonight to be able to make a presentation on their proposal. I believe you have the recommendation from Planning and Zoning Commission. They did recommend that some of the three-story buildings that were adjacent to the Robersons, the Robersons live right here, and they have asked that those buildings be reduced from the three- story to two-story. Other than that, I believe they are here prepared to make the presentation tonight. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Since this is a continuous public hearing, Ms. Butler, I believe you're going to go present -okay. Meridian City Council M~ig • November 16, 1999 Page 30 Butler: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council members. JoAnn Butler, 101 South Capital Boulevard representing Ionic Enterprises as the applicant. As the Council will remember, at the time that we had the last public hearing on annexation and zoning, we also went over the entire conditional use and presented the various fords that Staff has describing what would be done on-site, and we held over -the Council held off on reviewing the Commission's recommendations pending the final adoption of annexation and zoning and signing of the Development Agreement. You have the recommendations by the Commission before you which we agree with except there are just maybe two or three that I'd like to direct the Council to and just indicate how we have provided you with more information or a question that we have. With that, we will -after I get through with that, we have Bryce .Peterson here and Doug Tamura, the architect and designer that can answer any specific questions that you might have after following on the other public hearing that we've had. I'm looking right now at 1.27 which is found on Page 6 of your recommendations. This states that the proposed height of Building D, these are the buildings, the two buildings that are southerly most on the property. When we originally presented it to the P & Z, they were approximately 33 feet, and the Commission at that point was saying that they wanted to see further detailed and representation at the hearing, and I think they meant the City Council hearing. On the actual height of the buildings and what we presented to the Council at the last public hearing was the fact that those hearings had been reduced in height from three- to two-story so that they are approximately 26 feet in height, and the Staff has plans that show that. So I think that recommendation just reflect the fact that the plans now show that, and that is our intention. Then looking at 1.31 and 1.32, this is on Page 7. I think we explained this to the Council, but the Planning and Zoning's recommendation was that they didn't think they saw an apartment maintenance building. As you will recall, there is an existing structure on site that will be remodeled for the clubhouse, for the laundry and the clubhouse, and the garage of that building will be used for maintenance equipment. In 1.32, their recommendations talk about storage areas for things such as boats, campers and trailers. This was something that I have to say I don't recall discussing either at the Planning and Zoning Commission and looking back at the transcript or the City Council. We do meet your parking requirements at two spaces per unit, so we are meeting your requirements. I think that this particular recommendation would fall away. Finally, I'll just turn you to the last two pages, Pages 8 and 9. These were the specific recommendations of the P & Z Commission, 1.43 that the two buildings shall be reduced to two stories which they have, and on the following page, the unimproved right-of-way shall be maintained at the expense of the developer, and that is true. On 1.45, with regard to ACHD, it has always been our intent to meet all of ACHD's requirements. At the Planning - as we talked about at the last City Council meeting, at the Planning and Zoning Commission, there was a discussion with Larry Sale about whether or not that intersection should be improved at that point. Mr. Sale was explaining to the Commission that, no, right now ACHD was looking for more flexibility with regard to that intersection. I'm just reading from my notes from that hearing. That when it becomes a safety ` Meridian City Council M~g November 16, 1999 Page 31 C~ problem, ACRD can move funds to reconstruct and install a signal or add turn lanes. He was explaining to the Commission that, no, ACHD had not made that requirement or made that requirement of this applicant, and it was not making that recommendation. We will - so we are asking that that condition of approval be clarified to say the applicant will meet all ACHD's requirements, but with regard to a proportionate share of improvement, that would be left up to ACHD. At'this point, they are not asking for that. So, other than those few modifications, we're in agreement with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. We'll stand for questions and respectfully ask that you approve the conditional use as you have the zoning and annexation. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I'm just a little slow at taking notes, so bear with me. Butler: Okay. Rountree: The second item you mentioned after 1.27. Butler: 1.31. Rountree: Okay. Butler: That's the -there is an existing structure on-site that's going to be used for clubhouse and, I guess, P & Z would -was wondering where will maintenance equipment be held, and that will be in the garage of this structure which exists. Corrie: Excuse me, but did you say 1.32 to eliminate? Butler: Yeah. We're asking that that be eliminated. It references, it says that there does not appear to be any storage areas provided on the site, and they're talking in terms of boat, campers and trailers. That wasn't -it's certainly not a requirement under the Ordinance, and we think that we are very well parked for this site to -two spaces per unit, so if that should become an issue, that people would have spaces. I don't think it's our idea to encourage that. Rountree: That's all I have. Corrie: Any comments, Council? Bentley: Comment for Staff. Shari, your response to her -response of your questions? Stiles: I do agree that the storage at least for the maintenance of the facility could be accommodated in the existing building. Under 1.32, it is referring . Meridian City Council M'~~g November 16, 1999 Page 32 specifically to an ordinance requirement for planned developments that asks for that additional parking, and what our comment was that they either provide that or submit some information justifying why that was not required; why they didn't need it. Bentley: She's stating there's extra parking spaces; is that true? Is there enough there to handle or do we require this to be in a separate area? Stiles: It meets ordinance requirements for parking. Bird: But it don't for storage. Bentley: But it doesn't for storage. Stiles: The way the Ordinance reads, it does ask for additional storage areas, but in an apartment complex, we don't think that you would see a lot of that. Bentley: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Bryce. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Yes. Rountree: Just on that topic and question of Shari, would a maintenance restriction or management restriction on the site would preclude residents from having those kinds of things on the site be sufficient to get around that? Stiles: Yes, I believe it would. -~ Bentley: Because it's going to come up. Peterson: Mayor and members of the Council, my name is Bryce Peterson. I'm representing the (inaudible) Stamas Corporation who will be the owners of this property. Our -the management company would not permit the use of the parking facilities for that, anything that might be of a nature that would be a trailer or a boat or like that. We would like to have you (inaudible) with Councilman's Rountree suggestion that we provide in the approval of this project that we don't allow it. It certainly would please us if that were in there. Bird: Put it on our backs. Peterson: Any questions? Corrie: Thank you. Meridian City Council M~g November 16, 1999 Page 33 Peterson: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else like to issue testimony on Item No. 16? Okay. Council, any questions? (inaudible) Corrie: You'd better come up here and give us a few words in. Fox: Alan Fox, 1840 Cadillac Drive. Shari, could you go back to the .previous one where you had the yellow spot up there showing it? Thank you. They show Locust Grove as going straight across which it doesn't right now. There's no projection when that's going to happen. I talked to Larry Sale two weeks ago, he told me you guys are -Meridian City Council of Meridian is going in for a federal grant. If they get that, the overpass over the freeway will be two to four years down the road. I said, "What happens if they don't get the grant?" He said, "I can't give you a timeframe." There's also an original time, first time in here, I didn't make the meeting. I was told that the signatures that were turned into you, they were told that the signatures (inaudible) didn't live right next door, so you didn't care about the signatures. They came from other subdivisions. 200 of those I collected, and they came from the blanks -the bottom up was R-T, Shari, on down. No. Lower. Right down -right there. Okay. That subdivision you're going to hear about tonight. They (inaudible) 180 homes in there. We border that. My subdivision. Locust View Heights. I took 200 signatures out of that area and was on (inaudible) go by the intersection down there every day at least twice a day. Traffic right now is crowded. This, basically, is the same type of apartment complex setup that you turned down on Overland and Locust Grove a couple of months ago. Originally, (inaudible) plan for the road and Five Mile Creek's going in there. He claims he's got 6.15. By the time we get done giving up land for roads and everything, he's going to be down close to four acres. He's going to be under five acres, I'll bet, to build on. His original plan when he came in, he had 12 apartments in there, and it was only going to be one to two of them going to be two stories. The second time he came back, there were three to four. Now he's down to nine buildings, and all of them are going to be three-story he wants. That's building right there (inaudible) too high density. He doesn't have the room that he started out with that he thought he had to build in there. As Locust View Association strongly oppose this going in on the corner there due to the high density and the problems we have with traffic. I thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any questions of Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Fox. Anyone else from the public? Meridian City Council M~g November 16, 1999 Page 34 Roberson: My name is Ernie Roberson, and I live right next to this development. On Item 1.26 where it says that south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three feet, we don't think that's (inaudible) going to put a berm of three feet, then we should have the brick wall or a masonry wall on top of the berm because for sound, we go right next to this (inaudible) development. Also I believe your ordinance says that it is 20 feet from my fence to his fence. I think right now you're saying that it's 15. So we are saying that it should be, your City Ordinance says it should be 20 feet. Also, if they are now the owners of that property, there's a dead animal in the creek. We have talked to everybody in the ACHD and so forth, and they said it's the property owners' responsibility to remove the dead animal. I'd love to see that done. Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else like to issue testimony? Okay. Ms. Butler, do you want to - any comments on the testimony? Butler: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We appreciate all the neighbors' comments that they've provided us and the Council at the last hearing. Just briefly, again, these are not three stories, but two stories. The density, I appreciate that people would -not like to see perhaps any homes in the vicinity, but this -the allowed density is 40 units per acre, and this stands at 14.9, so much decreased density from what is allowed. We also appreciate that everybody has concerns about the traffic. As Larry Sale said at the last hearing, he has bad news and bad news. Traffic in the area is an issue, but it's an issue that ACHD is dealing with. It's not reached the issue where they feel they need to improve the intersection at this point, that they're very much aware of it by virtue of the fact that Mr. Sale has been at so many meetings about this particular area. They're obviously trying to convey to Meridian that they're aware of it. So with that, again, we think that - we appreciate the comments raised, but we think that we've dealt with those issues and are asking'the Council to approve this tonight. Corrie: Can you get the animal out of there? Butler: Sure. Yes. Corrie: Thank you. Butler: And thank you for -that we've been made aware of that. Corrie: Okay. Council, any questions on the public hearing? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close the continued public hearing at this time. Bird: Mr. Mayor. ' A7leridian City Council ~g November 16, 1999 Page 35 Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we close the public hearing of Stamas Corporation /Ionic Enterprises, Cobblestone Village. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. 16. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Council, discussion? Okay. Hearing no discussion on Item 16, I'll request a motion on the conditional use permit. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Just a procedural question. I've missed a step on this. We do need Findings, correct? Okay. Mr. Mayor, I will move that we have the city attorney prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on this request for conditional use permit and that the Findings of Facts and Conclusion reflect recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission with the following changes: Item 1.27 reflect that the adjacent building heights to surrounding properties be no more than two stories; Item 1.31 reflect that the maintenance equipment will be stored on-site in the existing garage; Item 1.32 reflect that parking will meet a City of Meridian's Ordinance and that further no on-site parking for recreational vehicles, commercial vehicles be allowed; on Page 8, Item 1.43 - do you have that? Would you read that to me? Corrie: Which one? Rountree: 1.43. Corrie: 1.43. The two buildings identified as D-type buildings shall be restricted to two-story buildings. Rountree: Okay. Again, that the building height be restricted to two stories; and Item 1.45 that the intent there is that the applicant will meet all of ACHD requirements. Bird: Are you done? Second. Rountree: I'm done. Meridian City Council M~g November 16, 1999 Page 36 Bird: I second it. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded to approve the request for conditional use permit and have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law incorporating the Planning and Zoning comments and other changes made by Councilman Rountree. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Just like to go on record that I do appreciate the developer working with some of the concerns of the citizens, and I think you've tried to address some of those. From my perspective, I oppose this project from its start, and primarily for the concerns a lot of the citizens are stating. Franklin Road not being widened yet, no stoplight, Locust Grove not being improved or widened, the possibility of an overpass, things like that. So, I again, at this point, I think it's a good project and I think at some point it would fit in there very nicely, I guess, I'm still going to vote against this simply because I think we ought to put the infrastructure and build the roads first, and then buildings up; however, the funding is not there to do that, and so I think I'm kind of on the losing end of this battle, but I just wanted to go on record as stating that. Corrie: Any further comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: No. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES TO ONE NAY ~' Y/ ,~ ~~i!_ ~/ yrc MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 The regular scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Keith Borup. MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Kent Brown, Tammy De Weerd, Thomas 13arbeiro OTHERS PRESENT: Bruce Freckleton, Shari Stiles, Eric Rossm'an, Angel Sims, Will Berg. Borup: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to begin our Planning and Zoning Commission meeting this evening for the city of Meridian. The first item on the agenda is the` consent agenda. Commissioners, only I have done the consent agendas and minutes August 10tH and August 25tH De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept the minutes for the meeting held August 10tH and the special meeting held August 25tH Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I second the motion, please. Borup: The motion second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES CONTINUED PUBL"IC HEARING:;~CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA MULTI- FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT'COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE, INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN (APPROVE W/RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL) Borup:' Any opposed? Thank you. Item 1 is a continued public-hearing conditional use permit for a multi=family 96-unit apartment complex; complex proposed Cobblestone Village by Stamas Corporation. Do we have any additional information from Staff? I think what we had submitted the last minute last time was the new site plan. Shari, we're on Item No. 1. Cobblestone Village, and at the last meeting, we received this site plan a few hours before the meeting. I think one of the reasons for the continuing was a chance to study that and then any staff comments on the revised plan. Stiles: Commissioners, did you receive the letter -the memo dated today? It was prepared by Brad Hawkins-Clark, and that was based on his review of the revised plan? They also submitted some new elevations. I think I have a new site plan for our transparency for the new site plan if you want me to put that up. Make sure it's the same one. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, the main issues that he had still were the Five Mile Creek and make sure that is protected and accounted for as far as permits. I believe you have in your packets new elevations that showed the buildings. There were Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 2 some elevations missing for some of the buildings, primarily the C and D. The deed turned out they were the three-story buildings, so they have supplied that for Item No. 2. As`for at least athree-foot berm for the landscaping buffers adjacent to Franklin and Locust Grove, it was recommended that the Building D that these three-story buildings be relocated to another building location so that the impact on the adjacent property owner would not be as great. -Ask for some landscaping within the parking lots to alleviate the sea of asphalt which by Brad's calculations would result in .the reduction of four stalls and that would also require reducing the total number of dwelling units so that they met the minimums or to get a barrience on that parking requirement. For pjanned residential development, a maintenance. building is also needed, and there is not accommodation for storage areas for anticipated needs of boats, campers and trailers. And that's the onlyadditional comments that we had. I believe the applicants here tonight and has seen these comments and is prepared to address some of those items. Do you have any questions of me? Borup: Commissioners? Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Shari, can you show us where the adjoining neighbors are? Where there houses are located in reference to the buildings you're asking to be moved? Stiles: Locust Grove Road here, Franklin Road is here, the adjacent -well, where am I at? They would be right here. This is where Medimont Subdivision is be marketed as° Stonebrige Business Park. These are all zoned light industrial along here. This is a twenty-foot planting strip, and this is where the residential acreages are down toward the south -- Barbeiro: And there's one - Stiles: -- to the South. Barbeiro: -- residential house to the South? Stiles: Right adjacent to this property is one residential house.. Barbeiro: And where is it located? Stiles: It's - I don't know exactly, but since it's ablock -it's in the back portion here, °and that's where those three-story buildings were shown was back adjacent to that lot. Borup: Anyone else? Thank you, Shari. Is the applicant here this evening like to address the Commission? JoAnn, is this the way you've just provided, is this the same as what - ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 3 JoAnn Butler: It is. It is. It's just for your reference. JoAnn Butler, 607 North nth Street, representing the applicant'. And, yes. What I've handed to the Planning and Zoning Commission is exactly what the site plan that you have up on the screen and what the Commission has had in its packets. Also what I handed out is a conditional use compliance analysis that we did provide to the Commissioners prior to the last hearing which was tabled until tonight, and that is also just for your reference. With me tonight is Bryce Peterson, also representing the applicant. I'd like to just briefly go over the conditional use compliance analysis. Some of the memo that you have from Brad that Ms. Stiles referenced just a moment ago and answer any questions, and then Mr. Peterson may also address the Commission and reserve some time for rebuttal. I'll just incorporate for the record the testimony from the May 11th hearing, that is a time when we went over this project in great detail. It was tabled at that time. At that time, you did recommend to the City Council that this property be annexed and zoned. The City Council heard that annexation and zoning and approved the annexation and zoning on July 20th of this year with the development agreement. And, at your May 11th hearing, you did table this until after the annexation and zoning and now we're back again. Just briefly, with regard to the conditional use compliance analysis, I won't go over it in detail since you have had the opportunity to look at it, but, the idea here was to provide you with a synopsis of each of your criteria in your zoning ordinance to show why we need the conditional use criteria under Meridian's ordinances and its comprehensive plan. Meridian did make the policy and legislative decision to annex and zone this property to R-40. That has been approved and in connection with the conditional use, you have already heard extensive testimony on the project, and we're here tonight to answer any final questions that~you may have. Just briefly, the criteria that we meet under your zoning ordinance, it does constitute a conditional use as determined by your ordinance. It is in harmony with and it accordance with your comprehensive plan, and we have addressed each of the elements of your comprehensive plan and provided a short synopsis there. The location of this project does support your encouragement of a wide diversity of housing types in Meridian. It is your goal under your comprehensive plan to provide that sufficient choice of housing in the community to meet the needs. As was previously described for, I think the Commission, and also the City Council, there is a shortage of apartments in Meridian to meet that particular need for housing: The project is designed and is proposed to operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the character of the area. It is not hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring' uses. We had many discussions with residences in the area `and city staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Council on this with the idea of mitigating any potential disturbance. This project is designed `to help Meridian to foster it's goals for compatible land use and design. It assists the city in providing public services and facilities in your area of impact. As you know, the City has made the determination that is going to serve all of the area of impact within ten years. This project is located right contiguous to the city, now within the city, and it enables you to extend services and facilities yet that much further into n ~~~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 4 your area of impact to help you meet that goal of a ten-year service within the entire area of impact. The project did not create additional-requirements of public costs for public facilities and services. Because of = as you've had testimony in the past, your ordinance does call for the timely provision of services; infrastructure, roads, and.this project helps you provide that infrastructure in a continuous outward growth 'of ; development rather than in a leapfrog fashion. And, of course, the majority of the facilities are paid for by the applicant. The project does not involve uses or activities. that are detrimental to persons or property in the general vicinity by reason of excessive production of tr-affic,'noise, smoke, glare or odors. Of course, conditions of approval that you may place upon this project`would ensure that items such as lights would not provide glare into adjoining property. You had extensive testimony at your last hearing from your traffic engineer, Ada County Highway District and our professional traffic engineer that the project would not unduly burden the road system. Under your ordinance required to show that vehicular approaches to the property are designed so as to not create undue interference with traffic on the surrounding streets, and with the two intended accesses, both 400 feet, both to the west and to the south of the intersection of Locust Grove, this design ensures that the traffic does.. not unduly interfere with the existing traffic. Finally, the project does not result in the destruction or the loss of any significant natural feature. The comprehensive`hplan obviously has identified for the City what is to be in the best interest of Meridian for this.area, and the `project is designed to be compatible and further the goals and objectives and the policies°of the comprehensive plan as adopted by this city to promote the public convenience and welfare. As such, the project is in the best interest of Meridian. And so we are, of course, respectfully asking you tonight to approve this conditional use, discuss the conditions of approval with us and help us answer any question that you have. With regard to the memorandum, I actually have a copy, a draft copy of the memorandum dated yesterday, and so, Shari has indicated there might be some slight changes to that, so if I make a mistake, Shari, to what is actually represented in here, please let me know. The staff has included some additional site-specific requirements. First of all, the need to comply with any requirements of the State Department of Water Resources and the Nampa Meridian Irrigation districts and it's our standard conditions of approval, and, of course; we would comply with that. The staff asked us to submit the ten copies of the building .elevations which we have done for you tonight, and we also had one -Bryce, maybe you could put that one elevation up, and we could leave that up. I think it.would probably fit underneath the site plan there so that if you have any questions. It's a larger version of the A Building so that you can at least refer to that colored rendering in addition to the black and white that you have in your packet This also -there is another rendering that we have, and, Bryce, maybe we can slide that last one too along the board. I think the last one showing the landscaping and the wall. And Mr. Peterson can answer any question you have on this': I think that a.request of at least one of the commissioners was to provide some indication visually as~to the slope of the site and how the project would be viewed as you are looking from the south to the north, and I believe that is going from the south to north, so it would show the wall in the Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 5 area. 1t also tries to capture the slope of the site which goes from the southwest corner to the northeast corner which is the lowest point of the site. When this was designed, the idea was not to create any fill on the site, not to level the site or do any fill, but to work with the grade of the sites so that those buildings to.the south and west would be able to look over the roofs of the buildings that are going towards the northeast corner; the idea to work with .the site and to capture, allow those individuals to be able to view over the adjoining buildings. Staff also .recommended thaf the proposed landscaping, which they know is double what is required by ordinance, be moved around on site to help breakup the parking areas and that will be done. We don't believe there will be .any loss of - I don't know that Mr. Peterson's had the chance to talk to Staff about this, but we don't believe there will be a loss of any parking spaces, and we wouldn't be asking for a variance in connection with any parking spaces. I'll have Mr. Peterson speak to ..the fence along the south side of the property and why that is appropriate. I think there was a question about the height of the building. The height of all buildings are 33~feet. They are~2-1/2 story on one side, and that again, because of the slope of the property, they are built into the hillside; so 2-1/2 story on one side, three story on the downslope. There was a comment, I think from Staff, that no apartment or~clubhouse or maintenance building was shown. That has been consistently shown on the site plan and Mr. Peterson can probably point to that, and I think you'll see that readily. That is an existing .house that is on the property that will be remodeled to provide for the maintenance and for the clubhouse. And so with that, I'll reserve some time for rebuttal and turn the microphone over briefly to Mr. Peterson to address some of the architectural elements and any questions that you may have. Thank you. ,_ Peterson: May I take advantage of this microphone? Borup: Please do. Peterson: Thank you. Good evening. My name is Bryce Peterson. I represent the Stamas Corporation in this instance. The Stamas Corporation and the Ionic Corporation are made up of~the same principles; they being my daughter and son-in- law. I am going to represent them tonight, and I'm also going to represent the builder tonight which is HomeCo, my building company. I would like to fortify the record, if I may. The chairman mentioned that we'd only submitted the site plan a few hours before the last meeting, and in fact, I want to make it a record that we did submit that at the time of the City Council hearing, at which time the project was annexed and rezoned. So, I just want to be sure that the record is straight. We received word today that the -that there were some revisions that were requested, and so we met with Brad this morning, and I've done my best in this-short period of time to give'you the exhibits thatJyou've requested. I think we've done pretty well except for one. And the one we'll try to explain. May !put this up? I can't see you, but I assume it's okay if I - Bor•up: We're here. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14,.1999 Page 6 Peterson: -- if 1 don't hear you say "no." I know that the audience probably cannot see this as well as we would like it, but we do have handouts for the Commission, and Ms. Butler has already given those to you. The site plan has been revised again, and I hope that you can see it. I'd be glad to pass this around if-you'd like it, Mr. Chairman, but we have here demonstrated that we can and will do the landscaping that you - in between the parking `bays as requested in the report that I received this morning. And if you'd like to have it, I'd be glad to give it to you. As Ms. Butler mentioned, this house has been here all-along. It has always--.been labeled as the clubhouse and maintenance, and the garage, you know, is just perfect for a maintenance building, and the clubhouse, or the house, is a walk-out basement, which is just ideal. And so we'll be remodeling the inside of that to accommodate those uses. I talked at the meeting last time. It was a brief meeting,. but I did talk about how Mr. Torrell had, I thought, successfully moved the buildings towards the north giving substantial buffering on the side next to the Robinsons. We hope that you've seen this. Have you seen this? We handed it to you. We gave it to City Council and then 1 gave it to you again last meeting. Borup: We've got it. Peterson: Okay. And you can read on your copy the distances of each building. They're about 32, 35 and 58 if f remember right. Now, I would like to just emphasize, if I may, the'slope of the ground, and I would like to use these two exhibits if I may in doing that. The reason that I was so taken by this particular piece of property was its contours. And you may not be able, I know you can't see it from where the audience is, but I know that you have them on your drawings, and I know that you can see them on your drawings. But, there is 16 foot of elevation change from this corner to this corner. Now, 16 feet happens to work out perfectly to have a building, the third floor being above the roof of this one; and this one being above the roof of this one. It's just perfect. And so each person who lives on the third floor will have the vista of Deerpoint. Deerpoint, you know, is right here. You look in a northeasterly direction. And if you will take particular note of your drawings that are in front of you, that the contour, the contour lines -they're on your drawings -fit this particular drawing perfectly. There are some steeper areas, and that's where the buildings are. There are some less s.+eep areas, and that's where the parking lots are. And so, it -- the ground was made for this project, I believe. Are there any questions so far? Okay. Now I think it's important to show that on this drawing. All of the buildings -now, this is one thing that was in the staff report that I was confused about, and I want to answer any question that you may have. All of the buildings are three-story. The information, obviously, that the staff is working with have -we've gone back and had previous submissions, you know, previous applications, and then we come back with different ones. Well, the latest one that the staff had showed all of the buildings being three stories, and the reason I know that is because the staff has this cellophane on the overhead, and they all are three stories. There is some difference in the Buildings A, B, C and D, and if you'll look at Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 7 your floorplans, you'll see that there is the bay windows and some of the areas are protruding out farther than others, so it isn't like a repetitious copy, cookie-cutter project. But yet, there is some (inaudible); it hangs together. The siding is all stucco, the roofs will be the same, the windows will be the same. So, I always heard that you had to have five things in common to keep a project a project. Well, we've done that, but yet, we have made some various changes in the buildings so that they're not monotonous. I assume there are no questions, and unless there are, I think I should not take anymore time. Borup: Any questions from the commissioners? Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: Mr. Peterson, can you show us where the sidewalk would be along the exterior of the development on Locust Grove and Franklin? Peterson: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Brown, yes, 1'd be happy to. The sidewalk will be placed right along here which is -you see, when Franklin and Locust are developed to their full width, they will have the ground to here; at least they'll own it. Whether they use it or not, I don't know, because sometimes they don't use it all. But, we're placing a sidewalk right here, and likewise here, which is the extent of their desires and the widths of-their streets. Brown: So, is it two foot within the right-of-way they way they normally do that? Peterson: I believe that's right. Brown: What do you plan on doing from - I imagine those are both collectors or arterials from Franklin, and how do you plan on treating the rest, where the sidewalk to the street or to the asphalt? Have you taken consideration of that? Peterson: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brown, yes. It's our intent to grass that area and maintain it. Sprinkle and maintain it until such time as the Highway District wishes to take it over. Brown: So you'll (inaudible) in with a license agreement? Peterson: Yes. I believe that that is part of the development agreement, but I'm not positive. Anyway,. we'll commit to that anyway. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 8 Brown: Along your southerly boundary, there is discussion about a fence or a wall. Is it a fence or is it a wall? Peterson: It's a wall. Brown: So, if I read this right, it's asix-foot high block wall? Peterson. Yes, sir.- I'm not sure that it'll be block; but, Mr. Roberson requested that at our very first meeting, and „as far as I know, he still wishes to have that. That is demonstrated, by the way, on this drawing. Brown: Mr. Peterson, you're familiar with where the Robersons' home is? Is it directly in alignment with that southwest building? Peterson: May I use this? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Brown, yes. Again, going back ~o this one, I believe their home is 50 feet plus from the property line and in about this location. I think it's important to mention that we have moved these buildings over, as, I stated earlier, 30 plus feet from the property line. We have also, there are no windows on this end, ~on the ends'of any of the buildings, acid we have indicated and will stand -we'll enter into the agreement that. indicates that we will screen the south side of each of the patios that are on this side, or deck, whichever the case may be. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Thomas. Barbeiro: Mr. Peterson, in our. last meeting, you presented us with a traffic impact study. In the traffic impact study, as I asked during the engineer's testimony, is a projected turning volume for the year 2001. When I asked the engineer if that projected turning volume for the'year 2001 took into account the inclusion of Jabil, his answer was "no." I still stand that this is an incomplete and not a viable traffic control plan:for your intersection at the time that;your apartment complex is open for operation. Did you have additional traffic control plans prepared that are in keeping with the projected turning volumes of the year 2001, as addressed here in the traffic control plan? Peterson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Barbeiro, anticipating your question, we have the traffic engineer here, and he has updated his report. However, again for the record, may ! say:~that you approved the Jabil project before this application was received, and I do .not believe-that we should be held responsible for the traffic that we generated by Jabil. .However, we have updated the report, Commissioner Barbeiro. Borup: Any other questions? Barbeiro: Do we have that report? ~ ~ Meridian Planning- and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 9 Borup: Well, yeah. I think we'{{ have a chance to hear from that. We also have Larry Sale from ACHD here. That maybe will shed light on this. We hope. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Yes. But yes, we want to get through these questions first and then go on with that. De Weerd: I have just one question, and that is on Locust Grove, once you allow for the ACHD right away, how far is the setback? Closer to the -main entrance into your complex? Peterson: Let me - if I don't answer those questions, Mr. Chairman, Ms. De Weerd, if I don't answer the question properly, please ask it again. But I'll attempt to. This -the sidewalk, as 1 indicated earlier, is the amount of ground that ACHD intends to use some day. And so, the sidewalk is placed on that line, and the distance that you're asking is from where to where, please? De Weerd: From that line to the innermost point of your parking lot, I would guess. No. You have a setback requirement before you're -Shari, perhaps you can help witl~~ that question. Do you know what I'm trying to ask? Stiles: The setback for the buildings from the future required right-of-way would be 35 feet on Franklin Road and I believe 20 feet on Locust Grove Road. De Weerd: Oh. Is it only 20 feet? Stiles: Yeah. De Weerd: And I assume that that's 20 feet? Peterson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, I believe Jit successes that. To -it's 58 feet-from here and this looks like it's probably twice-that. De Weerd: No, I would go to the A Building there. Barbeiro: Oh. To this one? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Peterson: Yes. • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 10 _ Barbeiro: That one's not scaled. Peterson: I'm sure it's in excess of 20 feet; yes. I'll vouch for that, but it doesn't have the measurement on it, on this drawing at least. It may have it on your drawing. Anyway, I'll vouch for that - Barbeiro: If does not. Peterson: It is - it is in excess of 20 feet. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Yes, Mr. Barbeiro. Barbeiro: In our August 10th meeting, we had another department develop come in before us. I asked the owners if their intent was to build it, fill it, then sell the property. They told us that they continue to hold onto the properties after they are filled. Could you tell me if it is your intent to build this property, fill the tenants, then sell the property or do they intend to hold onto the property? Peterson: Again, I'd like to say for the record that is not a question that you should be asking. But, I'll tell you it is our intent to hold the property. Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: Mr. Peterson, have you built this building before? Is there other complexes that you've built this building? Peterson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brown, no. I have not personally built this building as you see it here. f built very similar buildings in a project that I did in Mountain Home. I did a 44-unit project in Mountain Home some years ago, and it was basically, for all~practical purposes, the same project. Borup: Any other questions for Mr. Peterson? If not, we do have ~a traffic engineer. I'd °iike to maybe address a traffic question that we'll probably be asking Mr. Sale; questions along the same fine. Flatz: Commissioners, I'm Jerry Flatz. I would for JUB Engineers in Boise, and I did the traffic study.. After the meeting -- at our last meeting I had a few comments.. One (~ Meridian Planning. and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 ~ .. .: Page 11 _ was yours about Jabil, and another one of the people that was at the meeting afterwards told me that she thought that the counts were flawed because they weren't taken during the school year, and that that would make an impact on the`couhts. And we took the afternoon traffic counts over again to see what the difference was, and that's how we've updated this traffic 'study., There wasn't a substantial differen"ce. a There were a few more cars in that peak hour, and as you're' aware, I'm sure, a traffic'. impact study's built upon the afternoon peak hour, usually, because it's the highest traffic volume for an hour. during the day, and. in this case that's true. The .afternoon°} . peak hour's about, I thinK it was about 42 percent higher than the morning peak. So that - on the traffic study and the recommendations from the study are built around that afternoon peak hour, and we've, updated it with those minimally higher numbers for the peak hour: It didn't change a level of service calculations - it didn't change the level of service calculationS`that are shown in the original, but it has been updated, and I'll leave those copies with you. Are there any question? Borup: (inaudible) (inaudible) The funny comment was, we haven't seen it. But, would you like to wait and take a look, or would you tike him to give a brief summary? Borup: Very brief. Barbeiro: On what the total numbers come out? Flatz: I'd just as soon see it. If you wish to give a brief summary, that's fine. Barbeiro: I think the question -the question then, did you do a combining of Jabil and with the current, or -- Flatz: We didn't include the numbers from Jabil for -- Barbeiro: Okay. Flatz: -- basically two reasons. One is the first piece of the traffic study is to do the trip generation, and that's always based upon the ITE numbers, instituted traffic engineers, and they have numbers for each type of land use and the expected trip generation from that. In this case, we know how much -how many. trips will be generated by these apartments based upon quite a few other studies of apartments of similar size. I don't know what kind of traffic Jabil's going. to generate. It - in the study they use a growth rate to kind of take into account those future growths around the project that you're not aware of, and we've used that growth rate. We've added those numbers caused by growth between now and when the project is expected to be built. To include the • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 12 specifics from Jabil should be done by them. They should know how much traffic they'll generate, and - well, I shouldn't say it should be. That's my opinion; should be. Barbeiro: In our -excuse me, Mr. Chairman. In our prior. meeting, you testified that, if I'm not mistaken, that the current intersection of flow was graded as a C; is that correct? Flatz: When you look' at the intersection, the level of services, the worst approach, the worst movement was a level of service C. Barbeiro: Okay. And~that this particular complex would not add to or change treat grading? It is my belief that on the day that this project opens and fills, that that intersection will be a D or a D minus, and that the addition of the traffic (inaudible) will .make it an E. Borup: That's based on what? Barbeiro: The applicant has not produced anything to tell me otherwise. I continue to refer back to projected turning volumes 2001, and it is not representative of the projected turning volumes in the year 2001. Flatz: So, what you're saying is, if I can paraphrase. Maybe it's not even paraphrasing, but you're saying that because of Jabil and this development it would probably bQ worse than C, D or E. Barbeiro: Yes. Flatz: You might be right. Barbeiro: Thank you. Flatz: Because of this development, it will not go past C. That's what the traffic study's telling you. Barbeiro: I understand that. Flatz: Okay. Borup: Any other questions? I guess that means - Flatz: Thank you. I'll leave these with the clerk. Borup: Mr. Sale, I think Commissioners would be interested in the -any light you can rshed on the traffic in this area. Especially, I think the question from last time was the • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 13 combination of Jabil and the formula, and the effect. I don't know how much information you have on that. Sale: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, for the record, I'm Larry Sale, Planning and Development Supervisor for Ada County Highway District. I remember a few months ago I led off a discussion with the Boise City Council with these same words that I have bad news and I have bad news. I don't mean to be trite, but Meridian - it goes without saying Meridian is growing very rapidly, and it's growing on one, two, , three, about four fronts, and when it was all growing on the north side on the interstate and to the northwest, we thought we had a handle on it. We thought we could keep up. And now you've branched to southeast ,you have a note of rapid growth southeast, south of the interstate; you have an extremely rapid growth knowed in the area between the interstate and Franklin Road or even Fairview Avenue, now, from your city cznter out entirely to your boundary of area of impact; and you have another area ~of rapid growth on the south and west corner of (inaudible). I told .Commissioner Brown when. I congratulated him tonight on his appointment to the Commission that I was going to tell you a bedtime story tonight, and I think I will. When I was young, although I didn't know it, my family was very poor, and from time to time, I would want something. My mother tells me I wanted things a lot. But, I was always told we couldn't afford it. Later, now I know that through sacrifices on my parents' part, I usually got what I wanted at some time later; at Christmas time or something, I would get that special gift that I had wanted. And I feel, now, like my parents. I feel like I have seven kids. They're named Star; Kuna, Meridian, Boise, Garden City, and Ada County and Eagle. And my kids all need things, and I'm having to tell them all that we can't afford it right now, and I hope that doesn't offend you, but that's the case we find ourselves in. You have -right' now you have very great needs. I'm hopeful that Christmas will come in about three years. I believe.that beginning in three years we will probably have your community so torn up you'll wish that we hadn't given you our help. But, until then, things are not goincJ to be good, and they're not going to get better. We've had several staff meetings in the past three weeks just about your corridor, your corridor of growth that you're having north of the interstate, and it appears now that we're going to be recommending to APA that we `'' institute some changes to the long-range transportation plan to put in place new corridors for construction that will alleviate some of the east-west problems. dbviously, we have more south- problems as well, and Locust Grove is a focal point of that. You're aware that we're going to be able to help improve Locust Grove north of Fairview beginning in 2001. This is the only .good news I'm able to give you, and right now it looks .like we may be able to accelerate, I think that's currently under the program for construction in 2002. We hope now that we'll be able to acquire the right-of--way this next fiscal year and get under construction in fiscal 2001. That kind of takes care of a problem that you've had for several years. South of Fairview is still in the planning stage, and it's going to be a few more years before we're able to do anything to help you on a very broad scale. We have more flexibility when it comes to specific intersections, and we can move funds around to accommodate spot needs; for " Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 14 example, this intersection~of Locust Grove and Fairview -Franklin. When it becomes a safety problem, we can move funds to reconstruct the intersection,. install a signal, add left-turn lanes, and make it a spot improvement to handle your overall .needs. With regard.to the application at hand, this may sound callous, but the old areas undergoing growth, if it doesn't happen here,. it will happen somewhere else, and it will be a problem to accommodate wherever it happens. It would be nice if the City had the ability, the legal ability, to just isolate one part of town and say, "Okay, folks. This is where all our growth is going to take place," and then you could provide the sewer to handle it, you could provide the water to handle it, and we could handle the road infrastructure to handle it. Unfortunately, our country doesn't work that way. People -have the right to apply to you for development and we have to, within reason, accommodate those needs. So, I guess my continuing bad-news saga is that the situation isn't good, it's going to get worse, and we will, however, we will try to meet the needs that your traffic has. I don't think that's probably what you wanted me to say when I got up here, but I hope I haven't either bored you or offended you, but if you -now, if you have a specific question, I'll try to answer that. Let me comment. The traffic impact study was prepared by a qualified engineer. JUB is on our list of approved traffic engineers. We use the firm, and we use Mr. Flatz as a professional engineer on our own project. So traffic -their traffic impact study has' been properly prepared, and you have it before you for.your consideration. Barbeiro' Thank you. Borup: -Commissioners. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted clarification on what qualifies as a safety problem to get the spot solution. Sale: There isn't one or even a few items to answer that question, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner De Weerd: Obviously, topping the list are accidents. But,. before we get to that point, significant delays; if it becomes a situation where the typical delay to get from Locust Grove onto Franklin exceeds-about 40 seconds, that's an average delay measured over a period of time, if there are -there are rules of thumb for volumes of traffic and the ratio of one leg of the intersection to the-other legs that will point out a problem on a specific~leg - on a specific leg of the intersection. There's no one thing. It's a bag of criteria that our traffic engineers look out for; they're source. De Weerd: So, your spot solution would be a light at that intersection? Sale: An interim solution sometimes is to make afour-way. stop, however controlled by four stop signs. That's not atypical situation where one of the streets has this much reasonal importance as a through street, as Franklin is. So I'm reasonably certain that the first level of improvement would be a traffic signal.. The second level, if not done at \J Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 15 the same time would be the addition of left-turn lanes on each way. One left-turn leg and presumably this intersection won't progress to the point that, for example, Fairview and Eagle is where we are asking that developer to put two left turn lanes on each leg of the intersection. De Weerd: So when ACRD looked at this development, did, in your traffic counts, did you include the anticipated- impact from Jabil? Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, that's a fair question. I don't knew the answer. 1 don't remember what was the sequence of the two applications? Actually, now that I remember a .little bit myself, Jabif was an outright use in the zone where: it was, so we didn't really see it as an application in any way. It came through as just an application for building permit. So, I don't think they did a traffic study. But, ordinarily, we try to take everything we know into account. So, if we -back to my original question, I don't think we knew about Jabif when we first reviewed this application. De Weerd: I think Jabil came last winter, didn't it? Barbeiro: It came before this. Sale: I take your word for it. I don't - rmy recollection is that we didn't see Jabil before we did this application, but C could be wrong. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sale. Borup: Anyone else? Sale: I wish that I had good answers for you, and I wish I had more specifics, but, unfortunately, I don't. Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: Mr. Sale, as I understand the long-term hope is, is that there will be a freeway overpass on Locust Grove, and that the road will go north straight to Fairview and Chinden, and it'll be a straight shot. And so you're anticipating Franklin and Locust Grove both being major roads and then major amounts of traffic? Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brown, that's absolutely correct. If I have any good news, it's the fact that we have acquired two-thirds of the right-of--way for the connection of Locust Grove between Franklin and Pine. Three of the four properties abutting that alignment have redeveloped and we have acquired the corridor for the extension of Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 16 Locust Grove in its correct alignment; between Franklin and Pine. We have acquired right-of-way from three of the four abutting parcels, so that's - sometimes I have to look pretty hard for good news. Brown: It's my recollection that Jabil does not have afull-service entrance off of Locust Grove; that their employees will. be entering through the park, there is an emergency access only. That was my understanding. Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brown, 1 think they're building a standard collector road connection to Locust Grove Road from - it will be the extension of Central. And, actually, we're anticipating that that road will have to be extended in the future all the way to Eagle Road as a parallel facility to Franklin because of the volumes that are starting to show up .now that need to go east and west. ~ We're programming Franklin Road as afull-service, five-level, five-laned roadway, and without some kind of parallel .help, it would have to go to seven lanes what the numbers are starting to tell u~. So, that's one of the changes we're going to be recommending to APA is that a new' collector road be established between Locust Grove and Eagle Road just north of the. freeway. Borup: But you're saying that Jabil does have full access to the west? Sale: That's correct. Borup: So the traffic count's going to depend on which direction the employees live, would assume? Sale: Yes. We - Borup: If they want to get a quick access on the freeway, they'd run down Central and over? Sale: Yes. For the time being. If they were going east, they'd probably come East Locust Grove to Franklin to Eagle to the interstate or north on 55, depending on where. they were going, where they lived. Borup: But, they cari head east out of their site down Central and the other roads through the commercial project there? Sale: They'll have three ways from their site. They could go west to East First and then they could go north out to Franklin on Stratford, or they'll be able to go east to Locust Grove. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 17 Borup: Okay. So then, maybe to answer the other question, maybe how do you know? How can you do a traffic study on a facility that doesn't exist and not knowing - or can the computer models come close on that? Sale: Mr. Chairman - Borup: Not knowing where the employees are going to be living and driving to? Sale: Mr. Chairman, this is probably a question more`appropriate for Mr. Flatz, but they - the traffic engineer - APA run's a very sophisticated traffic model that has assumptions built into it as to where the population centers are and where the trip-ins are going to be from avarious - from a given employer. The traffic engineer will take s that model and tailor it to the roadway network in the immediate area of the site that he's looking at, and so that he then assigns trips to the connecting roads that reflect the model. If a model says-that a certain percentage of,the trips from Jabil want to go east, then the traffic engineer will assign those to a road that goes east from the site, and then assign them, and that's where their training and experience come in; assign those to the roadways that branch out from that initial road. ~. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Sale? Thank you, Mr. Sale. Sale: Thank you. Borup: Mr. Flatz, is there any final comment you'd like to make since we're~still on ~:. traffic and then when we move on? Flatz: !'d be happy to answer any questions. Borup: Any questions from the Commission? Okay. It' looks like we don't have any. I just-didn't know if there's with all that conversation and. if there's any other - Flatz: Any time if you have questions, get ahold of me. Borup: Okay. Thank you. This is a continued public~hearing. We have had several,'as we've mentioned, but we are still interested in anyone that has any new information that. they'd like to present to the commission tonight. If so, (inaudible) would like to come on up at this time. Whatever you'd like. Smith: I'm Robert R. Smith, and I live at 335 South Locust Grove Road whicri is approximately three acre parcels south of this development. I'd like to set the record straight. Ms. Butler said ~Mr. Peterson had many meetings with the neighbors. l'm here to inform you that we only had two meetings with Mr. Peterson about this project, and during that time, each time the project changed into what it is now. I'd like to express r ~ Meridian Planning: and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999.,,. Page 18 again my disapproval of this type of development in the area. I still believe that there's going to be a sever traffic problem at the corner of Locust Grove and Franklin Road, and that is because it does not go through. It is a dead-end road right now against Franklin Road. Regardless of what JUB found in their traffic count, also at the same time Peter O'Neal took a traffic count. It looks to me like there was something funny going on, so I went to each one of them and talked to them while they were taking this count. This count was not taken at time when the traffic is the heaviest, which they have addressed. I also feel that when I -the developer can take a traffic count, he can look any way they want. I was also invited to a development presentation put on my Mr. Peter O'Neal at a neighbor's house at Locust View Subdivision about two weeks before the last meeting. At that time, h`e informed us that he intends to develop this 80 acres that is just across the road from my place. That is -there will be 280 homes and all of them will use Locust Grove Road for direct access. There is no other access out of there at this time, and they. have informed us of this. They're going to be applying for their permits very soon. I fell that with as close as an estimate that Ada County Highway can give would be at least six years before Locust Grove could be widened, and this is documented in their own statements. They have to buy the right-of-way, they are also trying to juggle some things to get the overpass built over the freeway. I also drove to all the similar complexes that are in Meridian, of which I've been associated with in the many years that I've been here, and every one of them has a sign advertising for occupancy. This indicates to me that the need to subsidized housing isn't as great as Mr. Peterson has presented to you. -Also, I looked at the one that has the 2-1/2 stories, which will really -units in it, and it isn't a joke. They mound a little dirt up around the bottom unit to take half a story away from it. -They don't dig it into the earth ~`or anything. It's still three stories from the ground level up. I absolutely oppose of three-story units being put on this corner and think you should not allow them. Mr. Roberson and I .took a tape measure and measured the property pins of this property, and through my basic mathematics, there is only 2-1/2 - 5-1/2 acres of developable ground, and by the time you take access that Ada County's going to ask for the right-of- way for Franklin Road and also from Locust Grove, which we measured out, at least, less than 5-1/2 acres. And in moving, they'll have to move the Five Mile drain over onto this property in order to widen Franklin, so that's going to take some more property out which I didn't access. So, it's just a matter of record, he's going to be developing this project on less than five acres of ground, developable ground. Mr. Peterson addressed that the view his three-story buildings have of Deerpoint would really be beautiful, but he doesn't address what happens to my view of Squaw Butte when he has three-story buildings blocking my vision; that's to the north. These are my comments, and I hope that you will listen to them. Thank you very much. Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? McMillan: Reece McMillan, 870 South Locust Grove Road. I, like my neighbor, oppose this project for the simple fact of the traffic situation. Jabil Manufacturing told us at a Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special °Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 19 ,previous meeting that they will have up to 400 employees starting out on this project. Who is to say that all 400 of them won't exit on Locust Grove. They're building two soccer fields there, which on tournament time, they will estimate 1500 cars at a tournament. Now, are 1500 of these cars, are they going to go out on East St~~atford? Are they going to go out on Central, or are they coming out on Locust Grove? I think you ought to take a traffic count out there like a 48-hour period instead of a four or an eight hour period. The extension of North Locust Grove is turning down into Franklin Road, they're going to block off what is now called Nota Road at the railroad tracks which is going to bring all the bus traffic and there' s a couple truck terminals down there. All the truck traffic will be coming out at that same .intersection. This 280 houses on there, you know, like Mr. Smith says, that's one way in and one way out: Locust Grove. So, I don't know what the future's going to be. I think we ought to oppose this thing and wait and see what develops as far as Franklin Road, Locust Grove Road, the freeway, the overpass, and just sit back and kind of take a long look at it. (inaudible) propose increase in our budget, this is going to turn more load onto them, you know, (inaudible) service and everything, so, actually, I'm opposed to it all the way around. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Next. Plant: Morgan Plant, 300 South Locust Grove Road. I find it very difficult to believe anything that this developer presents in this projects. Things just keep changing. Every time he comes in, something has changed. Borup: Mr. Plant, I might mention a lot of changes have been at our request and your neighbor's request. That's why they've changed. Plant: The concept plan showed quite a bunch of open areas in the original, and here there are virtually none. Mr. Smith addressed the six acres on the application, and I agree. He is well under five acres; probably closer to four acres. I call to fact that when this project was presented to City Council, what we see here tonight is a far cry from what was presented there. It, again, just keeps changing. The pictured landscape looks great in a drawing, .but I doubt it ever comes to pass. Look at what the city didn't make Stonebridge do. The neighbors are choking with dust; they're fighting the amity every way, and they're losing. The represented traffic survey is,somewhat of a joke, and I think that's been addressed here a little bit, but I'd like to make some projections. When Jabil gets going full-bore, they have advertised it'll have some 2200 ei~nployees. (inaudible) of those will use South Locust Grove. That amounts to about 1400 trips a day. The Hemblin property is slated for commercial development. Again, about a thousand cars a day on that road. Should an overpass over the freeway be built in three to five years, an uncountable number of cars will travel South Locust Grove. I'm throwing in 2,000 cars a day, and I'm probably quite low. (inaudible) mention Peter O'Neal is developing 280 homes on 80 acres. Fully a third of these cars will absolutely Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 199.9 Page 20 have ~to use South Locust Grove until other avenues are developed, so there's at least another three, four hundred cars in there. Once the bought properties are developed, again, there are uncountable service calls that this type of property will generate: furnace, power, light, all sorts of service-represented cars. If we look at these projected traffic counts as I've presented here, you're going to add another 5,000 cars a day, minimum to South Locust Grove. Don't allow another impossible traffic nightmare like the professional office building on the corner of Eagle and Franklin .Road. Has anyone ever really studied that? That is a total traffic nightmare, and it hasn't even opened yet, because there's only one way in and one way out, and those cars will have to cross a five-lane road to get where they belong, whether they're going east or west, it doesn't make any difference because there's no outlet on Franklin - I mean on Eagle Road. I don't see any place on this project drawing for a school bus turnaround. Are we going to busload kids off and on a five-lane South Locust Grove Road? State-law does not allow a school bus to back up.There has to be a turnaround where those kids can - the buses can pull in and out, and again, even the bus will have to pull across at least two lanes of road. Are you going to load on South Locust Grove? I submit to you again, this project does not belong in this area. It's the wrong project, the wrong place and wrong time. Meridian can do much better for its people. Meridian deserves better. Please reject this project in its entirety. I think that we need to take a look at what could be there, which would be an asset instead of a gross detriment. Thank you. Borup: Thank you, Mr. Plant. Anyone else? Fox: Alan Fox. I live at 1840 Cadillac Drive. Correct me if I'm wrong. You have to have an ordinance,pass in order for the City Council to say this annexation and zoning fias been passed; is that not right? Okay. The annexation ordinance has been tabled until their next meetinq~, so it is not passed as of this-time? It was tabled at the August 18t" meeting for the 7t of September; they tabled it again. They've got some problem with the developer or something, but it has not been passed by the Council as an ordinance yet. My one thing is traffic, too, on this is that the fire department's building their building out here on Franklin, which I thought wasn't the best place, but the other morning -Igo to work at 6:15 in the morning - I sat through, the last two weeks, I sat through three times in the morning three lights before I could make a right turn onto Eagle so I can go get the freeway coming off of Franklin. Traffic is getting worse all the time on it. I watched a tractor last Friday, in fact, two of them I saw, come in their tractor trailers come down going East -going West to turn on North Nola, they stopped, traffic backed up behind them on Franklin because there were people coming out of North Nola to make a left turn, and until those people came out, the tractor trailers could not make the-swing in and make the turn, so they're blocking traffic. You have a fire truck, if they're blocking traffic, we got a problem to get up Franklin. We can assume a lot of these workers for Jabil live all over the valley, because right now Jabil's working aver at HP and they're going to move their headquarters`from HP over to here when this is done. The six to five acres has been addressed tonight. The stakes in the ground give Meridian Planning and Zoning. Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999_ Page 21 it about 5.5. As they said, if you take out for the roads, you're down to five, probably. Take out for Five Mile Creek, we're under five down to four. The first one came in here, we were going to have one or two of the buildings were going to be three stories, 2-1/2, three stories. Then he came back and said three of them. Now we're at all of them. That shows me right there he does not have 6.5 acres to spread this out on ~o he can make them two stories. He's got to make them three stories to get that many in to that small of an area. So, that's all I've got. Is there any questions? Borup: Thank you. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Yes, Mr. Barbeiro Barbeiro: Could we ask Staff about Mr. Fox's discussion regarding the tabling of the - I didn't quite follow what he was referring to? The annexation? Borup: D'o you want to answer that or do you want me to? Rossman: I can comment on that. It doesn't really matter at this stage. Obviously, we can't grant a conditional use permit on a property that hasn't been annexed, and the property's not annexed to the ordinance it's been adopted. If it's been tabled, that's fine. This conditional use permit final action won't be taken on it until it goes to City Council, so, City Council. won't act on this conditional use permit until they've annexed the property. Borup: It's,my understanding the only thing holding it up is the signing of the development agreement. So, it's just procedural. Thank you. Anyone else? Witherell: Hi. Jim Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove. I live two houses from this development. There isn't a development agreement yet: We'd like to see a development agreement because you're asking ~us to comment on the conditicns; we don't know what the conditions are going to be in the development agreement. It's a (inaudible). We would also like to see a final plat, it does keep - or a preliminary plat, it does keep changing. What it's being (inaudible) for is who owns the property. It's unclear whether- the property, the deed has been transferred yet. At the last City Council meeting, representatives for the development told Mr. Gigray that he could go look it up. Mr. Gigray didn't think that was a great idea. That's where that stands. Anyway, we're here about a conditional use permit. Let me say that memories are fairly short here. Planning and Zoning recommended this be turned down. It did not approve it. It went to Council on the two to two vote and broke by the tie, (inaudible) tie broken by the mayor. In the process, the chairman of the council had to come and rescue (inaudible). So far we've lost~two very good commissioners. This property is Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 22 just plain jinxed. Whether you approve it or not, put conditions on it or not, it's got its problems. Now, when the Commission rules, Planning and Zoning has an awful lot of authority under the comprehensive plan. He's building it for three stories. You can change that to two. City Council will have to change it back to three. If you don't think there's enough trees, you put on more trees. That's -conditional use does in plarning and zoning. Now, let me say originally I liked this project. I did not like the concept of the real high density, but it was a beautifully designed thing. This (inaudible) looks more like an army fort, house, (inaudible) ground. So, now I have to (inaudible) of saying I was neutral. (inaudible) being against it, because you only have (inaudible), so I had to take the (inaudible). Anyway, this is a three-story building, or several three-story buildings next to a single-story residence. The (inaudible)-acres, so you're going from 400 people, about, to two people, about. That does not fit. (inaudible) this was not good planning. The comprehensive plan requires that there is such extreme change from one use to the other that (inaudible) residences and requires at the minimum fora 20- foot transition. We're playing a (inaudible) game here transition seems to be quite a setback... They're not the same thing. Twenty feet means from his fence to the neighbor's-fence. I don't know if this will address it or not, because this is all new to us tonight, too. So, I thank you for the wall, but there needs to be something on the other side, too, and not just the wall. Now, I'm a little curious about the (inaudible) and the pool. What's the water source on this? The reason I ask is because the obvious answer is city water, is because the developer behind us dug a well under the guides of domestic use and uses that for his landscaping and so forth. I'm arguing against strongly digging their well; we've got more wells in that little area out there than tf ie water can support. I don't see any (inaudible) clean water act (inaudible) water resources set aside. It would have been nice, however, if he had a dry set before (inaudible). And the annexation is still tabled. (inaudible) to say, I was a child protective social worker for the State of Idaho. It's been many years ago, the kids haven't changed. This thing scares me to death, and not from being a neighbor, but for being a resident. You've got open spaces for these kids that are (inaudible). You've got the top area at the back, you've got the (inaudible) the two things do not go together, just like you don't putfirst graders in with high-schoolers; one picks on the other. You've got Five Mile Creek (inaudible). A hundred feet up the hill, you've got open (inaudible). This is not my problem, but somebody's going to get hurt down there. So this - in your ability to make rules, or make conditions on this, please try to factor in how you're going to protect these people from themselves. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? Plant: I'm Marilyn Plant and I live at 300 South Locust Grove Road. I want to address safety, and we've already talked about safety and the road safety and. so forth and so on, but we've opened up a Pandora's box, folks. We've lived on South Locust Grove now for 20 years. I live there. I experience that intersection every day. There are times when I've had to wait at Eagle through four lights to get through there. This is an ~ ~ .. ~_i Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 23 emergency corridor. We live up there, we hear the sirens day and night. How ,are they going to get through when you have traffic tied ~up so much? When they open up that business building up there on Eagle and Franklin, it's goingto'back traffic up more and more and more, and here we're back to South Locust Grove. Can our fire department take care of three-story buildings?..Are they equipped to handle that type of thing? Because we really don't have any real tall buildings in this area. I don't know. I haven't checked with them, but I think it's something that needs to be addressed. Road rage. The way that's going; we're going to experience a lot of it. As a teacher of 26 to 28 years, ..and we're rating this from A ao F. Some days, like Sunday morning at 8:30, I have no problem getting out onto Franklin. Everybody's still asleep. But, come along about 8:00, 8:30 on a weekday, forget it. We're- taking -our lives in' our hands to get out' there.. And as more and morecars come in, that's what's going to happen. And the other thing is the school population. Since I was a teacher, I~guess I still am, always will be. But you put that many people into our schools, there's a safety issue here too. You've got think about the schools and•where they're going from there. I really wonder if you. want to keep this lid off of this. box and go with this. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? Have any -yes, ma'am. Smith: I'm Jerry Smith and I live at 335 South Locust Grove; and as I picked up the paper one morning, I saw that Boise's looking for a truck route. I also saw that Meridian's looking for a truck route, and as I understand it, Mr. Bird suggested Franklin Road for a truck. route. There's -you can hardly get a truck down there now. There's no turning -they can't even turn on the lanes or anything that's down there, but I think that should definitely mentioned,. and when Mr. Peterson started.talking about this with our two meetings that we had with him, this was only going to be a story and-a-half building. There are limits on light industrial behind us on the height of the building. I would like you to consider the apartment buildings being that high in this area, acid I think the Robersons and. the rest of the neighbors, myself included, deserve at least a buffer with a fence. That little buffer, whether it's a masonry fence or whatever kind'of fence it is, when you get =and look at a three-story building beside it, that little masonry fence or whatever, it's going to look like a little ant crawling on the ground, and I'd like you to take that under consideration. We have a definite problem right behind us. We have one on the side of us. We're going to be totally surrounded; and I talked to theIdaho State Transportation Department, Mr. Thomas, and. he said that even when this is on the agenda, it'll be probably five to six years before this overpass can be finished. And no one has mentioned the low-income housing that's going to go over on the other side of Overland that would also use the overpass.. if and when it is finished. Even though they share the funds; if Meridian can get the funds -for the right-of-way. As I understand it; it's been posted Meridian may buy the right-of--way for the overpass, and I'd like to ask a question, where will Meridian get the money for that overpass if they buy the-right-of-way? Can anyone answer that on the commission? • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 24 Borup: This is not the place for that., No. I don't think anybody here can answer that. Smith: There's no one here? Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Roberson: My name is Ernie Roberson, and I live at`185 South Locust Grove Road. I just have a couple comments. I've sent each of you atwo-page ,letter prior to this meeting, I think you must have that in your packets, expressing my feelings. I also sent. you a letter, my husband and I sent you a letter, with pictures, and you have those and our feelings in that letter, and I just would like to state that for the record. Thank you. Borup: Okay. Thank you and both those have been turned in to the clerk as part of the record. Both of your letters have been. Roberson: Thank you. Borup: Anyone else? Thank you. With that I'd like to conclude with any comments. Butler: Again, JoAnn Butler, 6078 North 8t" Street, representing the applicant. I'll just make a few comments in response to some of the comments here. As the commissioners are aware for the last hearing that we have, Mr. Sale, you said. that you have bad news and bad news. And I think for all of the folks in Meridian, because you are growing so rapidly, and because you have made commitments already by setting out where your area of impact is located which includes the area where many of the folks-that have testified before you tonight live. Those areas will be annexed. According to what you've committed to with Ada County, those areas will all be annexed and served within ten years. That's ten years from two years ago. So the City is well aware of the hard road I guess you've got to hoe' over the next ten years to provide infrastructure and services to many people throughout this area. And Mr. Sale is right. It's going to be a very difficult time for everybody as we pull together to provide those services and housing. This particular applicant who is well known in the community and is working with the Idaho Housing and Finance Association to do a project that this city can be-proud of is attempting to work with the city, with the neighbors, with Staff to do just that. To try to provide that infrastructure in the form of the right-of-way that Mr. Sale eluded to in the form of extension of sewer and other facilities and in the provision of housing. We have had`many meetings. Some with-the neighbors, as they said. Many with the staff and many with the city, and the project has changed, and we thank the commission for recognizing the fact that it has changed in response to requests by`the city and by the neighbors. We have tried to be responsive to those requests: moving buildings, creating extra buffer along the south side, necessitating changes to the stories of the buildings, but still within the ordinance requirements. We are not requesting any variances from the height that is set for this zone. We have redesigned '• Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 25 the buildings at the request of neighbors so that windows did not face to the south, we have increased the landscaping dramatically as requested, not only by the neighbors, but also by Staff in this commission. With regard to the annexation, I think we just need to be very clear about that. That was approved by the Council on the - at the end of the 20t" of July. I think one of the commissioners has mentioned, and Mr. Rossman can confirm, the only thing that this was due to be annexed on the seventh. The only reason it is not was because the. development agreement, the City Attorney's Office was asking for confirmation that the project was owned by the applicant, which it was at the last City Council meeting, and we have just not seen a revised development agreement from the Attorney's Office so that we can sign it and get it back to you, because the City will not pass its ordinance until it has a signed development agreement in front of it, and so as soon as we have it, we will sign it~and get it back to the city. And Mr. Rossman is correct that any -- the approval that you provide is conditioned upon annexation, and our courts have made it clear that you can approve this conditional use, and it will be contingent upon annexation and that there is no timing problem for the City in that regard. With regard to traffic, obviously everybody in Meridian is concerned about traffic. For some people, traffic chaos is one more car. It's clear that Meridian has more -than one more car passing through it, and you have many issues that you need to ,respond to and ACHD needs to respond to. But for this project at this point in time, both ACHD, your professional, and JUB has shown that the traffic report is not a joke. It complies with all of the requirements of ACHD and the APA modeling to show that traffic does not unduly burden the roads in this area. We understand that all traffic creates a burden, and that why ACRD requires that we pay impact fees: to help ACHD mitigate that burden. Unfortunately, because of our tax laws in Idaho, that is the main source of funding that this county has in order to provide any, whether it be spot fixes on intersections or major street section realignments and enhancements. There were many comments to the effect that the applicant will be doing illegal things and that somehow we should not be approved because we will not comply with state Department of Water Resources or other things. As you know, I won't take offense at that, but as you know, the Commission cannot make a judgment because of innuendo that we might do something amiss. We will certainly abide by every condition and every state law and local law that is before us. You have received from all departments and agencies, all your departments and various agencies have had the opportunity to comment on this project, including the fire department, including the school system, and none have opposed this project or said that they could not serve it. Again, we meet all the requirements of the zoning ordinances, and there are no variances requested. Again, we are willing to discuss as we have at every meeting with the Commission on what further could we do in connection with landscaping and zoning and -sorry, screening and buffering and more than happy to continue to entertain suggestions by the Commission. So with that, I just again. turn the Commission back to the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan analysis. We believe that we meet all of thF conditions of your zoning ordinance and your comprehensive plan.: We know ghat this is difficult for many of the residents who live in the vicinity, but that no one likes to see • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting .September 14, ,1999 Page 26 _ change. Many people have said they've lived here 20 years. That's got to be a common situation throughout Meridian where people are experiencing change, but it is our goal to work with the City to provide you with a .project that you can be proud of. : With that, we're respectfully asking that the Commission approve this conditional use request. And I'll stand for any questions unless Mr. Peterson would like to add anything else: Thank you. Borup; Thank you. Any questions from the Commission? Okay. Commissioners, I think it's all yours at'this point. Hatcher: Items for discussion on the project. The first one that was brought up in numerous testimonies was the discussion of future development. So-and-so's doing this and so-and-so's doing that. I think that we need to take into account the item at hand. We cannot predict who's doing what, and we cannof - we have to take each project on its own merit. Whether a person's going to build a 280-house subdivision .down the street; we'll deal with that when we see that project. We've got to look at this project as it stands. Another issue was upon approval of the annexation, which is, as discussed, a formality, it was brought up that this is going to be approved as an R-40: The project is a six-acre project no matter how you look at the site; whether you take away right-of-ways, take away easements, the project is a six-acre site. -Then from there, you take everything else away. That would give 240 units onto this piece of property. This project is proposing 96 units. One of the things I think we might want to consider and is open for discussion is the possibility of the two D-type buildings on the southern-most portion. I would highly suggest that those two buildings, although they are at the top of the topography, be reduced to two stories. ~ As the topography drops down the site, Isee-that three-storybuildings could be acceptable. But at the very top, impacting the neighbors to,the south, I think three stories is a little excessive. Another possibility if the wall to the south is being built of currently at six foot, a block wall, block can go a lot higher than six feet. Site and sound is a concern. That wall can be raised at minimal cost. One of the things in lieu of traffic on the project I would have to bring out is that as Mr. Sale from ACRD had brought up, a Band-Aid fix as needed for the intersection. One of the things, if we were to go ahead and approve this project or send it to City Council, one of the things that I would see should be done in conjunction, either solely responsible-for the project or conjunction with adjacent developments and whatnot, is that I, at minimum, the intersection should be improved with a signal and the left turns. I,think that the condition as it is without this development warrants some improvement. I think we all agree that just about every intersection in this town warrants some improvement. At this time, I think that these are some - *** End of Tape 1, Side B *** Borup: Well, we can discuss it either way.. Does Commissioner feel secure that we're not going to want to call anyone up for testimony? • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999. Page 27 Hatcher: No.., I think we need to leave it open in case we-have questions. Borup: Okay. Do I have a motion to close? It looks like we do not have a second vote? • Okay. Thank you. Did you have any other comments? Anyone else on discussion? Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, if I may as a question of Counsel? There is a line in mere that says, our courts have made it clear -excuse me. Speaking from the conditional use compliance- analysis, "Our courts have made it clear that different types of housing cannot be viewed as incompatible with other housing, even if the other housing is single=family residential." Can you comment on that for us further as that seems to be one of the overriding factors of this entire (inaudible) Rossman: Where are you referring? Barbeiro: Page,3, second to the last paragraph in the middle. Borup: Any other. comments while he's looking that up, or while he's preparing that? That was your only question or comment? Rossman: Wetl, just in reviewing this comment, there's no citation in any case authority I don't - I'm sure JoAnn could easily provide that. I haven't read the particular case.that she's referring to, so I really can't comment. Obviously, compatibility and whether it's harmonious with the surrounding areas is a standard that's set forth within the ordinances and is for your consideration. But I probably agree that there is some case authority that would indicate that the type of housing, as long as it's a compatible use, is certainly -that the type of construction and that type of thing is not something that would lend itself to compatibility; but, I would have to look at the cases that JoAnn is relying upon in indicating that within ..her analysis. Borup: Mr. Barbeiro, did that answer your question, or would you like Ms. Butler to reply to that? Barbeiro: I would appreciate it if Ms. Butler could give a short summary of what the intent of that statement was. Butler: I will give (inaudible) Borup: (inaudible) Butler: Thank you. JoAnn Butler again. To answer the question, you're right. I should have put a citation there. There have been several cases that have talked about ~~ ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 ~ - Page 28 housing, especially in connection with manufactured housing or mobile homes and the fact that they-are .not,.. by virtue tof their use, incompatible of other housing, whether they be stick-built, single-family homes. However, as I continue to note, and I can provide those sites for you at a different time, but then I do go on to note that it is appropriate for the City to consider design elements,. that even though the use is compatible, they're all housing. You do need -to take into consideration the design elements tou~ensure~ compatibility. ,: Barbeiro: So you're relying on the mobile home case? Butler: Uh-huh. Barbeiro: Okay. Yeah. Rossman: Ms. Butler, I'd like to use an extreme as an example, and please bear with me. If a fraternity house chose to build on that lot, would - we would have no say in whether only we could say that it has to be brick. Would that be correct? In necessing that - Butler: I can't answer that under Idaho law. I know there are no cases under Idaho law that I know of that have reached appellate or supreme court level. And. so that certainly hasn't been answered in,ldaho on fraternity houses or group home. But if you're speaking about group homes, then there are cases that haven't -that have indicated or have stated that group homes, as a residential use, are compatible with other residential uses in the area. Now, a city may decide in those cases to limit other things to ensure compatibility such as the number of trips to and from a group home daily,-they may on a fraternity house decide that compatibility in a residential area does not include all-night parties or something. like that to ensure compatibility; but as far as the residential use of the property, I believe our courts would hold that the uses themselves are compatible as living and sleeping in a home. .. Barbeiro: Okay. Thank you Rossman: That's absolutely correct. There is a recent case that says you can't exclude manufactured housing from a particular residential zone .merely because it's manufactured housing. Now, you can take into account design characteristics, you can take into accounf traffic, you can take into account those types of things, but just the~fact that it's a particular.type of housing is not a relevant consideration. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Yes, Mr. Barbeiro. . .. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 29 Barbeiro: Can you enlighten me again on this particular property where several years ago that a mobile home park was proposed on this and was turned down by Planning and Zoning and City Council? Rossman: A mobile home park, by that was a manufactured housing. It was not a mobile.-home park, •it was double-wide units on permanent foundations was my recollection. I, don't remember whether it was unanimous - I don't know if it was unanimous,. but either way it was not approved. Pardon? Okay. Mr. Berg said he might have pulled his application after several delays. The other project that was proposed there was - I don't remember. But this is a third application that I'm aware of on this property. Can you remember -Will, can you remember what was the other (inaudible). Was it more of a commercial project? I think there's some - I'm thinking maybe some office or something -along that line. Barbeiro: Thank you. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman - Borup: Yes, Mr. Hatcher. °Hatcher: -- I'd like to propose a question to Mr. Sale'on the traffic issue. Borup: Go ahead. Hatcher: Basically my question is, based upon your earlier comments, based upon the current construction of Jabil and based upon the proposed project that's currently in front of us, would the additional traffic congestion at this intersection warrant ACHD to allocate funds for improvement? Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hatcher, that's a good question. I think I'd give you an 80 percent probability that it would. Given what we know, what we hear about development in the area, what we expect Jabil to -again, what we read about Jabil ; we don't. really know anything about them, but what we read about their expectations and other development in the area, I'd guess that within a very few years we'll be making some major improvements to that intersection. Whether it's - I am not able to point to which straw breaks the back; which-trip from which project or which hundred trip's from which project would be the one to point to make the improvement. That's why - partially:why, as Ms. Butler pointed out, the state legislature saw fit to allow' us to impose. impact fees on development, so that we don't any longer have to impose a major improvement like this on one developer. The courts were very -looked upon that process very unfavorably, so that is the basis for impact fees that we extract funds from several developments, in this case in order to finance improvements in an area. A Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 30 long-winded answer to your question, but I'd say if this project goes ahead, if Jabil goes ahead, we will be making improvements to the intersection: Hatcher: Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Commission De Weerd. De Weerd: Yes. Can I take that question a step further, and I don't know if this is from Mr. Sale or from Staff, but can this be a requirement that the signalization be a part of this conditional use permit as well as a left-hand turn, and that perhaps future developments that this would benefit as well would pay some kind of late-comer's fee or maybe that's a stretch, but it's apparent that this intersection needs improvement. Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commission De Weerd, we frequently impose or recommend to you that you impose proportionate shares of the cost of such improvements on a specific development, and if that were to occur in this case, we would allocate the traffic from this project to, I believe it has driveways on both Locust Grove and Franklin, so we would allocate traffic to each of those driveways, and then determine the percentage of the overall traffic that's going to use tha# intersection and allocate the costs of the intersection improvement based. on that percentage. Hearing the numbers that we've tossed around tonight about Jabil and the 280 homes, other just natural background growth, it would probably be a relatively small percentage of the cost of the intersection improvement. I'd say.less than 15 percent, something like that. De Weerd: So you are saying that this can't be a requirement imposed. Sale: I didn't mean to say that. De Weerd: Just that they pay their proportionate share. Sale: Right. De Weerd: And how would you go back then and collect that from Jabil then? Sale: We would not be able to. Hatcher: Didn't Jabil, as part of their agreement pay impact fees to ACRD based upon the size of their project? So money has already been allocated. from them? Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hatcher, that is true, but then this project will also pay impact fees,. too. De Weerd: Can we;require you to (inaudible) him intersection improvements? • , Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 31 Sale: Mr. Chairman - Borup: It we could do that, (inaudible). Sale: We just became one of my (inaudible) We'd certainly listen to the City's request and do everything we can to meet that. DeWeerd: I thought I would ask. Sale: We certainty listen to the City's request and do every thing we can to'meet that. Borup: Mr. Barbeiro. Barbeiro: Mr. Sale, doesn't Jabil pay their impact fees based upon each individual building as the building is built or do they pay an up-front impact fee based upon the completion of the project ahead of time? Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Barbeiro, as each building permit is obtained, they pay an impact fee for that specific building. Barbeiro: So the way that Commissioner De Weerd has requested in it's long form, additional impact fees could be assessed on Jabil based upon new construction in the future above and beyond what they may have anticipated being assessed on? Sale: Commissioner, they will - as they pull a building permit for each additional building, they will pay regular impact fees, standard impact fees. If you're asking can we impose more than standard impact fees, we cannot now do that. There is a way that the highway district can impose what are called extraordinary impact fees, but because they were in an area that zoned properly for their use, I don't think we-could do that. It was an impact that we-have to assume would happen. Barbeiro: Thank you, Mr. Sale. Borup: Any other questions or discussion from the Commission? Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: Shari, what's the height requirement that would be on a fence or a wall on the property line? • •. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting ~~~ September 14, 1999 Page 32 Borup: Oh. I was going to mention that: Good point. Stiles: The maximum height in an R-40 would be six feet. Borup: City ordinance. Barbeiro: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. How did that -Shari, how did that impact the family center that they have fence that will -could be as much as eight feet? Stiles: ``They're in a commercial zone - Barbeiro: Okay. Thank you. Stiles: -= industrial zone. Borup: Depends on which side you're on, too. That (inaudible) Mr. Hatchet's questions that I think that you brought up. Brown: And that's the possibility of increasing? Borup: Yes, but that is a restriction with the present ordinance. Commissioners? De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I just have one more thing. Is there anything we can do for those intersection improvements? Borup: To hurry them up? Sounds to me tike we're -- De Weerd: That they would coincide with occupancy. Borup: Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong. It sounds to me like what Mr. Sale said, the fastest way to get an improve in intersection is to have some projects approved so that the people there -and- that is necessary. De Weerd: That's real-proactive, isn't it? Borup: Yeah. Well, that's where the money comes from. Not very many builders are going to want to pay before they start building. They want to do it at the same time. De Weerd: But, if there's a safety problem, then we'll get a spot solution which would be signalization; right? Hatcher: We have to create the problem first before it's fixed. • w Meridian Planning and Zoning-Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 33 De Weerd: Well, the problem's already there. - Borup: Who wants to volunteer? De Weerd: Here. Go_stand in front of the (inaudible) Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: I'll try one more time. I'd like to close the public meeting and make a motion that we do so. De Weerd: I'll second that.- Borup:- Okay. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Okay. Public hearing is closed. Now, we can still have questions -you can still questions to Staff, and we do need to reach a decision. It's been two hours. Remember our decision is a recommendation to go to City Council, however it may be. Is this commercials -Shari, if I'm correct, there will be another public hearing at City ` Council. Stiles: It isn't our - Borup: Per our (inaudible) Stiles: It's residential. All conditional use permits would go-since it's part of the annexation and zoning really tie it to that. We would send it to another public hearing at City Council Borup: Commissioners, any thoughts? Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Yes. Brown: I know the projects that I've seen around the city look a lot nicer if the developers do enter into a license agreement until those improvements are improved along the right-of-way, .and at the time that a motion's made, I would make a recommendation that requires the developer to provide evidence that a license Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 34 agreement for the operation and maintenance of that unimproved right-of-way had been entered into. I can see where the residents see that the plan has changed, but I also see that they've tried to mitigate their impact to the neighbors, and there's so many things that you can do. I agree that those two Units D - I would go along with the recommendation that those be two stories. It is my opinion that would almost make those. non-visible to those neighbors. As I recall, the homes that are along Locust Grove face to'the east with the fronts of their homes. Those are just some of the thoughts that I had. Borup: Commissioner De Weerd De~Weer`d: Can I still ask Staff questions? Borup: Yes. De Weerd: If this project is denied, is it still going to be zoned R-40? Freckleton: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Freckleton: And along with that, the figures on the application show 13.66 units per acre, which would be less than R-15 zone. Borup: A question then on the two comments on Building D. Are you in a proposal to make that atwo-story height? Are you giving the applicant the option of taking those lost units "and incorporating somewhere else on the site? Are you saying it's to be reduced by (inaudible) -try to tease four units there that affects -did you think it through to that .extent? Freckleton: I didn't... Stiles: I did. Freckleton: I don't see a problem with him picking those up in any spaces, I guess, or~ extending maybe the 6 units to make them larger or -necessarily extra; floors and those, but lengthen the building. I don't have a problem with him working with his architect to come up with that same number of units. Rossman: Mr°. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Rossman. . . Meridian Planning and .Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 35 Rossman: Somewhat difficult to do at this point. We're asked to grant a conditional use permit for a particular project that's been put before you. Obviously, you can make it a condition that they reduce the height of a couple particular units, but an ambiguous provision that they may replace those units at some other location on the project without knowing,where they're going to be or what the implications are going to be from that would be very difficult for you to do at this point -need to see a revised plan before you made that determination, in my opinion. Freckleton: Well, with that consideration from legal counsel, what I would suggest then, if we were to head in that direction that we reduce it to two stories, and that's that. De Weerd: Okay. Are you ready to make a motion? Borup: Mr. Rossman, if that was a recommendation, would we still be able to, with the public hearing closed, review a revised site plan? Rossman: This Commission would not. We would be sending a recommendation to the City Council who will have its own public fiearing. Borup: Okay. e Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Brown. Brown: But we could make the recommendation that Staff approve those and that's what they're hired to do with the modifications to add the four units back; correct? Freckleton: Staff approve the modification. of where to place the additional four units? Brown: Correct. Freckleton: I suppose you could. It's just a question whether the Planning and Zoning Commission would want to relinquish that -their ability to review that to the Planning and Zoning Staff. Borup: Okay. I think someone was getting ready to say something. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Hatcher. 4 Borup: Well, I think he said - I don't think he said it quite that -and Mr. Sale can correct that, but I thought he was talking if there's an intersection that's got projects all related to that, all essentially going in close to the same time that each of those could have some type of extraction because all of those would be contributing to the problem. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 36 _ Hatcher: I propose, or I make a motion that we - I hesitantly do this -that we recommend to City Council this conditional use permit for the multi-family, 96 -strike that - 92-unit apartment complex by Stamas Corporation at the southwest corner of Locust,Grove and Franklin: With all staff comments incorporated in as requirements that the two buildings identified as D-type building be reduced two stories, that a license agreement for the unimproved right-of-way be maintained at the cost of the developer, and the one last issue I guess I would have to defer to the rest of you is the requirement of the developer to do road improvement on Franklin and Locust Grove adjacent to the property; thus, if-it's eastbound traffic on Franklin, he would put in the left-hand turn lane. And that would be the west side of Locust Grove as well. Borup: (inaudible) Hatcher: Can we - Borup: You'd like a pause in your motion to discuss that point? Hatcher: Yes, I do. I'm wondering if there's - we can't enforce - we can't force ACRD to improve the intersection at this. time, but we can propose some of that improvement be done by the developer as it relates to his project. Borup: So what - Hatcher: So, my question is, can we impose those right-of-way improvements be done by - De Weerd: That he pays the proportionate costs for the improvements with the signalization and the turn lanes. Hatcher: Above and beyond the impact. De Weerd: Right. Hatcher: I mean, get the ball rolling. Get this problem started, I mean, the solution to this problem started. De Weerd: I think Mr. Sale said we could do that. Borup: Well, I think he said - I don't think he said it quite that -and Mr. Sale can correct that, but I thought he was talking if there's an intersection that's got projects all related to that, all essentially going in close to the same time that each of those could have some type of extraction because all of those would be contributing to the problem. Meridian Planning and Zoning. Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 37 They were talking minor project in relation to the whole intersection. There's no way to get it from Jabil, and that's -well, ..perhaps. Yeah. De Weerd: Perhaps what? Borup: Other projects coming in the future. But that's in the future. Freckleton: You could have a proportionate amount paid and then as the other development takes .place along Locust Grove, get a-proportionate amount from them for the - That would specifically be allocated to that intersection improvement or just go into a slush fund which is what ACHD's impact fees are anyways. Well, it's exactly what it is. De Weerd: Well, this is a specific thing. Yeah. Can we°do that specifically? De Weerd: Can we do that? Borup: I'm going to - Mr. Sale. I know you like to be put on the spots but you'vE made some reference to some type of shared project like that. Has that been done? I'm not aware of that being done around Meridian, and how does that work? Sale:- Mr. Chairman, for the record again, Larry Sale. It has been done in Meridian. Borup: Okay. Sale: The intersections of Fairview and Records, Fairview and Eagle, and Eagle and Pine. Borup. Okay. I'm aware of that one. Sale: Are all being improved in a partnering between the developer and the highway district and the State of Idaho. So the City, and I'll certainly defer~it to your legal counsel for better advice than I can give you, but you could impose acondition - or let me rephrase that, let me-couch that in terms of a question to your attorney. Could the City impose a condition that said something like the developer would be required to pay to make a deposit to the highway district's trust fund for its proportionate share of the cost of improving the intersection of Locust Grove and Franklin Road with a traffic signal and other necessary pertinences to that traffic signal as determined by the highway district? Borup: You're saying that's a question you're posing to the attorney? • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 38 Sale: Yes, sir. Rossman: That's always a good question, and the line that I'm drawing in my mind is' obviously there's a line between a voluntary application of funds by a developer and an improper tax that is unconstitutional, and where that line is drawn, we'd need to take a real close look at. The problem I have is where you make it a condition of approval of a particular project. It sounds more like a requirement than it does a voluntary offering by the developer; however, it obviously isn't a -yeah. That's something we'd want to take a look at. That's a concern I have is that you're imposing improper tax that isn't authorized by the Idaho constitution in doing that. Obviously, they can come in and volunteer to submit that type of contribution, but I'm not sure that the City can impose that as a condition of development. So, I'd need further time to look at that. You can make the recommendation, we can review it between here and City Council if you'd like; if that's something that you'd want in your,recommended recommendation to the City Council. .But I can't give you a definitive answer at this point. That is the concern I have, though. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Hatcher. Hatcher: On that note, then, what I would continue my motion is that we make it a condition of approval pending its legality; that the developer improve the right-of-way in lieu of the licensing agreement. Rossman: Let's phrase't correctly. Contribute a proportionate share of its expenses as determined by ACRD to the slush fund maintained by ACRD. Hatcher: Spoken like a lawyer. Rossman: I'm sorry. Not slush fund. (inaudible) not in the attorney's dictionary, I don't think: Hatcher: One other option maybe is to put in a motion, a recommendation for City Council to consider. De Weerd: I would second his motion. Rossman: Did you finish. De Weerd: I think so. • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 39 -- Hatcher: I finished my motion, but I wanted to hear what your (inaudible) Borup: Well, that may be another option, just that there be a recommendation to City Council to consider an option. Let them decide. ,Rossman: Well, I think that's what you're doing. I mean, you're making -all you're doing is - Borup: (inaudible) Rossman: --recommending anyway. Everything you put in your motion is a r° recommendation. Planning and Zoning doesn't have final authority on a conditional use permit. So if you put it in there, they can - F ~' Borup: Well, all l'm saying is that we wouldn't have to worry'aboutthe legal aspects of it at this point. Hatcher: So I would modify my motion that we make it a recommehdatior for City Council to review pending the City Attorney's review between now and the City Council .meeting. De Weerd: I'll withdraw my second. Borup: Okay. We do have a motion. I think so. Brown: I'll second that. Borup: `Okay. That motion is second in discussion. All in favor? NUMBER OF AYES: Two. Borup: All opposed? NUMBER OF NAYES: Two. Borup: We have a tie vote? I'If vote aye. I'd like to move this on. I think we've had~it long enough. Let the City Council worry about it. '`COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTES: Aye. 'MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES TO TWO NAYS. De Weerd: Just for the record, I would like to put the stronger - Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 40 Borup: Pardon? De Weerd: -- language in there. Borup: Oh, right. I understood that's why you didn't do it. Okay. (inaudible) Rossman: Just to clarify, Commissioner`De Weerd would like it as a condition rather than a recommendation. Borup: Okay. And that should be in the minutes for City Council. Thank you. Item No. 1 is completed. We would like a couple things -we're only.going to take a short break right now, but before we do, we're going to be looking at-our agenda. That was Item No. 1 of 13 items, and we do have a good crowd here tonight. I'm (inaudible) the majority of the people probably here for the Gold River Company's project at Pine and Ten Mile. Could I see a show of hands of how many are here for that project? Rossman: I would suggest that we move that to number (inaudible) Borup: Okay. Thank you. And we're taking a short break at this time. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROPOSED ENGLISH GARDENS SUBDIVISION BY PROJECTS WEST-CORNER OF TEN MILE ROAD & CHERRY LANE. ` (APPROVE W/RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL) Borup: We would like to reconvene Planning and Zoning Commission for Meridian. We do have a (inaudible) up there if somebody would like to go up there and discuss. We're concerned about getting through the agenda. At this point, we've decided we're going to continue on with the agenda as outlined through the continued public. hearings. At that point, we'll decide how to proceed from there on. Item No. 2 is continued public hearing, preliminary plat proposed English Garden Subdivision. As we do not have any staff comments, written comments, Shari, is there any available comments you'd like to make? Stiles: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, we didn't learn until today that there was possible resolution to some of the problems with the sewerability of this site. Bruce Freckleton can speak to some of those issues later. To familiarize everybody, -this is Black Cat and Cherry Lane. This is approximately a 40-acre parcel that's already annexed and zoned R-4 in the City of Meridian. You may remember another project that's adjacent that was the Jeff Manship property that came in.for a proposal for an R-2 subdivision there. It was a land lot piece of property back here. Fuller Park is in this area here with Parkside Creek here. We have received I believe a modified plat that the MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: AUGUST 25 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. ITEM NUMBER: 1 REQUEST: CONDITION USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: ~ SE ATTACHED I UTES . ~ ~ C ~ ~ n ~~, .tS~i~ CITY ENGINEER: ~,¢, v~~~ p~~ S nn; CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Sim ¢?'rtAC~-~~ Q,~J'iSr~ Si'(~ plf4h~ ~~ I CITY ATTORN EY: CITY POLICE-DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER 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: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: ~ ~l~/~9~ All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~~~ ~~a3 a~!~-~ ~ <, Meridian Planning a~oning Commission Meeting June 8, 1999 Page 45 t MacCoy: All in-favor of the statement? MOTION CARRIED: 2 Ayes, 1 nay. MacCoy: Two votes for yes, one for no. Mr. Attorney complete the paperwork to-per the request by Commis"sinner Smith. ITEM NO. 6: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA MULTI- FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY IONIC ENTERPRISES-SW CORNER OF FRANKLIN RD & LOCUST GROVE: MacCoy: Since we have just denied the R-40, Mr. Attorney? Item No. 6, we just denied the... Rossman: I don't think there would be much use for a public hearing on a request for conditional use permit when annexation and zoning has just been denied. MacCoy: We are going to have to make a statement here though for Item No. 6 so we~ can close the book on it. Rossman: What kind of statement do we need? I guess the commissions decision'is implied or expressed from it's decision on the annexation and zoning and we will include that`in the recommendation to the City Council that because of the±decision on the annexation and zoning it was not addressed as to whether or not a conditional use permit was appropriate. If the City Council believes that they want to approve the annexation and zoning despite your recommendation they should send it back down for a public hearing on the conditional use permit. Let's have that issued addressed first and if necessary we'll address the conditional use permit later. So I would recommend that you table that particular matter until a determination by City Council on the annexation and zoning. MacCoy: That's what I want to hear you say. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we table item no. 6 pending decision by City Council on Item No. 5 request for annexation and zoning on this Cobblestone Village. Borup: Second. Smith: Well, I can't table to a date certain until I know when they a're going to act on it. Really, unless that's what I need to do. x, Meridian Planning a~Zoning Commission Meeting June 8, 1999 Page 46 Rossman: No~need for a date certain, but~Mr. Berg is correct. The proper language is continuation rather than table. Continue it without aspecific - designation of time. Smith: Then my motion to say continue in lieu of table. Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: The public has vanished on us here. I want to say thank you for the publics turnout because that is the way we make decisions. As you can see it was not an easy one to come up with. We still have thoughts in our mind sitting in this chair up here that we'll live with for some time to come. All right, it is 9:30, we are going to take a ten minute break here. Promise we will be back at it again. (BREAK) MacCoy: We are under the gun, we have another half agenda to go through tonight. It's almost 10:00 o'clock. By ordinance of our city, this board meets, can meet twice a month. We already have our second meeting scheduled June 17, it's full. Our July meeting is full. We are working toward August, that's how much material we have to go through. We try and do the best we can, I apologize for the length of this part that you've just seen... (END OF TAPE) MacCoy: With the threshold of the city and everything that people would like to say and tell us, we are the ones that receive it. The material that we send on to the council is the same material, but we also give them a summary as to where we've been. This is where the work horse is. I don't know if any of you know that, but we are not paid and we do this as a part of-we are appointed and-but we are all professionals and this is a job we do day in and day out anyway during the daytime. ITEM NO. 7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY DAYCARE CENTER FOR FIVE CHILDREN OR FEWER BY LETICIA D. VANCE-1991 SOUTH COVEY PLACE: MacCoy: We will now open this public hearing, but first staff, Shari, comment please. ! ~ _~_~_ ~~ ~ ~' ~s j~ECEIVED ~~~~- l { ~;~lG 10 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN August 20, 1999 CITY CLERK OFFICE TO: MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION (Meeting -set for August 25, 1999 CHAIRMAN: KEITH BORUP COMMISSIONERS: THOMAS BARBEIRO, TAMMY DEWEERD, KENT BROWN & RICHARD HATCHER ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) An Opinion: The planned Cobblestone property is a nice property, but not for the purpose that the developer wants to use it. {t could be a lovely setting for something more suitable that would complement the area. We realize that "low income" is a dirty word, but basically that is what it will be. When Franklin road- is widened, eventually, that property will be an "eye-sore" as you drive down Franklin. Meridian already has a lot of this type of housing. The project is not compatible next to single-family multi-acre homes with light industrial and commercial building surrounding it. It does not create a diversified tax base. We don't think the right person with the right project has come along yet. Meridian has a lot of undeveloped property and a lot of developers who are anxious to build here. So why do you think you must approve everything and anything that is brought before you? Objections: We object to the high density and to the three-story concept. The developer claims to have 6.15 acres, but that is not actual land to build on. The Assessors's Office (see attaachment) lists 5.52 acres. If you take away the set-back from Franklin and Locust Grove roads and the 15 - 20 ft. set-back from the south property, plus any set-back requirements by Idaho Water Resources and the Corp of Engineers, you have less that 5 acres. They said they would have 96 apartments, 192 parking spaces and 6 handicap spaces, extensive fitness center, pool, half basketball court, tot lots and equipment, plus the existing large home on the property that will remain. Doesn't that seem a little crowded for less than five acres? When we were first told of the apartments they were two-story. VVe asked Mr. Peterson if he owns the property and were told that the deal closed in June. Now we find out that Monty McClure still owns the property. They must have a permit from the Corp of Engineers and Idaho Department of Water Resources (because of 5-mile natural drain) before they can construct anything. They have not applied for such a permit. Mr. Peterson said that Idaho Housing and Finance would manage the property but IH & F does not manage property. Their stories keep changing. So you can understand our concerns. The buffering of a masonry fence with trees isn't satisfactory. Had we known the true storv of this apartment complex in our early meetings with Bryce Peterson we would never have made such a suggestion. We, and our neighbors, believe there should be a berm with a fence because of all the noises, etc., associated with such a complex. ! ~ Comments: No one seems to note that your Comprehensive Plan says "the only way to improve the ideal community is to maintain and upgrade the quality of existing and new dwellings." Also, "quality housing in Meridian is more than a living structure, it includes quality schools, parks, public safety, and efficient government. If anv of these are Packing, providing housing is pointless." Safety on Locust Grove and Franklin roads is a real concern as it now exists. Considering all the housing projects that are now in the works it seems you are a long way from providing parks and safety. After listening and reading the pages and pages of rhetoric provided by Joann Butler at the City Council meeting (716199), your Comprehensive Plan can be interpreted anyway anyone chooses. If you haven't read those minutes, you should. P & Z would have been asking questions. I don't believe CC was listening much less asking questions. We have spoken to the Police Department, the School District, and the Fire Department --none of whom approve of this project. But, as they tell us they have noted their disapproval and why, but cannot say more because of the "politics" involved. Isn't that a pathetic situation because it effects: so many people and changes forever, the lives of all of us on So. Locust Grove. Those of us who have acreage and don't want the project next to us have the sympathy of the City Counsel members. We don't want or need their sympathy. We realize that we will lose our property and we have accepted that, but we certainly hope it would be for a better project than the proposed Cobblestone Village. The traffic concerns are a big issue with everyone in this area and will again be brought before the Commission. From what we have heard and read, we understand this project is a done deal. That you,. Commissioners, have no choice but to approve the project. We apologize for the length of this insert and we thank you for taking the time to read it. ~F s/er attachment U~ ~ moo, 1777 lo:.~~ 1ea:~ 229 ADA ASSESSO~ -PAGE 01! !iDQl ' ~9 M~ A S T L R [# ~' D A. T E 7/(~6~l99 ~ 7.5 :!08:15 .rceY 521183,10020 Code Area 242 Type ;,QTY Va.Yue ACxzv~ _ ~ma 1-fiCCLURE~ N1pNTE C & BEiI`~R-LY J ~~ Z .860 1:144Q0 _ - Bank Code ~[B1 yer wp rirapaid i dress 2626 PENNiCK PflIN'TE 1,N L • 1- D • _ _ - - --- - - -- ____ Bankrupt _ MBRIDI~iN' -` ~D~ _ Suh .Code R3~42 - flQQO _ i _ ~ Annexation *~10 Est Change 9902/24 By ASVLADIY `~ _ _ Notes *NC ~ata~. 114404 :sc. PAR #0020 QF NE~N~4 SEC 18 3N 1E Exemption #8842844 ___-- 03N01E18flfl20 3N lE i$ Hardship 65 0 ;operty Zon3.ng RT Flag _ idreSS 03.4.7.5- E ~'R~PiI~T-I~LT~N- RD MERIDIA~1 ID~ 83642-f2000 t~D.D. _ ~aee # _ Type 1 REAL 12x11 1 FRTNiARY Oee . fl - Act ion : _ ~=Select ~'3-Exit F5=eorrCtd Notice Fb-Letters F9=UA FB-AssoO Addx'~ss F13.=Dee f ~~ (~ 3Q}.` 99 M A 3 ~` ~' R U ~' A A T E 7fa6/99 15:08:24 ~eI S11S8110050 Code Area 247_ Type Qty Value AC~zVE __ a MCeLURE MLQNTE e & BEVERLY J 120 2.660 ,_54000 340 ^~ 1.177, 00 _ Bank Cgde N~1 ~z~ ~e3s 2.626 PEN'N~CK PC3INT'E LN MERYDTAN _- I£i -- 3642 - 0{00 t Change 97/10/28 By : fi,SDQRTSM --- Total ~. PAR #0050~F NE~41VE4 aEC.~B 3N lE #8842844 _ 167~ao Prepaid !„ L.I.D. _ Bankrupt ___ Sub.Cgde Annexation *ND Notes *NO Egetaption 03N0].E~.8.0050 3PT lE ].$ Hardship fi5 0 party Zoning RT _ g~.ag _ rasa Q1.475~ E FRANKLIN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-OQ00 D.D. _ ce # __ Type 1 REAL Roll ~ PRIMARY qcc. 0 Action: _ 6elect F3-Exit F5=COrrctd Notice F6=Letiters F~3sUR FS=Assoc Address F'31^Deed Tr c ~ _ _ . 11 " iJ 1 ~ _ , , - RECEIVED f~ ~ z ~~-~.... ,~ ~ . 1 J U ~ J b 1999 - ~ ~ Gc=t V~ c~. CITF~r ~IERIDL~ PETI~Y~~9 1999 6-g_~y MAY 19, 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN l l ~~:~-~ - CITY CLERK OFFICE ~ ~.- ..- S TO MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION We, the residents of the South Locust Grove and Franklin road intersection area, protest the 96 unit apartment complex proposed by the Stamas Corporation/Ionic Ent. at the southwest corner of said intersection. We hereby request that the application to develop this complex be denied for the following reasons: 1) With the current flow of traffic, the intersection of South Locust Grove andFranklin roads becomes dysfunctional at times because of the lack of turn lanes and traffic control signals. The 96 plus vehicles from the apartment complex and the several hundred vehicles from the Jabil Circuit Inc. complex (at South Locust Grove and I-84) add- to this already serious and dangerous situation. It creates an impossible condition. South Locust Grove is a dead end road, there is no other way in or out except the Franklin road _intersection. 2) The apartment complex plans two accesses, both very close to said intersection, which compounds the traffic problem. ~'~" { ~4 3) `It appears that the purpose of "the apartment complex is fo provide low income subsidized housing. We strongly protest the existence of this type of project in an area that is obviously not compatible or receptive to the proposal presented by Stamas . -~' Corporation/Ionic .Ent. ~f' Merid_ ian. ID 83642 PRINT NAME ADDRESS ",~ I ~L ~~1 ~ ~ L `~ . Sj^ri l (it' ~-~~~ ~~~n~~r,~ 1 GZ_ ~~ ,~ (~~ ~. /~~Cwia i1 ~~~~v~~~ TELEPHONE SIGNATURE 1 ~~~ .2 3 ~ y ~_ - r~ ~c ~ 1 ~ ~ G. ~" xJ~.:~~ccf 43~°~~7~ ~~~ 3•r?~ ~DY-~l ~~~-Y~ ~~ ~~~ r' ~ RECEIVED AUG 1 9 1999 August 18, 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE P~ z .a~--~..-~ ~ TO: Keith Borup, Chairman, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and Commissioners We, the residents of South Locust Grove and Franklin road. intersection area respectfully request that the petition which was submitted to the Meridian City Clerk's office on May 19, 1999, be introduced as testimony at the Planning and Zoning meeting scheduled for August 25, 1999. We are objecting to the Conditional Use Permit Application for the Cobblestone project. We believe, very strongly, that this project does not belong in this area for the .reasons stated in the petition when it was submitted to the P & Z Commission at your June 8, 1999 meeting. We, the residents who signed the petition, will be impacted immensely by the increased traffic this project will generate in an area that is already over burdening the infrastructure. It shouldn't make any difference whether we are 300 feet or 5,280 feet we will all be affected. It is our desire that it be so noted by our signatures on the petition. Your consideration regarding this request is appreciated. Thank ou. /~ /~obert ,~ . ~,~-~, 335 S. ~ cr,~Jf- ~~~-o~e,~~~t. 1~-pti•~~~ ~~ ~3~~z ~B8-2PS~ _~: T~. ,T _ ECEIVEDF: ~ _ . ~ ~ ~ _ •, ~ a +' AUG 1 9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN r.i~ 0~ 1ILR?~I_•.'~ CITY CLERK OFFICE tit ~ n ID 83642 ~ -• .. NAiL1E ADDRESS :e ~ TELPHONE SIGNATURE ~~ - - -- -- -- d~ f~./1z~1.' l~"11 `~~~,_ ~i~ ~, _ ~~~ ~]1 ~ ~: ~6~~ -~~:~E ~_`_-cam --- ` / ` ` -~ _ J ~ ~ l .ill-z~ ~~ 7!~,~:~% i ,. ~_ ~ l r / / 1. T ~i ~ / , r~ ~...~~ ''7/7 /,'f /'' ,/ _ ,. ~ _l~~r-._-__ / ~ ~'~~/1^// %~ ~,~~~.c~"' ~ .~~C~JD ~-C9~-~~-L~-~~~~~ ltd L ~ ~S ~~n ~ L ~^~ „ S~ / `f / / ~ ~~ ,, ~ .his s ./.~~ , ~ _ ;~ % ~; ,~ ~ ~; ;~ /C ~,2~ . i-+~ ~~ ~ ~' ~~~'-f~G-1 i ~-~G S C'~1 i~ i Lc,-r-~-L ~ ~z ~'7-~,, G c{ 1' :~ .,. /'" NNi n i ~F SD ~A/J i L LAC' ~2. ' ~~~~ - 7a ~~ ,-, /' P ~ .~ U ~y .~ ,-, ;; . ~ AAl l ~ ~ r) ~~~TLr~ i C ~ ~ ~~~L ' I f~/L. ~ 'I cY~7 - ~ L~7 y ~!.~ ~ ~ ~/ ~N /~ J .,.7c~`,-~ / .nom ~. a / ~ - _ 1 ~ ~, ~T{vT-.r~ -~ ~ r DECEIVE ~'~.r - ~ ~..~:.~ AUG 1 9 1999 "~~~ v! _`~~~_ii~L~.', CITY OF MERIDIAN - til~risii~n ID 83642 CITY CLERK QFFICE- NA^~1E ADDRESS -TELPHONE SVIGNATURE ~, ~ t ~ ____. --_.... _ , !,~ ~-~. t ~ ~ -~ s '~,, _ Cu Cr' y -~ _ I~ i~~~ ~ _ ~~ /.. ~ ~ . ~_____ I •;~/i Il /~ I ~ Zc+o~j /'/) rY ~L~.~,- ~ , i ~ ~ _~~ I_ Iffi____"'~~~V ,~~p / Jl ._~. ~t c ~ Q ~- ~~~° ~ zgt .(~(. Q~~ti ~` ~ o,2s ~~z it / ii ~/ ~ ~, ~ d x Yom. ~, ~ ~1e~~~1 1~+5 rnuSTAN S- ~`~- ~o~ ~ ~ g, ~,''-J~ 1 9 1999 i~ - Ji R. \ ~ i` ~ T~ T 1 ~- - - - - ='i=s' ~~-'~-` CITY OF MERIDIAN - ti n I~ 83642 CITY CLERK OFFICE - NAfL1E ADDRESS TELPHONE SIGNATURE ~ "` !tom 1~i•-r //r f~/~~-~s/-....~ i ~ ~C--~ ~-~ -cam L ~~ ~ ~..u`--`ti ~~ ~ ~ ~ mil'' ~ ~ ~ - l S L~ ~ L ~` - ! / ~ ~ /.K y~~ ~c; ~.~1 ~' ,/~, ~j ~ ~ .~~ , ~f / / ' ,fir ~a~~ h~ ~~ .~~ ~~~. ~~'~~v % /~ ~~,- ~ ,~~~-~ r ! ~`~ ~~~ G~~rv~z y L , I t Ur~~-{X ~ ~ ~ti ~ ~ r I~ _ mss. ._._-_ ~. ~ ~a ~ 13e~-tl ~~ P g~3~-~~~3 / ~~ ^ ~-/ ~~ ~~ /fir ' ~~~ ~/ a I ~ n f. ., /'~(w2/~j~~ ~ ILc~C) ~o~ri'rG J `~5~~- ~~~j~i ~ / . /,, es5 ~ ~ la~o ~Tv~,., ~, " ~~~~ - g31 ~.:~ ~ ~ ~, ~I, ~~~s --,mss ~~~~ ~;h~ ~~~ ~~ -r~- y~~~ _ ~: , i t ~ T ~ i }. -~ ' i J U(~~V - ~ ;cc~ .NAME ,, R CEIVE ~i D AUG 1,9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Meridian ` ID 83642 CITY CLERK OFFICE ~ <, c ADDRESS TELPHONE SIGNATURE ~- ~, -` ------ -- ~_``~~ ' ~ ~i %%22.5 /~' ~~ ~%~ S, GF~~~~S~i Gu"~' %`~` S~~%'C 1 Z~~... ~~Lt~, ______~_ ,I!~~~~~ G ~~~ ~S~U .~, -~.-~ c c ~ 5T ~r-o /~ ~, ~ ~_ l7io ~~~i~ b r~ ~, ~~ -i5 3 z ,~ C~ , - ~ d ~. ~..._ ~ ~ ~ ` .~ -~ ~ ~ l 5 3 Z ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ,. y~ ,» ~'~5_,~. ~~~yy %2/.3 -. ~ -~ -- ._ ~,~ ~'~ -5 ~ ~ ~~ ,~ ~R _ ~~~~ ' ` ~' ~ L ,~, ~ n~ ~ ~ ~~ 'Q~ G/. ~~/~ =~>-~ i / ~/ c ~~l c ~~~ --=~;~ S' rJ ~ • _ -~ ~- -- JUIV - 6 1999 Ci 7~ ~ r1LL--~~, NAh~lE Meridian io s3sa2 ADDRESS y /-~~ l Yd Cis ~ ~/~c D` C~h~/ ~~ 1, yc~ c,~~~~~ ~~' ~~ "'', - - ~CEIVED ~4i~G 1 9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE TELPHONE SIGNATURE 3~g-3G3~ . C~~/_~G _ ~s,~ - 3~ 35 ~ .~ F G ~~ J ~ ~~a - 6 ,GHQ . ., Me i n ID 83642 NAME ADDRESS RF~~ELVE~ ~L'G 1 9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE ELPHONE `SIGNATURE 7 ,~, ~~~ ~_~"~ l ~r ~ Y l ' _ t,~ J J ~ti - ~ 1gg9 .... _ , . Y ~~ 11 ~ ... _ 1 _ i: i__=~ ~_ NAi~1E ~F f~leridian, ID 83642 ADDRESS RF.~~EIVE]~ ~-UG 1 9 1999 8 CITY OF MERfDiAN CITY CLERK OFFICE - TELPNONE S1 N TURE ~ ~ e v a S` rS ~ c ~ vs. ~ C ra v Y ._ . - / 7 C ~ I d,.~a-~-. ~ ~~/~ iti~- i'Yl , cc~r~'~ n / Sl ' ~ -!.~ s i /?~ v= =1 ~- / 7~~ _ ~ ~~Cl~ E, 77'~~~ ~ C L~t~ i~,~~r,~ ~ J~ ~/ / Q i `- ,. i~,~~-9~~~ ~, ; r ~~ ~~~x~,~ ~ .~ ~ ,~~~ /gig ~ "~ %' ~ / ~~ ` ~ , %'~. ..~ 'LL_2~- 9 .`.tom 1 n ~ ^~ f 1 `./ Q+ r /`fit,-_~;~~Q~ ';i~'. A 4. ~-± - ', ~ ~ %` ~ ' o~~; ~ ~~lscn i~~ ~crn~,~ccd d~ ~ .dam ~5~5 _ .dP.~ ~~, is~~ iys %% ors ~~W ~ ter ~ ~S s~ ._ ' ~ .~ J ~a u r ~ ~. Fen ~ er' l3 ~- , l warn r/2 1;4 ,,,~ ;~.~ -~.~ '7:~ ~----krd-~ "~ ~~ ~ ., I ~'L r`~7 (G~ r ~ i~? Err+ .~ ~S 1 ,-n~~'v h;, ~~J~~ !~ ~ ~y- ~3 3i d V ~• r "~~" ~t,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~~V ~L ~~( /J I / ` __ 1 ~ (D ~ N ~79.L1 f'1'IIGf! L G / 1 ~ ~ 1~ ~ --~ - - , . r ` =~~! s ~~ ~ ~~ --1F. ,11 ~~ /nom V' 1. 1 `~ I.. ~\1 /y( ~n ~ ~ fJ ~(/~ II11 ~(_y1r.7 i Y~ rrr~Wl)['~ v ~ ~ ~1 r F 1 ~7 ~_ .~ , ~ :J1ti`r1J 't~ ~a~c~ -~ ; . l fl . w"' ~~: P a;?-`~j~ `~ 2 ~-Co ~! Q>~,~, , ~I -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u C,..~~ ~ ,, . !i ~S ~ 6773 , ,; ' ,~ ~ q C ~ n .~ , ~~-~ ~ ~~ ~` ~ ~ ` L ;~ E - ~ ~~ - i/y / ' ~ p.-;',P. L ,~ i r'~ PJ1 .~ ~ ~ 1/ '15 ( ~Gl' ~ ~f:~~ ' r~o ~ ~ C Q '' L. ' ~ ccl~f ~ .~ '-l~iv ~ S FL7~ r~/ 3 7~ ~/S(/e~,iS r~ ~ D ~~$-~-~a ~ r , ~ _~' it- i ~~~~. -~~_ - z._.~y_~~> ~ RE~EIVEj~ ~j '~~V - ~ ;~~~ AUG 1~9 1999 r~~~ ~,r ~~~ ~,L~,~; CITY OF MERIDIAN _ Meridian ~~ 83642 CITY CLERK OFFICE NAME ADDRESS TELPHONE SIGNATURE _ -- i ~ n ____ .. ... ~ ~.~~ ~ C~ C.~ s~~ ~~ 1 ~ ~~ L~rn r ~1 ~ ~ ......~. ~ ~ _ , ~ 7 ( _ aid 1 ~// V n.t ~lci-.ro~~i~.(1l =G" n . /`lf,~~Z,~Y ~ ~~n.111 X01} ,d', -Gcc~f ~'~.~ ~,~, . %~ ,v ; ~vri ~Li l T FI C3P£"~ Z I ~ ~ (.v c :~T ~ Z.~Li~" ~ ~ Cs - ( ~ Cr ~. ~~ w~ ~~G s. °~.-~~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~~E J (mot ~ ~~= .Y ~ ~, /l/~~;~r~ west >%~~ S - ~~ c ~,s7`~~~d~ ~~~ a~~~ ~>~ .~~ ( ~. - `` 1 ~~ C I L I .~U Icy I Z (~ ~f ~~ urr, RUC+.u `~`~~ 7 ~J~ CL ~ ~ ~ _ `~~~ ~(/ /~ ' ~~ ~j'7 /_ U u, ~ N rv~ V'/~ ~E~ /. ~~a ~ _ _ 1V ` -~ ,(~ f ;I ~.rl~c r . - ~~~ ~ 1~ c A.Cv L3c~ ~ 3C23 Sr' ,.~' o~ .r~,~ ~ ~'~b~ ~~3 ~~ N ~ ~ ,- ' Q 9 X1-1 -4 . r ~~ ~cv~ D~ ~w~ k ~ ., 1~~ak 'I ~~ i 3 - ~t ~ --- Y ~-. R~EIVE]~ J L~- S ~~~'~~ AUG 1 9 1999 j v ~- CITY OF MERIDIAN - Meridian io s3~a2 CITY CLERK OFFICE _ r' NAME AQpRESS .rE~.pHONE SIGNATURE --~ , ~- 21 Cj'•~ v ~~-.. j :~ s `''~~~. S'S ~~~ C- Jf'f' ~nJGrNC'~~) ~~ i ,3 % 7~ ~ ~f ~~ '~ ~~ - ' ~ h ~ ~~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ ::--~ ~f:e~'l {~ `~~51 .~LCrcS,~.1.N' ti-1'~ ! ~~7 -~1G~i ~/ a ~ 7 ~C.- j/ ~ . ~ ~ ~ k.,, f ~--~'" ~ - - x tL :, .. v , y ~ ~ 3 1~-t~~-ti~ win ~~.~~ ~ ~'~ - 7~ ,. - ~----•- ~3 r C~~-e~ '~ , ~Lt~f~ ~~` ~ ~ 7 ~~~ ,-~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ' ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ { J U i~t - 6 i~G~ r~ l~ ~ ~~1:iiiL'~~ NAME . 1~ridian ID 83642 ADDRESS j~~EIVED ~,J~ 1 9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE TELPHONE SIGNATURE J V ~ ~~ /~ / ~ /I e r c ,tl i ~ - ~4 r~7 ~ " sal/~ ~ / " -.1-51 1 ~y~-zr~-~ 4 ~'~~ G ~ ~ ~ - ~. -_--- _~_ . ~ { ~ _ _ I - J I -- ----- _~_ 3 i ,~ ~ i u 8 ~ - I a ~ 9 ~ J ~d~~ ~o ~ tG J~~~~~U~~~ ~~~~t~~~t Sherry R. Huber, President" 318 East 37th ~5treet Judy Peavey-Derr, Vice President - Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 Marlyss Meyer Routson, Secretary ~~~ 1 9 1999 Phone (208) 387-6100 Dave Bivens, Commission'er' Fax (208) 387-6391 Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner CITY OF M RIDIAN e-mail: tellus achd.ada id us ~'u- tTe`!3'~1'9g~ ~;' '~ F c{ r F t Robert R Smith 33~ S. Locust Grote Road ~~Teridian. Idaho 836-12 Dear ~1r. Smith: ~~-~-,rT; -- - C~ ~ i)L'.~. t i D ~-~ i ~~~~L~.. Thant: you for your concern about the extension and «~idznina of Locust Grog ;. Road. bet~~~een Overland Road and Franlain Road. This section of road dots not appear in ACHD's Fire Year ~~%ork Program, but it is, ho«-ever, listed in the Ada Plantung Association's (APA j 201 ~ and 2020 Long Rance Transportation Plans. As development applications are submitted ACRD has. been presen Ina right=of-«-ay for the long range plan developed by the APA. I have passed your name and concerns to our Planning R, De~-elopment Department for their files concerning this segment of Locust Grove Road. If there is an~~ further info~~nation that I can provide, please feel free to call me at (208) 387-622. Sincerely. Ada County High~a~av District ~°~ .-- Dale V. Kuperus, E.I.T. `Design Engineer cc: Steve Spickelmier Lam' Sale File ;~ ~. -,CE ,~ ~~ AUG 2 5 1999 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE EJity of hZeridian .IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. pity Clerk Office, ~jtj .~~,~ CONDITIONAL USE COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS ~- Meridian made the planning and policy decision to annex the property owned by' Ionic Enterprises, Inc. and to have it developed for residential use when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan, and when Meridian and Ada County negotiated Meridian's Area of Impact boundary. Ionic Enterprises' annexation and R-40 zoning request has been approved by Meridian. In connection with the conditional use requested by the applicant, the Planning & Zoning Commission has heard and read extensive and competent testimony from the City Staff, the applicant and the applicant's professional consultants on the Cobblestone Village Project. The Commission again will take testimony on August 25, 1999. This project was tabled until that date while the City Council reviewed and approved the annexation and zoning requests. The facts and evidence presented, including this analysis, show that the proposed use at this location meet the criteria set by Meridian for conditional use' requests:' These criteria include: The Project will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. Meridian has made the legislative determination that the proposed use is a conditional use in the R-40 zone.2 The Project is located in a designated planned development area, and it is located between and separates an industrial area from a'residential area. The applicant will do all that it can, and that the City reasonably requests, to ensure that the compatibility with surrounding properties is respected. As the Comprehensive Plan states, the conditional use process affords the City the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility on a case-by-case basis. The extensive conditional use review of the Ionic Enterprises Project ensures the development of an aesthetically-pleasing project for the City of Meridian so that the community design policy of Meridian is met. The Project will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance. The Ionic Enterprises Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals of the Plan (i.e., statements of community values that give broad direction to establish ideal future conditions3) and o1p icies (i.e., specific statements that guide decision-making and give clear indication of intent4)..The City consistently states in its Comprehensive Plan that the City must anticipate and provide for residential growth. The City Council made extensive findings to show that the High Density Residential zone granted for the Project is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Likewise, the conditional use request is consistent with the goals and policies of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. ' Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-418.C. z Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-409. a Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. s ` Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. PAGE - 1 F:WPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS i Meridian, through its Comprehensive Plan, encourages the future population growth of the City to locate within the Area of City Impact.5 The Project is located within the Area of lmpact.6 This area is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Areas where "municipal services and utilities are available or planned for."' Meridian's policy is to use unimproved land in the Urban Service Planning Area in order to "maximize public investments, curtail urban sprawl and protect existing agricultural lands"8 outside of this area. The`Meridian Plan insists that no new residential development should be approved outside of the Urban Service Planning Area. The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that meeting the challenge of providing services to citizens requires the expansion of the City's economic base along with creating new job opportunities,for citizens as well as creating new residential opportunities.9 As stated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: [h]ousing is a domiriate physical feature and the principal land use within Meridian. As the region's population grows, the demand for housing will increase. Meridian will continue to develop into the ideal community only by maintaining and upgrading the quality of existing and new dwelling units and at the same time developing a strong commercial and industrial base.10 The location of the Project supports the City's encouragement of a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family) and choices between ownership and rental units for all income groups~in a variety of locations." It is the housing goal of Meridian to provide a sufficient choice of adequate housing in the community to meet the needs of individuals of all socioeconomic backgrounds; the elderly and the disabled,12 and it is the policy of the City to support a variety of residential choices for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities.13 As was previously described for the City Council, there is a shortage of apartments to give Meridian citizens the choice in housing they deserve. The Ionic Enterprises Project helps Meridian meet its housing goals. ~ • The City promotes the development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers.14 The applicant is presenting to the City a unified, integrated development, s Policy 1.1 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that "Approximately 92°!o to 95% of the new residential development shall occur within the Urban Service Planning Area, or public facilities, essential services and utilities are planned for or are already available. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-9. a Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.4. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-3. ~~ ° Meridian Comprehensive Plan,-page E-10, Policy 1.3. s Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-15. 10 Meridian`Comprehensive Plan, page 66. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.1. 'Z Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. t3 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 23, Policy 2.i(U). " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.4. PAGE - 2 F:WPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS ' F • near major access thoroughfares as promoted by the Comprehensive Plan,15 that fosters the policy of Meridian for compatible land-use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).'s The Project will maximize benefit to the residents, minimize conflicts and provide a tie-in between residential areas and service needs." The Project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. As stated in Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, residential development must be built to meet the growing demands of the community. When adopting the Comprehensive Plan, the City acknowledged that, in the near future, this area would demand new residential uses as a complimentary mix to the existing employment opportunities. The Project offers the City the opportunity to provide a creative and unified residential project and to set examples for an attractive, heavily landscaped, well signed, innovative project for Meridian close to jobs and urban services. The Project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The .proposed uses (multi-family residential) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses. These residences will provide housing close to jobs and services. The applicant and its representatives have fiad many discussions with residents in the area, City Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission in designing a Project that will mitigate potential disturbance. The numerous conditions of approval provided by the Planning & Zoning Commission ensure compatibility. The careful guidance by Meridian is evident in its extensive review of the Ionic Enterprises Project. Ionic Enterprises has presented to the City a unified, integrated, clustered development, and the City, along with'Ada County Highway District ("ACRD"), has guided its ultimate design to foster the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).78 The design of the Ionic Enterprises Project recognizes the importance of neighborhoods in creating and maintaining an attractive and desirable living environment in close proximity to work that balances residential neighborhood interests with business interests. The City has heard before that this residential use is not compatible with existing residential uses. Yet this Project assists the City in achieving the goals and objectives of the City's Plan to encourage the widest range of housing for all of Meridian's citizens. Our courts have made it clear that different types of housing cannot be viewed as incompatible with other housing -even if • ~ that "other" housing is single-family residential. The City works hard to ensure compatibility, and that's why the Ionic Enterprises application is being reviewed through a conditional use process. There can be no serious statement made that tries to imply that this housing is incompatible with other housing. However, it is .appropriate for the City to consider design elements of this housing development to ensure compatibility. The site plan to be discussed by the Commission shows that an elaborate park-like setting has been created for this Project. Extensive setbacks and fencing would be, provided at the southern boundary of the site to prevent disturbance to existing neighbors. One neighbor has asked the applicant to consider erecting a masonry wall which the applicant has said 15 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-68, Policy 1.19. 16 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page •E-19, Policy 1.8. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.6. ,18 Meridian Comprehensive Pfan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. PAGE-3 F:WPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS ~ ~ it will construct. Design details would be worked out with staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission. Windows have been designed to look away from the existing residences in the area. The Project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the timely provision of'adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and-will continue to, work with the City, ACHD, and others to coordinate the provision of infrastructure necessary to accommodate the Project. The Ionic Enterprises Project complies with the transportation policy to encourage clustering of uses along arterials, collectors and section line roads.t9 Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant, Ionic Enterprises. The Project will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Ionic Enterprises Project is a natural progression of the development of this area in Meridian's Area of Impact that Meridian previously has identified for planned development in nature. As Meridian has represented to Ada County and the community, it is Meridian's intent to provide services throughout its Area of Impact. Development at this location ensures public facilities will be extended to a!I areas within the Area of Impact in a reasonable, progressive manner. Accordingly, this Project will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, but ensures that Meridian can provide the service it has promised throughout the Area of Impact within the next several years. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACRD, and others to coordinate the provision of services necessary to accommodate the Project. Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant. Meridian has received testimony from the agencies and departments, including the Meridian School District, that were asked to comment on the Project. There has been no objection. • The Project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the genera! welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Project is proposed as a conditional use project. Accordingly, the City, through its Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions of approval to ensure that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be,minimized. With regard to traffic, there is no factual evidence to indicate that this Project, and the traffic associated with the Project, will be detrimental. The City's professional traffic engineer, ACRD, has determined that this Project will not unduly burden the road system. In addition, the applicant's traffic engineer has provided the City with competent evidence that the street system is adequate to serve this Project. 19 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-54, Policy 1.5U. PAGE-4 F:WPPS\WPDOC3\H M\IONIC.ENT\ANALYSIS f ~ • + 'f • The Project will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. { There are two intended accesses. One on Franklin Road, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection with Locust Grove. The other access is approximately 400 feet south of the intersection on Locust Grove: Sight distances are adequate from both locations. Both the professional traffic engineer and ACHD have found there will be nosundue interference with existing or future traffic patterns. • The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Conclusion The Comprehensive Plan has identified what the City has found to be in the best interest of Meridian for this area. The Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the Comprehensive Plan, which goals have been adopted by the City to promote. the public convenience and welfare. The Project is designed to create a cohesive planned- residential project thus achieving public benefits envisioned by the City's Comprehensive Plan. As such, the Project is in the best interests of Meridian. The Project assists the City in improving the economic, social, and physical health of the community through better land use policies that do not "violate private property rights, adversely impact property values, or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of private property. { S PAGE-5 F:WPPS\VVPDOCS\H_M\IONIC. ENTWNALYSIS F D r~~ z g c n .~ [; 7 D ~ { ~ D ~ m i! ~ ~m z y ~ 9 O n ~ ~ Z z m Z - i m D ~ ~ n ~ G) y 0 c i ~ 0 m 0 D r m P o» c !~: u- ~~ f ~ ~ ~ - o ~. - N Y ~ _ ~ ~' 7 ~ ~ _C. _ ~IrI ~ -~ ' I I ~ r - O -I ~ C~11 - [~ _ 4% '>In X1:70 ~ ~ ~ ~ (n ~ f ~ ;~ , r-; v7 ~ ~,f~~ , f~ -- I ~ :`- - f1 .~ _ G L OC:~f+~L Ifs ~ I I ~ I iCj :~ ~~~ :~ C7 ~ rn ~ CJ1 ~ ~ t 1' ~..- ~ - J O ~ ~m O' ~ {. ~ `~ [~ Z m ~ ~ ?~ W ~° < D mz r D rn 4 i MEDiMONT SUBDT_~/iS ICN j II ~~ bli I I ~bba b~aF#bb b b a b a b a~.F~'~-~ a p b e b a~ a s UC ~~ ~Pb.~„ a N!~0".18'47Y F a aJ7P..+9 a a a a a b b a Rv'LB a A 9t ~..7. N~ _~ _ _- ~} - s a~ - --- - ~ -- s t,. ! I _~~ i ~ II I ~ ~~ I ~~ P - i ~ ~ \ I ~ I _ ~ _ ~ 'y/ -tl~ r ~ .~F T ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ i~~~ ~ ID I # ~~ 1'°'r i!i ~ ~. u ~ 6 ~ y ~ r _ x~ I j I~,tl Il,ol~. ~ ~ ~~ 'I i€ I i~ ~v / ~_ ,- '~ ,~~ ' ~d ~~ I ~ i I •` ~\V j ~I B ~ Is Iii' j \ '~ I ~ ~g ~~~ i t F b'~1~~~ II~I~~i ~ rf f '~ ;z / ~ ,. i i .3~i~ 1~ I I I c- ~~- ~ - .~ "i-~ ',.iJ j ~, I 'L~ ~ ~ i ~[J _ I - -- ------. ,.. _- _-_ - _ .. -_ ~I~ _L_ 11.--1 --- _. -= I i ~ -- - - -- _._ I ___.-_. __,_._-_-_-_ _.__-__._-. \'~ ill I i~ - ~ ~ 1 I ~ ( COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~ ~ Td m u rd I i D i I~ ( FRANKLIN 8 LOCUS GROVE 8~ Associat¢s ~, ~ O I ' i MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~ _ ._, ,, _, „ I II 'I. i - i ..•~--- _ , . s; ~~ ` C N ~T .=,,o °o -. ~ ., ~ Z ID G t- I~ rl~ ~°o -~ ~~ r D Z W C r.. D Z D .~ S D N ~ ~' i ~ ;~ ~ I ~ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE FRANKLIN RD. & LOCUST GROVE RD. ~ li .~ __~ Td m U C d ~ & A55oCIC71¢S • ~ _ ~ O ! ~ MERIDIAN IDAHO ~ , ~ , _- I ...f~{ ..., I ...,..,ma.., ' ° ,. __ i .~ r '' ~ ~~ ~ ~l! COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~ Ta m u f a ~ 1 r N ~ - ~ ~ FRANKLIN RD. ~ LOCUST GROVE RD. ~ & Assoaat¢s ~ _ ,I -~ J MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~ I .. i>~al . I S v a N ~~m S ~ fir. m D O Z S r v z c~ a ~~ a~ "~ 4m r m D -~ O Z C r v z • ~a D ~ „~ e E __ ~_ COBBELSTONE VILLAGE = Ta mar a (j~ I;> ° ~ ~ ~ ~ FRANKLIN ~ LOCUS GROVE = 8~ A55ocial¢s 0 = 498 Moln Sbeet MERIDIAN, IDAHO _ eo~e,, .e. enox (20B) 3~3-2931 .. .. 5 N ~~m aD ~~ bm .~ a -~ 0 z m c 0 m ~~ 5Q~ ~~ "m m a 0 z c v z c~ m i g ' z ~ ~ COBBELSTONE VILLAGE ° ° Ta X1'1 ~ f a D ~ ~n~ ~ k"T ~ ~~ FRANKLIN 8 LOCUS GROVE ~ & Associat¢5 :... MERIDIAN, IDAHO 499 w°`° 5.,"` eo~sa, ia. emo3 (20B) ]4J-39,71 I', W !' ~m D ~~ -m r ~m D ~_ O z W c P 0 I~ n a ~l ~~ _ Z ~m r m D O z m w z c~ N ~m ,~ '. i~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~~ _ ~ ~~ ; COBBLESTONE VILLAGE = Tamura ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; " - FRANKLIN & LOCUST GROVE ~ & Assoaar¢s i N I m ~ ~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~ "" M° ` ' ---- - - ---~ ` ------.~ .------J ,~ W ~~~ `'m m D ;~ Im ~r m D -i Z ~W C 'r' i0 IZ c~ io L a0 .Z -.~ '' m r m G D -i O Z C r v z 0 N O Z ~m ~~ C~ D ,~ -_ __ l _-- _ ~ I~ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE i ~ ~ TamUfa ` ~ ~ I FRANKLIN 8 LOCUST GROVE 8~ Associaf¢s ' ~ f I ~ MERIDIAN IDAHO _ ;"~ "`I` s""' ~ ~ Id 9}]02 \.,`_ I __~__ -i-- ~ \.. --___- _-_ , ~ \-- --... se. . CJ ,NI .fd} 1'1.11 ~ .. =.c ~ ` t. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: September 14, 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS COROPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. ITEM NUMBER: 1 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: No new information submitted CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~_ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: ~~ ~~. ~~ ~~v a IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. ~~' HUB OF TREASURE ~`~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE VALLEY A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 City Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN. BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 RON ANDERSON (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING KETTH BIRD City Clerk Fax (208) 888-4218 DEPARTMENT 4 (208) 884-5533 • Faz 887-1297 ~ ) MEMORANDUM: - September 13, 1999 To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and City Council From: Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator M~ ' _ _ ` i Brad Hawkins-Clark, Assistant Planner ~~C_ ~ ~ `~ ~ v t ~_ ~. Re: ~ .. 1 p. .' Request for a Conditional Use Permit fora 96-Unit Apartment Complex on 5.03 Net . Acres +/- by Stamas Corporation/Ionic Enterprise, Inc. `f Proposed, Cobblestone Village ` We have reviewed this submittal and' offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted liy motion of the Meridian City Council: ` The following comments are provided as an addition to the April 9, 1999 staff report and are based upon the revised Site Plan (Sheet A 1.0) for the Cobblestone Village C. U.P. submitted to the P&Z Commission for the August 25`" continued public hearing. The revised Site Plan sought to incorporate Staff and P&Z Commission requested modifications from the previous June and July meetings. (Note that the following comments do not repeat 4-9-99 staff comments.) ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS As stated in the 7-6-99 letter from Department of Water Resources Stream Protection Specialist M. Gene Gibson to Shari Stiles, separate permits will be required from IDWR and Corps of Engineers before any activity can take place below the high water mark of Five Mile Creek. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NNIID) also requires separate permits prior to any construction. It appears from the revised Site Plan that the NMID-required 30-feet right-of--way from the Five Mile Creek centerline is protected and no building activity will occur below the high water mark. Applicant must confirm this and submit .compliance letters from said agencies. ' 2. Applicant must submit ten (10), 8 '/2" x 11" copies of building elevations for the proposed Buildings "C" and "D" prior to the 9-14-99 P&Z Commission hearing. To date, elevations have been received only for Buildings "A" and "B." The blueprint elevations submitted to P&Z Department on 8-26-99 also include a proposed Building "E" but no "E" is represented on the Site Plan. Please clarify. 3. We recommend the proposed landscapirig along the south boundary be incorporated with a berm at least three-feet (3') in height to provide for maximum sound barrier. Given the CobblestoneVillage2.CUP P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council September 13, 1999 Page 2 • variance of buffer widths along this boundary line (i.e. from 16' in the center to 36' at Building "B"), the berm height and width could also vary with the buffer to provide a more integrated appearance. 5. The proposed height of Building "D" is approximately 33 feet. The proposed height of the other three building types is approximately 26 feet - a difference of 8 feet. We request further detail and representation at the hearing on the actual height of the buildings from finished grade to roof-line peak as viewed from the south (i.e., the 2'/Z-story versus 3-story appearance). Assuming anabove-ground height difference of 8-10 feet between Buildings A-C and Building D, staff recommend the Applicant relocate both Building "D's" to the current location of Building "B" on the west boundary and move Building "B" to the south boundary. This is to minimise the view obstruction to the south properties. 6. The proposed parking layout will result in a "sea of asphalt" appearance given the absence of any landscape islands or landscape bump-outs. The applicant shall revise plan to incorporate a visual break in the form of landscaping or other feature (i.e. benches or artwork) for at least every fourteen (14) adjacent parking stalls. Staff would support the relocation of trees from the west or east buffer area to the pazking areas since the number of proposed trees on the site is nearly double the ordinance requirement (57 required and 120+ shown). Note, though, that the landscaping represented on the final plan approved by the City Council for the CUP may not be reduced. The Site Plan currently shows 192 parking stalls on site, which is the minimum number required by the Zoning & Development Ordinance fora 96-unit complex. In order to accommodate the recommended parking lot landscaping revision, staff calculate that a minimum of four (4) stalls will need to be omitted. Staffrecommend the Applicant propose a revised plan to meet this internal landscaping requirement and that the Commission and Council grant Staff authority to negotiate the final pazking design. The Applicant may need to reduce the total number of dwelling units to accommodate this requirement. 7. . _No apartment maintenance building is shown. Applicant should be prepared to discuss this feature at the' public hearing. Ordinance 9-607.H.3., "Design Standards for Planned Developments -Residential" (pg. 35) states "A maintenance building or approved area shall be provided that is suitable for the services required for the repair and maintenance of all common azeas." 8. There does not appear to be any storage areas provided on the site. Ordinance 9-607.H., Design Standazds for Planned Developments -Residential (PD-R), requires storage azeas to be provided for the anticipated needs of boats, campers and trailers. Applicant should revise plan to provide for appropriate number of storage stalls OR submit a letter to the Commission justifying reason(s) for not providing a storage area. CUP-99-0OS CobblestoneVillage2.CUP ~'~ ~ ~ R,ECEIZTED 5EP 1 3 1999 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. CITY OF MERIDIAN ' CONDITIONAL USE COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS. CITY CLERK OFFICE Meridian made the planning and policy decision to annex the property owned by Ionic Enterprises, Inc. and to have it developed for residential use when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan, and when Meridian and Ada County negotiated Meridian's Area of Impact boundary. Ionic Enterprises' annexation and R-40 zoning request has been approved by Meridian. In connection with the conditional use requested by the applicant, the Planning & Zoning Commission has heard and read extensive and competent testimony from the City Staff, the applicant and the applicant's professional consultants on the Cobblestone Village Project. The Commission again will take testimony on August 25, 1999. This project was tabled until that date while the City Council reviewed and approved the annexation and zoning requests. The facts and evidence presented, including this analysis, show that the proposed use at this location meet the criteria set by Meridian for conditional use requests:' These criteria include: The Project will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. Meridian has made the legislative determination that the proposed use is a conditional use in the R-40 zone.2 The Project is located in a designated planned development area, and it is located between and separates an industrial area from a residential area. The applicant will do all that it can, and that the City reasonably requests, to ensure that the compatibility with surrounding properties is respected. As the Comprehensive Plan states, the conditional use process affords the City the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility on a case-by-case basis. The extensive conditional use review of the Ionic Enterprises Project ensures the development of an aesthetically-pleasing project for the City of Meridian so that the community design policy of Meridian is met. The Project will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance. The Ionic Enterprises Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals of the Plan (i.e., statements of community values that give broad direction to establish ideal future conditions3) and olp ivies (i.e., specific statements that guide decision-making and give clear indication of intenta). The City consistently states in its Comprehensive Plan that the City must anticipate and provide for residential growth. The City Council made extensive findings to show that the High Density Residential zone granted for the Project is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Likewise, the conditional use request is consistent with the goals and policies'of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-418.C. z Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-409. ' Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. PAGE-1 F:\APPS\WPDOCSIH_M\IONIC. ENTWNALYSIS • • Meridian, through its Comprehensive Plan, encourages the future population growth of the City to locate within the Area of City Impacts The Project is located within the Area of Impact.fi This area is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Areas where "municipal services and utilities are available or planned for."' Meridian's policy is to use unimproved land in the Urban Service Planning Area in order to "maximize public investments, curtail urban sprawl and protect existing agricultural landsie outside of this area. The Meridian Plan insists that no new residential development should be approved outside of the Urban Service Planning Area. The Comprehensive Plah acknowledges that meeting the challenge of providing services to citizens requires the expansion of the City's economic base along with creating new job opportunities for citizens as well as creating new residential opportunities.9 As stated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: [h]ousing is a dominate physical feature and the principal land use within Meridian. As the region's population grows, the demand for housing will increase. Meridian will continue to develop into the ideal community only by maintaining and upgrading the quality of existing and new dwelling units and at the same time developing a strong commercial and industrial base.10 The location of the Project supports the City's encouragement of a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family) and choices between ownership and rental units for all income groups in a variety of locations." -t is the housing goal of Meridian to provide a sufficient choice of adequate housing in the community to meet the needs of individuals of all socioeconomic backgrounds, the elderly and the disabled,12 and it is the policy of the City to support a variety of residential choices for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities.13 As was previously described for the City Council, there is a shortage of apartments to give Meridian citizens the choice in housing they deserve. The Ionic Enterprises Project helps Meridian meet its housing goals. The City promotes the development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers.14 The applicant is presenting to the City a unified, integrated development, e Policy 1.1 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that "Approximately 92% to 95% of the new residential development shall occur within the Urban Service Planning Area, or public facilities, essential services and utilities are planned for. or are already available. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-9. e Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.4. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-3. ° Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.3. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-15. 10 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.1. 'Z Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. 13 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 23, Policy 2.1(U). " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.4. PAGE-2 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENT\ANALYSIS near major access thoroughfares as promoted by the Comprehensive Plan,15 that fosters the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).16 The Project will maximize benefit to the residents, minimize conflicts and provide a tie-in between residential areas and service needs." The Project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. As stated in Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, residential development must be built to meet the growing demands of the community. When adopting the Comprehensive Plan, the City acknowledged that, in the near future, this area would demand new residential uses as a complimentary mix to the existing employment opportunities. The Project offers the City the opportunity to provide a creative and unified residential project and to set examples for an attractive, heavily landscaped, well signed, innovative project for Meridian close to jobs and urban services. The Project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The proposed uses (multi-family residential) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses. These residences will provide housing close to jobs and services. The applicant and its representatives have had many discussions with residents in the area, City Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission in designing a Project that will mitigate potential disturbance. The numerous conditions of approval provided by the Planning & Zoning Commission ensure compatibility. The careful guidance by Meridian is evident in its extensive review of the Ionic Enterprises Project. Ionic Enterprises has presented to the City a unified, integrated, clustered development, and the City, along with Ada County Highway District ("ACRD°), has guided its ultimate design to foster the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).18 The design of the Ionic Enterprises Project recognizes the importance of neighborhoods in .creating and maintaining an attractive and desirable living environment in close proximity to work that balances residential neighborhood interests with business interests. The City has heard before that this residential use is not compatible with existing residential uses. Yet this Project assists the City in achieving the goals and objectives of the City's Plan to encourage the widest range of housing for all of Meridian's citizens. Our courts have made it clear that different types of housing cannot be viewed as incompatible with other housing -even if that "other" housing is single-family residential. The City works hard to ensure compatibility, and that's why the Ionic Enterprises application is being reviewed through a conditional use process. There can be no serious statement made that tries to imply that this housing is incompatible with other housing. However, it is appropriate for the City to consider design elements of this housing development to ensure compatibility. The site plan to be discussed by the Commission shows that an elaborate park-like setting has been created for this Project. Extensive setbacks and fencing would be provided at the southern boundary of the site to prevent disturbance to existing neighbors. One neighbor has asked the applicant to consider erecting a masonry wall which the applicant has said 15 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-68, Policy 1.19. t6 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.6. t8 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. PAGE-3 F:IAPPSIWPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS it will construct,: Design details would be worked out with staff_and the Planning & Zoning ,Commission. Windows have been designed to look away from'the existing residences in the area. The Project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and~"services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse"disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of `proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services. :The City's Comprehensive. Plan and Zoning.Ordinance callsefor_the timely provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACRD, and others to coordinate the provision of infrastructure necessary to accommodate the Project. The Ionic Enterprises Project complies with -the transportation policy to encourage clustering of uses along arterials, collectors and section line roads.t9 Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the y applicant, Ionic Enterprises. -The Project will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. ~ ~ ~. The Ionic Enterprises Project is a natural progression of the development of this area in Meridian's Area of Impact that Meridian previously has identified for planned development in nature. As Meridian has represented to Ada County and the community, it is Meridian's intent to provide servicesahroughout-'its Area of Impact. Development at this location ensures public facilities will be extended to all areas within the Area of Impact in a reasonable, progressive manner: Accordingly, this Project will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, but ensures that Meridian can provide the service it has promised throughout the Area of Impact within the next several years. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACHD, and others to coordinate the provision of services necessary to accommodate the Project. Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant. Meridian has received testimony from the agencies and departments, including the Meridian School District, that were asked to comment on the Project. There has been no objection. The Project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Project is proposed as a conditional use project. Accordingly, the City, through its Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions of approval to ensure that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be minimized. With regard to traffic, there is no factual evidence to indicate that this Project, and the traffic associated with the Project. will be detrimental. The City's professional traffic engineer, ACRD, has determined that this Project will not unduly burden the road system. In addition, the applicant's traffic engineer has provided the City with competent evidence that the street system is adequate to serve this Project. 19 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-54, Policy 1.5U. PAGE.-4 F:IAPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS ., ~r _, COBBLESTONE VILLAGE IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. ~ j~,ECEIVED CONDITIONAL USE COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS SEP 1 '~ 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE Meridian made the planning and policy decision to annex the properly owned by Ionic Enterprises, Inc. and to have it developed for residential use when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan, and when Meridian and Ada County negotiated Meridian's Area of Impact boundary. Ionic Enterprises' annexation and R-40 zoning request has been approved by Meridian. In connection with the conditional use requested by the applicant, the Planning & Zoning Commission has heard and read extensive and competent testimony from the City Staff, the applicant and the applicant's professional consultants on the Cobblestone Village Project. The Commission again will take testimony on August 25, 1999. This project was tabled until that date while the City Council reviewed and approved the annexation and zoning requests. The facts and evidence presented, including this analysis, show that the proposed use at this location meet the criteria set by Meridian for conditional use requests:' These criteria include: The Project will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. Meridian has made the legislative determination that the proposed use is a conditional use in the R-40 zone.Z The Project is located in a designated planned development area, and it is located between and separates an industrial area from a residential area. The applicant wilt do all that it can, and that the City reasonably requests, to ensure that the compatibility with surrounding properties is respected. As the Comprehensive Plan states, the conditional use process affords the City the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility on a case-by-case basis. The extensive conditional use review of the Ionic Enterprises Project ensures the development of an aesthetically=pleasing project for the City of Meridian so that the community design policy of Meridian is met. The Project will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance. The Ionic Enterprises Project is designed to be compatible with and further the oats of the Plan (i.e., statements of community values that give broad direction to establish ideal future conditions3) and olicies (i.e., specific statements that guide decision-making and give clear indication of intent'`). The City consistently states in its Comprehensive Plan that the City must anticipate and provide for residential growth. The City Council made extensive findings to show that the High Density Residential zone granted for the Project is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Likewise, the conditional use request is consistent with the goals and policies of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-418.C. z Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-409. ' Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. ° Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. ~~ PAGE-1 F:\APPSIWP000S\H_M\IONIC. ENl1ANALYS I S • The Project will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. There are two intended accesses. One on Franklin Road, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection with Locust Grove. The other access is approximately 400 feet south of the intersection on Locust Grove. Sight distances are adequate from both locations. Both the professional traffic engineer and ACHD have found there will kie no undue interference with existing or future traffic patterns. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Conclusion The Comprehensive Plan has identified what the City has found to be in the best interest of Meridian for this area. The Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the Comprehensive Plan, which goals have been adopted by the City to promote the public convenience and welfare. The Project is designed to create a cohesive planned residential project thus achieving public benefits envisioned by the City's Comprehensive Plan. As such, the Project is in the best interests of Meridian. The Project assists the City in improving the economic, social, and physical health of the community through better land use policies that do not violate private property rights, adversely impact property values, or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of private property. PAGE-5 F:44P PS1 WP DO CS\H_M\I ON I C. E NTIANALYS I S rr l Y • • Meridian, through its Comprehensive Plan, encourages the future population growth of the City to locate within the Area of City Impact.5 The Project is located within the Area of Impacts This area is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Areas where "municipal services and utilities are available or planned for."' Meridian's policy is to use unimproved land in the Urban Service Planning Area in order to "maximize public investments, curtail urban sprawl and protect existing agricultural landsie outside of this area. The Meridian Plan insists that no new residential development should be approved outside of the Urban Service Planning Area. The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that meeting the challenge of providing services to citizens requires the expansion of the City's economic base along with creating new job opportunities for citizens as well as creating new residential opportunities.9• As stated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: [h]ousing is a dominate physical feature and the principal land use within Meridian. As the region's population grows, the demand for housing will increase. Meridian will continue to develop into the ideal community only by maintaining and upgrading the quality of existing and new dwelling units and at the same time developing a strong commercial and industrial base.10 The location of the Project supports the City's encouragement of a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family) and choices between ownership and rental units for all income groups in a variety of locations." It is the housing goal of Meridian to provide a sufficient choice of adequate housing in the community to meet the needs of individuals of all socioeconomic backgrounds, the elderly and the disabled,'Z and it is the policy of the City to support a variety of residential choices for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities.13 As was previously described for the City Council, there is a shortage of apartments to give Meridian citizens the choice in housing they deserve.. The Ionic Enterprises Project helps Meridian meet its housing goals. The City promotes the development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers.14 The applicant is presenting to the City a unified, integrated development, s Policy 1.1 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that "Approximately 92% to 95% of the new residential development shall occur within the Urban Service Planning Area, or public facilities, essential services and utilities are planned for. or are already available. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-9. e Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.4. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-3. e Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.3. e Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-15. 10 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.1. 12 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. 13 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 23, Policy 2.1(U). " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.4. PAGE-2 F:IAPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENT\ANALYSIS '"- „. f • near major access thoroughfares as promoted by the Comprehensive Plan,15 that fosters the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).t6 The Project will maximize benefit to the residents, minimize conflicts and provide a tie-in between residential areas and service needs." The Project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will -not change the essential character of the same area. As stated irr Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, residential development must be built to meet the growing demands of the community. When adopting the Comprehensive Plan, the City acknowledged that, in the near future, this area would demand new residential uses as a complimentary mix to the existing employment opportunities. The Project offers the City the opportunity to provide a creative and unified residential project and to set examples for an attractive, heavily landscaped, well signed, innovative project for Meridian close to jobs and urban services. The Project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The proposed uses (multi-family residential) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses. These residences will provide housing close to jobs and services. The applicant and its representatives have had many discussions with residents in the area, City Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission in designing a Project that will mitigate potential disturbance. The numerous conditions of approval provided by the Planning & Zoning Commission ensure compatibility. The careful guidance by Meridian is evident in its extensive review of the Ionic Enterprises Project. Ionic Enterprises has presented to the City a unified, integrated, clustered development, and the City, along with Ada County Highway, District ("ACRD"), has guided its ultimate design to foster the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).18 The design of the Ionic Enterprises Project recognizes the importance of neighborhoods in creating and maintaining an attractive and desirable living environment in close proximity to work that balances residential neighborhood interests with business interests. The City has heard before that this residential use is not compatible with existing residential uses. Yet this Project assists the City in achieving the goats and objectives of the City's Plan to encourage the widest range of housing for all of Meridian's citizens. Our courts have made it clear-that different types of housing cannot be viewed as incompatible with other housing -even if that "other" housing is single-family residential. The City works hard to ensure compatibility, and that's why the Ionic Enterprises application is being reviewed through a conditional use process. There can be no serious statement made that tries to imply that this housing is incompatible with other housing. However, it is appropriate for the City to consider design elements of this housing development to ensure compatibility. The site plan to be discussed by the Commission shows that an elaborate park-like setting has been created for this Project. Extensive setbacks and fencing would be provided at the southern boundary of the site to prevent disturbance to existingneighbors. One neighbor has asked the applicant to consider erecting a masonry wall which the applicant has said 15 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-68, Policy 1.19. 16 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.6. to Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. PAGE-3 F:\APPSIWPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTWNALYSIS .4 ,. '} • it will construct. Design details would be worked out with staff and the Planning & Zoning .Commission. Windows have been designed to look away from the existing residences in the area. The Project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the timely provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises. has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACRD, and others to coordinate the provision of infrastructure necessary to accommodate the Project. The lohic Enterprises Project complies with the transportation policy to encourage clustering of uses along arterials, collectors and section line roads.19 Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant, Ionic Enterprises. The Project will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and serv_ ices and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Ionic Enterprises Project is a natural progression of the development of this area in Meridian's Area of Impact that Meridian previously has identified for planned development in nature. As Meridian has represented to Ada County and the community, it is Meridian's intent to provide services throughout its Area of Impact. Development at this location ensures public facilities will be extended to all areas within the Area of Impact in a reasonable, progressive manner. Accordingly, this Project will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, but ensures that Meridian can provide the service it has promised throughout the Area of Impact within the next several years. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACRD, and others to coordinate the provision of services necessary to accommodate the Project. Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant. Meridian has received testimony from the agencies and departments, including the Meridian School District, that were asked to comment on the Project. There has been no objection. The Project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Project is proposed as a conditional use project. Accordingly, the City, through its Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions of approval to ensure. that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be minimized. With regard to traffic, there is no factual evidence to indicate that this Project, and the traffic associated with the Project. will be detrimental. The City's professional traffic engineer, ACRD, has determined that this Project will not unduly burden the road system. In addition, the applicant's traffic engineer has provided the City with competent evidence that the street system is adequate to serve this Project. t9 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-54, Policy 1.5U. PAGE-4 F:\APPS\WPDOCSIH M\IONIC.ENl1ANALYSIS ice) 4, The Project will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as~ not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. There are two intended accesses. One on Franklin Road, approximately 400 feet west of the intersection with Locust Grove. The other access is approximately 400 feet south of the intersection on Locust Grove. Sight distances are adequate from both locations. Both the professional traffic engineer and ACHD have found there will be no undue interference with existing or future traffic patterns. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Conclusion The Comprehensive Plan has identified what the City has found to be in the best interest of Meridian'for this area. The Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the Comprehensive Plan, which goals have been adopted by the City to promote the public convenience and welfare. The Project is designed to create a cohesive planned residential project thus achieving public benefits envisioned by the City's Comprehensive Plan. As such, the Project is in the best interests of Meridian. The Project assists the City in improving the economic, social, and physical health of the community through better land use policies that do not violate private property`rights, adversely impact property values, or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of private property. PAGE-5 F:WPPSIWPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS :! ~ ~~~ ~ . RECEIVED SEP 1 4 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN September 6, 1999 CITY CLERK OFFICE G`~~~ TO: PLANNING~~//& ZONING CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: THE R~19SONS SUBJECT: ~ PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE We have tried to envision what the proposed Cobblestone Village would look like on the property next to ours, so we decided to check out two and three-story apartments in Meridian. We were certainly surprised, to say the least; at how tall two and three-story apartments can be. So we decided to take pictures of some, of the apartments and the pictures are enclosed. (We noticed a lot of "For Rent" signs, .also.) Perhaps Meridian has more apartments for rent than is realized: Hopefully, before the P & Z meeting on Sept. 14, you will take the time to drive out to the site and visualize the proposed buildings on that slope. The proposed project is inappropriate for that piece of ground. It would be bad enough if the ground was level, but it is on a slope and with the height and density of the apartments, it just doesn't fit. It will stick out like a "sore thumb." (Like the ..office building on the south-west corner of Franklin and Eagle.) Also, it is incompatible with the single family residences, and is not harmonious with the surrounding single-story buildings. One thing the developer doesn't realize (or maybe he does), at night "outside lights" from the commercial and industrial buildings are a real nuisance because they light up the area like a Christmas tree. At night we can walk through our house without turning on a light because of the lights from those buildings. Also, we get road noise from I-84 and we live at least one-half mile from the freeway:' Not only will they get the road noise (because of the height of the buildings)., from I-84, they wilLalso get road noise from Franklin and Locust Grove roads-- which will-be especially loud and annoying after the roads are widened. Of course, the developer will not be living there so he won't care. Our last comment -- would you want to live next to this project? s/er~" , . 'enclosure °' . "''` ';r , 4+~: r ~ a ~ ~~ a~.4;' i;,r . ~ ... ;~4p .. -_. - • MERIDIAN PLANNING .AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - AUGUST 25, 1999: A special meeting to the Meridian Planning and zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Keith Borup. MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Tammy De Weerd, Richard Hatcher, Thomas Barbeiro, Kent Brown OTHERS .PRESENT: Bruce Freckleton, Steve Siddoway, Eric Ro`ssman, Angel Sims, Will Berg ~ ~ ' Borup: We'd like to open this special meeting of Meridian Planning -and Zoning Commission August 25th. As this is a special meeting, we do not have minutes from our previous so we will proceed right into the regular agenda. ITEM NUMBER 1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENTCOMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE,. INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: Borup: Do we have a staff report or comments at this time? Is Brad handling that? Okay.. Hawkins: Good evening Commissioner's. I'd like to first juste include testimony and staff report that was given in the prior public hearing for this agenda item, so I won't go into too much detail since you. are all ready pretty familiar with the project.• Just as a reorientation the project is these two parcels here that are cross hatched totals just over 6 acres bounded by Franklin on the north, Locust Grove on the east, Medimont Subdivision on the west, existing county properties on the south. Due to the lateness of the hour in receiving a revised"site plan, this is what you all should have received this evening. Staff did receive this a couple of days'ago, but have not had the opportunity to do an analysis. of the modifications. I would just point, the personal°modifications to the site plan are the access drive from Locust Grove into the site, which ~lias been moved to the north slightly=a wider buffer has been provided along the south boundary of the project. That was a request from staff based on public testimony and others from the last meeting. The other is the modification is a greater landscape area with swales here in the northeast corner of the project. This does include, reflect a modification of the future right of way take on Locust Grove and Franklin. The property again was recommended for approval by the City Council to be annexed to an R-40 zone at their August 17 meeting, so this item is the conditional use permit application only. The development agreement is still being prepared by the City Attorney. That is not complete yet, but the annexation has been done. I think that completes the presentation for this right now unless you have other questions later. Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 2 Borup: Commissioners, any questions for Brad at this time? I do have one. You said- our. plats are dated, received August 25th today. Did staff get an earlier copy? You said- Hawkins: Yeah,'Commissioner Borup. There is a little bit of confusion as to the date of the modification, but we had received this, I believe 3 to 4-days prior but had not had:an opportunity to do any in-depth review of it. Borup: So the date stamp is {inaudible). Hawkins: (Inaudible). Borup: Okay, thank you. Hawkins: If 1 could add one point to the report, is that:as was mentioned last time the city code in terms of making decisions on the conditional use permits can not consider funding or-the subsidized nature of the project. Borup: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. I guess my questions would be why did we get it right before the meeting then. That is my concern. I do not feel comfortable even discussing this until we have had,a chance to look at it and this is-when I got here tonight-this is when I got it.. Borup: I'd agree with that. I think - De Weerd: They were a number of things that were originally questioned when this application was here a couple months ago and I haven't seen anything on it since then. I don't feel comfortable even going forward at this point without having a chance to look at this. I don't know what staffs feelings are, but we haven't really had a chance to see what their'review will result as well. Borup:: Do you remember what items you had questions on? De Weerd: I have a list of them. But then again, I also missed the second meeting too. I .know there were some drainage issues, issues on the Five Mile Creek, lowering .the density, the block wall, the utilities. There was just a number of them, so I would like to have a chance to look at.the site plan and I guess I would like to recommend•tabling this till our.next meeting. _ Borup: Continuing it till next meeting? I think there is some merit there, but I think we do have the applicant here and even though at this point we'don't have the staff report, it may be appropriate to have a report from the applicant. They could probably explain a lot of those questions that we may have: Meridian Planning -and ~ing Committee Special Meeting • August 25, 1999 Page 3 De` Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I think the public hasn't even had a chance to view any of these changes, so I would see that it would'be a waste of time. Borup: That's what I am saying. This is the best place for the public to get a chance to look at it. We've got it on the map. The applicant is here and-can explain. F "' . DeWeerd: Well, I remember an incident that we were told certain changes were made on a site plan and they were not made and I do not feel comfortable acting on anything that I have not seen. Borup: I agree with that. De Weerd: Okay. That's my personal opinion. Borup: Okay. I don't think I asked for a vote. Do the other Commissioners=are, you feeling along. the same line. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman. I tend to agree with Tammy on the fact that neither myself nor any of the other Commissioners nor the public have had a chance to review it. -" Borup: Well, this is the place pretty much for the public to review it. Hatcher: I understand. I think that we could take this opportunity and go ahead and let the applicant bring his points up together, but I don't I don't see that there is any need to do that in the fact that I don't feel that we would be able to make a decision or make any sort of recommendation to City Council tonight in this meeting. w Borup: Mr. Barbeiro. Barbeiro: We have a public forum. I would- likerto have the applicant come up and speak and I would like to allow the neighbors to speak on the applicants explanations, but of course until staff report is available, and a complete review is done, it would not be prudent to make a-recommendation to City Council this evening. Borup: My thoughts are, how much time we want to spend on this if we going to have another~public hearing; I would like to hear from the applicanYthrough. The applicant is here-would like to come up and present your project? Again, keep in mind other than our new Commissioner, we are familiar with the project-so probably the things that would be pertinent torus would be'addressing those items that there was concerns and specifically it looks like to redesign of the layout. Peterson: Mr. Chairman, my name is Brice Peterson. "I am representing Ionic Enterprises, which is also owned by the Stamas Corporation. Debbie Stamas is my daughter and Paul Stamas is her husband, so I am representing the applicant tonight: The information that your referring to, and I agree and am sorry that you did not get it, but I think that the information-the new site plan and things like that were delivered to Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting. August 25, 1999 Page4 - _~ the City Hall at the time of the City Council hearing. I do recognize that if you have not seen it why that is understandable and I would not ask you to vote for or against something that you have not had time to study. This is a very important to me and to my family. I'd like it to get due consideration. I am not asking you to do anything that s: your not comfortable with. I think you-and things happen. The director has been ill for some time°`-and I think probably because of that, things were not delivered over to the P&Z, but those things happen and we are n'ot going to be concerned about it. You have not seen it, so I am not asking you to act on it. Is that fair? If you would like I have a rather lengthily presentation that I'd like to make and - Borup: Presentation concerning the revisions? Peterson: Yes. Borup: Okay. How lengthily is lengthily? Peterson: I don't want to' bore~you Mr. Chairman, but I do think that a presentation is appropriate. Borup: Well, yes. It is necessary. Barbeiro: Mr. Peterson, could you move the microphone closer. Peterson: I am at your pleasure Mr. Chairman. Borup: I don't know how long our agenda is going to last tonight, but I hate to keep ~~ Vpostponing things entirely. Again, in the future I would not expect to review everything that we have all ready heard at previous meetings either. I'd like to go ahead and do a presentation addressing those things where you've made revisions to address some of the concerns. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman: Might I offer, we are missing one Commissioner here tonight and if this is continued to the September 14th date, he`will not have the opportunity to hear Mr. Peterson's comments on these revisions and I just really strongly feel that we should have chance to look at the changes; digest it so when Mr. Peterson gives yhis presentation on the revisions, we will have -all ready know what he is talking about and perhaps he can answer some of our questions during those presentation. Otherwise, we will be duplicating what we'll do tonight on September 1.4th as well. Borup: Mr. Peterson, I'd like to go ahead and give you about 10 minutes and I think that would help us,digest it better. WiIF you. proceed. Peterson: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'll try to stay within that and what I am hearing you say, and it is perfectly all right with me, that your going to postpone this again. Borup: I think that is the direction the Commission (inaudible). Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting • August 25, 1999 Page 5 Peterson: It is perfectly all right. I would-I hope the same Commissioner is not absent next month. Having served- 5 Borup: Let me mention-we do-and I should have madean introduction at the beginning. We do have two new Commissioners here tonight. One of them is here tonight. Richard Hatcher is-Kent Brown is the other Commissioner: He had a previous appointment that he had made a month and a half ago before he was appointed to the Commission and that is the reason he is not here. He is planning on coming later tonight, as soon as his other meeting is over. We will see what ever time that is though. Let's proceed. Peterson: Thank- you Mr. Chairman. I would just say that the project is located on the corner of Locust Grove and Franklin Road. We did take this before the City Council and the City Council did annex the property with,an R-4D zoning. The things that=we have changed and I will go over this very briefly as it sounds like we are going to do it again,. so-if I keep practicing I'm going to get pretty good you know. The audience can see the site plan that is on the overhead and there are substantial changes to the site plan and.l hope you find them favorable. If I might use this site plan here, which is a duplicate of the one on the board-on the wall-I'll read some dimensions to you that might help. As you recall, when you`enter off of Locust Grove in the~previous land plan, we had a row of buildings on the left hand side-in other words next to the south `" boundary. With this chance, we have entered the project farther4to the south and went around the first row of buildings. The dimension from the, south boundary to the closest building in that row-the first row. It is okay or would you like me to point it out? Borup: Any Commissioners have questions on that? Peterson: 58 feet. If you -if there is any question, please stop.me. 58 feet is the distance. If you move the next dimension you'll see that the closest parking stall is 16 feet. If you move to the west along that property line, you'll see the next dimension to the closest point of the building is 36 feet. If you move to the farthest back building, which would be in the southwest corner, you'll see that that dimension is 32 feet. We continue to agree with the Robinson's that we would be happy to put a major wall on that property line to further help any sound barriers or anything that they may wish. They requested that, as you recall, so we are simply. agreeing to it. We have added a substantial amount of landscaping along there and we have added some fountains and ponds and signage to the entrance to indicate that it is the main entrance and that is the one we want people to use. The (inaudible) has been designed to be all stucco. This is atypical building. You know that there are different people who talk about whether this is a 2-1/2 story or a 3 story -you- choose whatever you-however identification you'd like, but this is a typical building. Would there be any questions? Hatcher: Mr. Peterson. You mentioned stucco. Is it stucco or is it EIFS? Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 6 Peterson:. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hatcher, it's stucco. We have added a lot of landscaping to the previous site plan. We have done what we-can do to loosen it up and to loosen up the density. We have spread'~the buildings out and made them-all of them are 2- 1/2 or 3 stories whichever you want to call them. The buffering or-I think that was the word that was used by the previous Commission, between the Robinson's next to us and .our property has been greatly increased and the landscaping between the two properties all of course on our side of the line have been greatly increased. We have here with us tonight the traffic engineer who did the .traffic study. I believe that that was the other-as near as I could tell there was 2 items that I needed to address tonight. One was the buffering and the other was the traffic. Jerry Flats with JUB Engineers is here. With your indulgence and your permission, I would like to have his speak. Mr. Tumora and I'd like.to have him answer any questions if-you have any concerning the site plan or the buildings. Borup: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Peterson at this point? Maybe one question. Back on the original staff comments from April, have you had a chance to review those .and do you feel that all those have been addressed. within the new site plan? Peterson: Mr. Chairman. Yes I do believe they have. Borup: Okay, thank you. Peterson: In the sense of brevity if.you don't have another questions I'd like to Borup: Yes, we'd like to move~on. Your traffic engineer you said would like to-I think that-was the other major concern from previous. Peterson: Mr. Chairman, if I might, I'd like to pass these out as information I was going. to present to you tonight. 1Nhile you study the site plan, as you indicated that you .haven't been able to yet, maybe you could look at this as well and see our positions on each of the items as they relate to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Rossman: Excuse' me Mr. Peterson, if you could run that through-the Clerk and it marked as an exhibit please. Flats: Good evening. I am Jerry Flats. I work for JUB Engineers in Boise. I did the short traffic impact study on this development. I'm not sure, well I am sure you might no want'to hear the whole- story, but I'll try to be as brief as possible.. The traffic impact study looks at a site and the first thing that we do is take this development and look at the amount of traffic that that will generate. We do that from the ITE manual. In this case, we had a-we look at the afternoon -peak Hour and that's usually the most intense hour of the day. We had in this case, 43 new trip ends that were generated by this development~xcuse me, 64. 43 enter and 21 depart. Borup: -What time period? e t~ ~_, Meridian Planning and ~.,;~ing Committee Special Meeting r-~ August 25, 1999 w ~ t -Page 7 ~ Flats: The afternoon, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m. We take that new traffic that is generated by the new-development add it to the`existirig t~affic'that is there" and also i add it to the traffic that would be caused by growth over the period of time~between now anal when the .project is :fully developed. We distribute that onto the roads. and then we look at the level of service in this case, particularly at that intersection of Locust Grove and Franklin. In this case, the -if I get to peek at the report Here-we found that the level of service is realty a major of how much delay there is at the intersection. You know-what. it feels like when your at an,intersection~and your delayed. The longer you have to wait, "the worse;it,feels and level of service is measured ABCDEF, kind of like grades in school: F feels horrible and A feels good. A you don't have to wait very long and F you might be waiting a minute before you can turn. It's a "T" intersection, you make right and left turns and the level of service did not change significantly with the. ~ new traffic. It was a level of service in the morning if was C and iri the afternoon it was C-the delay was 14.2 seconds•average per vehicle'that came in the morning and 17.6 in the afternoon. I don't know if you have had a chance to look at the report. I will leave you. my extra copies. I would be happy to answer questions. Borup: Are you saying multiple copies of the traffic report were submitted? ~ " Flats: You know the last time you hadithe meeting, Gary Lee was here and `I am not F sure if they were submitted or not. The report was done in July. Hawkins: I think that went to City:Council it-did not come through this body. Flats: Oh, well I wilt leave you as much as I've got. ~- Borup: Thank you. Commissioners have any questions? ,~ .. Barbeiro: Mr. Flats, with regards to your analysis of the traffic'control plan, you ` mentioned the idea that it would include the incremental growths Can you tell me-right now you have it listed as a C intersection-the additional traffic from the apartment complex will not change it to a D. ,, Flats: Right. Barbeiro: Did you take into consideration and is it in your report the expanded growth that Jabil employee's entering will take place and can you tell me if, with the addition of Jabil and the addition of this apartment complex, will we reach D or E levels at those intersections. Flats: I can't because when I took the growth, I called APA and got a growth rate per year for the Meridian area and I used that growth rate. I have no knowledge of this,. other development and how much traffic it will generate. r ,~ • ~ ~,EcENEI} AUG 2 ~ 1999 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC. City of Meridian City Clerk Office CONDITIONAL USE COMPLIANpCE ANALYSIS Meridian made the planning and policy decision to annex the property owned by Ionic Enterprises, Inc. and to have it developed for residential use when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan, and when Meridian and Ada County negotiated Meridian's Area of Impact boundary. Ionic Enterprises' annexation and R-40 zoning request has been approved by Meridian. In connection with the conditional use requested by the applicant, the Planning & Zoning Commission has heard and read extensive and competent testimony from the City Staff, the applicant and the applicant's professional consultants on' the Cobblestone Village Project. The Commission again will take testimony on August 25, 1999. This project was tabled until. that date while the City Council reviewed and approved the annexation and zoning requests. The facts and evidence presented, including this analysis, show that the proposed use at this location meet the criteria set by Meridian for conditional use requests:' These criteria include: The Project will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. Meridian has made the legislative determination that the proposed use is a conditional use in the R-40 zone.Z The Project is located in a designated planned development area, and it is located between and separates an industrial area from a residential area. The applicant will do all that it can, and that the City reasonably requests, to ensure that the compatibility with surrounding properties isrespected. As the Comprehensive Plan states, the conditional use process affords the City the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility on a case-by-case basis. The extensive conditional use review of the Ionic Enterprises Project ensures the development of an aesthetically-pleasing project for the City of Meridian so that the community design policy of Meridian is met. ' The Project will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance. - The Ionic Enterprises Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals of the Plan (i.e., statements of community values that give broad direction to establish ideal future conditions3) and olp icies (i.e., specific statements that guide decision-making and give clear indication of intent4). The City consistently states in its Comprehensive Plan that the City must anticipate and provide for residential growth. The City Council made extensive findings to show that the High Density Residential zone granted for the Project is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Likewise, the conditional use request is consistent with the goals and policies of the .Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-418.C. z Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-409. a Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. ` Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-1. PAGE-1 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\H_M\ION IC.ENTWNAL`(SIS Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 8 Barbeiro: So, it is fair to say that since Jabil will likely be completed operational and have employees prior to the completion and occupancy of this; that your report is not effective with regards to this project. Flats: I would say that my report does not include that other development. Barbeiro: And since that development:will be' operational prior to this apartment complex being occupied, how does that effect your report? Flats: My report looks at theinfluence of this development on that intersection. Barbeiro: With regards to traffic flow today, I need to understand how it will effect traffic flow with regards to a new development that will be operational and occupied at the time this project is operational and occupied. ,:. Flats: It seems like, if that was the case, there should have been a traffic study done by the other development also. You could combine those two pretty easily and take a look at the future level of service and see how each development effects that intersection and how they effect it together. It's not something that I had access to. Anything .else? Thanks for your time. Borup: Thank you. Do the Commissioners have any questions on the site plan for Mr. Tumara or are we ready to move ahead. De Weerd: I am ready to move ahead. I just had one observation. In looking at that down by the entrance off Locust Grove, the parking area is only within-that buffer is just like 12 feet, we do have a minimum required and that's for the full side. I guess that would be my only observation at this point. Without staff comments on this revised plat, I just don't feel that comments at this point are even necessary. I would move to continue this until our September 14t" meeting. Borup: Okay, we have a motion to continue this public hearing. Hatcher: I second it. Borup: Motion is seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED::. ALL AYES Borup: This application will be continued to the September 14th Planning and Zoning meeting. Thank you. .~ • • Meridian, through its Comprehensive Plan, encourages the future population growth of the City to locate within the Area of City Impact.5 The Project is located within the Area of Impacts This area is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Areas where "municipal services and utilities are available or planned for."' Meridian's policy is to use unimproved land in the Urban Service Planning Area in order to "maximize public investments, curtail urban sprawl and protect existing agricultural lands"8 outside of this area. The Meridian Plan insists that no new residential ' development should be approved outside of the Urban Service Planning Area. The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that meeting the challenge of providing services to citizens requires the expansion of the City's economic base along with creating new job opportunities for citizens as well as creating new residential opportunities.9 As stated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: [h]ousing is a dominate physical feature and the principal land use within Meridian. As the region's population grows, the demand for housing will increase. Meridian will continue to develop into the ideal community only by maintaining and upgrading the quality of existing and new dwelling units and at the same time developing a strong commercial and industrial base.10 The location of the Project'supports the City's encouragement of a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family) and choices between ownership and rental units for all income groups in a variety of locations." It is the housing goal of Meridian to provide a sufficient choice of adequate housing in the community to meet the needs of individuals of all socioeconomic backgrounds, the elderly and the disabled,12 and it is the policy of the City to support a variety of residential choices for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities.13 As was previously described for the City Council, there is a shortage of apartments to give Meridian citizens the choice in housing they deserve. The Ionic Enterprises Project helps Meridian meet its housing goals. The City promotes the development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers.14 The applicant is presenting to the City a unified, integrated development, e ,Policy 1.1 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that "Approximately 92% to 95% of the new residential development shalt occur within the Urban Service Planning Area, or public facilities, essential services and utilities are planned for or are already available. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-9. a Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.4. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-3. e Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-10, Policy 1.3. s Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-15. 10 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.1. 12 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 66. " i 13 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page 23, Policy 2.1(U). " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.4. PAGE-2 F:WPPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENIIANALYSIS 1 • near major access thoroughfares as promoted by the Comprehensive Plan,15 that fosters the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and'design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site):16 The Project will maximize benefit to the residents, minimize conflicts and provide a ,', ~ tie-in between residential areas and service needs." The Project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate' in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. As stated in Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, residential development must be built to meet the growing demands of the community. When adopting the Comprehensive Plan, the City acknowledged that, in the near future, this area would demand new residential uses as a complimentary mix to the existing employment opportunities. The Project offers the City the opportunity to provide a creative and unified residential project and to set examples for an attractive, heavily landscaped, well signed, innovative project for Meridian close to jobs and urban services. The Project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The proposed uses (multi-family residential) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses. These residences will provide housing close to jobs and services. The applicant and its representatives have had many discussions with residents in the area, City Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission in designing a Project that will mitigate potential disturbance. The numerous conditions of approval provided by the Planning & Zoning Commission ensure compatibility. The careful guidance by Meridian is evident in its extensive review of,the Ionic Enterprises Project. Ionic Enterprises has presented to the City a unified, integrated, clustered development, mand the City, along with Ada County Highway District ("ACRD"), has guided its ultimate design to foster the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design (including an extensive landscape treatment for the site).1e The design of the Ionic Enterprises Project recognizes the importance of neighborhoods in creating and maintaining an attractive and desirable living environment in close proximity to work that balances residential neighborhood interests with business interests. The City has heard before that this residential use is not compatible with existing residential uses. Yet this Project assists the City in achieving the goals and objectives of the City's Plan to encourage the widest range of housing for all of Meridian's citizens. Our courts have made it clear that different types of housing cannot be viewed as incompatible with other housing -even if that "other" housing is single-family residential. The City works hard to ensure compatibility, and that's why the Ionic Enterprises application is being reviewed through a conditional use process. There can be no serious statement made that tries to imply that this housing is incompatible with other housing. However, it is appropriate for the City to consider design elements. of this housing development to ensure compatibility. The site plan to be discussed by the Commission shows that an elaborate park-like setting has been created for this Project. Extensive setbacks and fencing would be provided at the southern boundary of the site to prevent disturbance to existing neighbors. One neighbor has asked the applicant to consider erecting a masonry wall which the applicant has said L15 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-68, Policy 1.19. 1e Meridian Comprehensive Ptan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-67, Policy 1.6. to Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-19, Policy 1.8. PAGE-3 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENT\ANALYSIS • it will construct. Design details would be worked out with staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission. Windows have been designed to look away from the existing residences in the area. The Project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and "services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible. for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the timely provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises . has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACHD, and others to coordinate the provision of infrastructure necessary to accommodate the Project. The Ionic Enterprises Project complies with the transportation policy to encourage clustering of uses along arterials, collectors and section line roads.19 Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant, Ionic Enterprises. The Project will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Ionic Enterprises Project is a natural progression of the development of this area in Meridian's Area of Impact that Meridian previously has identified for planned,development in nature. As Meridian has represented to Ada County and the community, it is Meridian's intent to provide services throughout its Area of Impact. Development at this location ensures public facilities will be extended to all areas within the Area of Impact in a reasonable, progressive manner. Accordingly, this Project will not be detrimental to the economic'welfare of the community, but ensures that Meridian can provide the service it has promised throughout the Area of Impact within the next several years. The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Ionic Enterprises has, and will continue to, work with the City, ACHD, and others to coordinate the provision of services necessary to accommodate the Project. Costs of services in connection with the Project will be paid for, in substantial part, by the applicant. Meridian has received testimony from the agencies. and departments, including the Meridian School District, that were asked to comment on the Project. There has been no objection. • The Project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property'or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Project is proposed as a conditional use project. Accordingly, the City, through its Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission, will set a number of conditions of approval to ensure that any potential detrimental element (such as lights) will not be excessive, and will be minimized. With regard to traffic, there is no factual evidence to indicate that this Project, and the traffic associated with the Project. will be detrimental. The City's professional traffic engineer, ACHD, has determined that this Project will not unduly burden the road system. In addition, the applicant's traffic engineer has provided the City with competent evidence that the street system is adequate to serve this Project. i 19 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-54, Policy 1.5U. PAGE-4 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\H M\IONIC.ENTIANALYSIS ~~ r • The Project will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. There are two intended accesses. One on Franklin Road, approximately 400 feet west of the , intersection with Locust Grove. The other access is approximately 400 feet south of the intersection on Locust Grove. Sight distances are adequate from both locations. Both the professional traffic engineer and ACRD have found there will be no undue interference with existing or future traffic patterns. • The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. The Project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. ` Conclusion The Comprehensive Plan has identified what the City has found to be in the best interest of Meridian for this area. The Project is designed to be compatible with and further the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the Comprehensive Plan, which goals have been adopted by the City to promote the public convenience and welfare. The Project is designed to create a cohesive planned residential project thus achieving public benefits envisioned by the City's Comprehensive Plan. As such, the Project is in the best interests of Meridian. The Project~assists the City in improving the economic, social, and physical health of the community through better land use policies that do not violate private property rights, adversely impact property values, or create unnecessary technical limitations on the use of private property. p ~' 4 i PAGE - 5 '~ F:\APPSIWPDOCS\H_M\I O N I C. ENTIANALYS I S JUL-28-1999(WED) 15:30 SPINK&BUTLER ~~~ .. ,. ~' ` At~ozz~eys and Gounselc~r~ at Law Mich:~el T. Spank 355.1092 JoAnn C. Buclcr 3551093 July 28; 1999 VIA FACSIMILE Linda Testing lvleridian City Clerk 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Yonic Enterprises/Cobblestone Village Our File No.: 671.1 Dear Linda: 2083881001 ~ P. 002 ;~. ~ , ~,E CF 1V~D ~9J9 607 N. Bch Sr., Suici 310 City of Meridian r. o. sox 639 !~itv Clerk Office Bain, Idaho $3701 (205) 35'3.1000 FAX (20fi) 3fifi-1001 -~ eblew~Apr~mencr.com .~ ~ ~.. ~~np~-~ra~v'"~ ~~f~_ ~ /qq (~~ Syk ~ '~•ti~ I believe that you recently had a conversation with Lisa Goold, the representative of the applicant in connection with the above-referenced application. Y understand that the City Council hearing for this application, originally scheduled for August 10, must be rescheduled to August 25 because of the large nurnber of applications that the City Couzzcil will be considering on the 10`h_ Normally this would be fine with the applicant, but the 25`~ is a day that 1 will be out of town and will not be able to attend the hearing. Accordingly, we are asking that this matter be set for the next. City Council hearing on September 14, 1999. Would you please confirm the date of this hearing with me at your earliest convenience. ~~_ . _ Sincerely, ~Q~., ~-.~~.c JoAnn C. Butler o, JCB as ; ~~ cc: (via fax) Paul Stamas Bryce Peterson Lisa Goold ~, , Doug Tamura , Crary Lee .,. JUL 28 '99 15 46 2083881001 PAGE.02 JUL 28 '99 15 46 2083881001 PAGE.01 JUL-28-1999(WED) 15:30 SPINI(&BUTLER -~. t ~' `~~c 2083881001 • SPINK & BUTLER 607 N. 8`~ Street, Suite 310 P.O. Box 639 Boise, Idaho' 83701 2081388-1000 208/388-1001 (fax) lrmail Address: sblaw(~~pzimenet.com FAX COVFR SHFFT TO: Linda ICesting 888-4218 Meridian City Clerk CC: Paul Stomas (916) 783-3739 Bryce Peterson, 323-8803 -Lisa Goold 323-8803 Doug Tamura 336-8441 Gary Lee 323-9336 FROM: JoAnn C. Butler DATE: July 28, 1999 TIME: 3:33 PM RE: Ionic Enterprises/Cobblestone Village OUR FILE: 671.1 MESSAGE: Please see attached letter to Linda Kesting. P. 001 Transmission is 2 pages, including this cover sheet. Contact Lisa Arnold or Jackie Call-Hildebrand at (208) 388-1000 if the entire transmission is not received. Original will X_ will nvt be sent via U:S. Mail. Please Deliver Iznznediately. The information contained in this transmission is attorney privileged and confidential information which is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you have received this communication in error, please call the person and number named above. Collect calls accepted. JUL 28 '99 15 46 2083881001 PAGE.01 RUG- 2-1999(MON) 8:d9 SPINK&BUTLER 2083881001 P. 001 _. 1 REe~~~ SPINK & B~CTTLER AUG 0 2 1999 City of Meridian 607 N. 8`~ Sheet, Suite 310 ~' itv Clerk Office 1'.0. Box 639 Boise, Idaho 83701 208/388-1000 208/388-1001 (fax) ' E-mail Address: sblaw rimenet.com FAX COVER SHEET TO: Linda Kesting 888-4218 Meridian City Clerk CC: Paul Stam~as (916) 783-3739 Bryce Peterson 323-8803 Lisa Goold 323-8803 Doug Tamura 336-8441 Crary Lee 323-9336 FROM: Lisa Aznold, Secretary to roAxui C. Butler DATE: August 2, 1999 TIME: 8:50 AM RE: Ionic Enterprises/Cobblestone Village ouR FILE: 671.1 MESSAGE: This is an update to the fax we sent to you on July 29 wherein we requested the City of Meridian to change the hearing date. Please be advised that the Planning & Zoning Commission will hear the Cobblestone Village matter on August 25 (as originally scheduled). Bryce Peterson will be representing the applicant at that hearing since JoArm Butler will be out of town. Transmission is 1 page, including this coves sheet. Contact Lisa Arnold or Jaclae Call-Hildebrand at (208) 388-1000 if the entire transmission is not received. Original will _X` will not be sent via U.S. Mail. Please Deliver Itrimcdiately. The information contained in this transmission is attorney privileged and confidential information which is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you have received this communication in error, please call the person and number named above. Collect calls accepted. AUG 02 '99 09 05 2083881001 PAGE.01 -- - - uu~- ~- i ~~~~ rnl J I U: I I 5F1NK&tiU I LtK ~UtS:itfti I UU I N. UUl ~'' { ~ ;~E. ~ ~ ~_. - L'-~ ~~~ T1 ~~~I~ & IB~U'~'~ ~~ . ' , ~- -! ~ 0 9 1999 A~torneys and Counselors at Law ~o~ ;~. Sch .,~., Suito 3)c (~it~- ~f :llcridan P• 0. no= 63P Michael T. pink Ci t ~ Clerl; OffiC:' wise, IJaho 83701 358.1092 (205) 38y-1006 JoAnn L. 6ucler ~ ~ 7 FAX (2J5) 3S8-lOC1 3SS•1093 / ~- sbls•HCnprimcncc.com ~ July 9, 1999 VIA FACSIMILE Shari Stiles Planning & Zoning 200 E. Carlton Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Cobblestone Village/Ionic Enterprises, Inc. Our File No.: 671.1 Dear Shari: It is my understanding that the above-referenced conditional use application has been placed on the Planning & Zoning Commission agenda for 'I~esday, July 13. I also understand that the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Cobblestone Village property will probably be reviewed by the City Council either later this month or the first week in August. tlecordingly, we Would ask that the conditional use application referenced above be placed on the Plannin & Zoning Commission hcarinb agenda for Aux st. I believe the date of this hearing will b u ust 10 Would you please call to confirm that this August date is when this conditional use application will be heazd. 7~~1- f - ,~YiL.F,Q•~ Sincerely, / /a JoAnn C. Sutler ~ ~ ~- ~ ? ~~4g City of 1lericlian JCB\dp City Clerk i3ffice cc: Paul Stamas/via fax ~ ~C~~ Bryce Pctcrson/via fax Lisa Goold/via fax Cc~x~- ~. /~ JUL 89 ' 99 10 ~ 21 ~ 20838810x3 --r!-~u~-~~---~._~ MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JULY 13. 1999 APPLICANT: IONIC ENTERPRISES. INC. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 4 REQUEST: CONDfI'IONAL USE PERMIT FOR MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FROM 6/8/99 CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER 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: ~~{ PIN S'~a5al ~`~^~9 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian, f Meridian Planning Grr-~?oning Commission Meeting July 13, 1999 :~ -~ .., ; ~~. Page 14 Sims: Nine. De Weerd: Nine, okay thank you. Mr. Chairman I would move that we continue-this public hearing till August 10tH and hopefully we have comments END OF SIDE ONE Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? ~ F MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES MacCoy: Ayes have it; Thank you very much. Well done. ITEM 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 16 FOUR- PLEXES WITH POOL AND CLUBHOUSE FOR USE BY PHASE I & II (PROPOSED CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II) BY WILLIAM & LUCILE LEAVELL-END OF 5T" NORTH OF CREEKSIDE -ARBOUR PHASE I & SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW: ~ ~ ,~; MacCoy: Since we have just-continued the. public hearing -for 2 and since 3 is sconnected, what's the Commissioner's viewpoint. Barbeiro:; Mr. Chairman 1-move that we continue Item 3 for our August 10tH meeting. De Weerd: I second. __ MacCoy: All in favor?. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 4.° CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL'USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: MacCoy: As I reported earlier, we had a letter which requested this be moved to August 10tH, it says it is a continued public hearing, is anyone here wanting to make a comment about this now. If not we will move on. It is going to be on our August 10tH agenda. Seeing none, Commissioner's. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue the request for condition use permit 'for Cobblestone Village to August 10-to what-August 25tH JIJL 09-'99-T0~21 208388101 PRGE.02 !' ' Meridian Planning an~ning Commission Meeting ~ `~ July 13, 1999 ~ Page 15 Stiles: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner's. I am just reminding you that this is now 18 public hearings on August 10tH MacCoy: Congratulations.. We'll be here till 2 in the morning. De Weerd: Well then may I change the date to August -now did I understand that we have a special meeting on August 25th. Okay. MacCoy: Shari a letter I received said August 10th. I°though that was their a reemeri between you and the applicant. g t De Weerd: It's probably just a mix of official meeting. I would move that if August 25tH is okay with the other Commissioner's, Iwould move that we continue this until August 25t". MacCoy: 25th is that what you said. Shari? Stiles: That's fine. I think we only have 8 or 9 on that day. MacCoy: Okay we will make it August 25. Is that okay by the`°Commissioner's now? 1f not, you better speak up now. De Weerd: I made the motion. Borup: Do we have a time on that meeting? -MacCoy: What do you mean a time? Borup: Some of the. special meetings have been earlier. Stiles:' We wanted to surprise you Keith! 6 o'clock, if you can make it. MacCoy: Is that true? Stiles: I believe it is scheduled. Double check with the Clerk's Office, but I believe it is 6 o'clock. We could still change it. De Weerd: My motion still needs- MacCoy-: All In favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES JUL- 9-1999(FRI) 10:11 SFINK&BUTLER ' ~~ ~ ~~'~'~1~1~ A~eorncys and Counselors at Law Michael T. pink 3SS-1092 JoAnn L. 6url~r 3SS•1093 VIA FACSIMILE Shari Stiles Planning & Zoning 200 E. Cazlton Meridian, ID 83642 2083881001 P. 002 ~,~c~rv~D J ~~ L 0 9 1999 G07 N. Sch St., Suite 310 Cit3~ of iFieridian n.0~ Ao= ~~~' City Clerk Office ~ui~c, tJaho 8701 ~zat;> >~y_tooa P ~ z FAX (2JR) 358.1001 1~~' ~ ~e;~ sblawtmprimcnracom July 9, 1999 Re: Cobblestone Village/Ionic Enterprises, Inc. Our File No.: 671.1 Dear Shari. It is myunderstandingthattheabove-referenced conditional use application has been placed on the Planning & Zoning Commission agenda for 'I~esday, July 13. I also understand that the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Cobblestone Village property will probably be reviewed by the City Council either later this month or the hrst week in August. Accordingly, we would ask that the conditional use application referenced above be placed on the Planning & Zoning Commission hearinb agenda for August. I believe the date of this hearing will be August 10, 1999. Would you. please call to confirm that this August date is when this conditional use application will be heard. F. Sincerely, ~.A«.C. ~ JCB\dp cc: Paul Stamas/via fax Bryce PctcrsonJvia fax Lisa Goold/via fax JoAnn C. Butler JUL 09 '99 1021 2083881001 PRGE.02 ~€ s s a ~~aa ~~ M~ ,;m o~ D Z ~/ ~. ,.~! 1 ~. ~~ ~: ~ ~~ a m ~ ~ ~ Z D C O 1 `/ O ~ n ~ o z m O i x Z m • -~ ~ Z z G ) -i s g"+~ 8 ~ n ~ ~ T c ~~~~pp_ C :o.i ~~7 mGm m~ D D Z/l D ~ ~ ~ O. ~' O Q y cn n~ - I ~ °..,.< ~~ g~~u n ~ T ~ ~ ~7 y ~ rn J ~ L v O fTl ~ ~ j~ ~ D S ~ - Z '< - ~ ~ m ~ ^~ ~ v ~ - cn p n L - ~ ~; ~ m _ D ti f _ _ -_- 6 C ~ V ~ ~ m 1~ MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: JUNE 8. 1999 APPLICANT: IONIC ENTERPRISES. INC. .ITEM NUMBER: 6 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A_ M_ ULTI-FAMILY. 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACH MI UTES FROM 5/11/99 ~A2 ~ ~ -1-;< bhS CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER 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: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS iw ~P w C Ail Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ,,: -," Meridian Planning a.. Zoning Commission Meeting June 8, 1999 Page 45 MacCoy: All in favor of the statement? MOTION CARRIED: 2 Ayes, 1 nay. MacCoy: Two votes for yes, one for no. Mr. Attorney complete the paperwork to-per the request by Commissioner Smith. ITEM NO. 6: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI- FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY IONIC ENTERPRISES-SW CORNER OF FRANKLIN RD & LOCUST GROVE: MacCoy: Since we have just denied the R-40, Mr. Attorney? Item No. 6, we just denied the... Rossman: I don't think there would be much use for a public hearing on a request for conditional use permit when annexation and zoning has just been denied. MacCoy: We are going to have to make a statement here though for Item~No. 6 so we can close the book on it. Rossman: What kind of statement do we need? I guess the commissions decision is implied or expressed from it's decision on the annexation and zoning and we .will include that in the recommendation to the City Council that because , of the decision on the annexation and zoning it was not addressed as to whether or not a conditional use permit was appropriate. If the City Council believes that they want to approve the annexation and zoning despite your recommendation they should send it back down for a public hearing on the conditional use permit. Let's have that issued addressed first and if necessary we'll address the conditional use permit later. So I would recommend that you table that particular matter until a determination by City Council on the annexation and zoning. {> MacCoy: That's what 1 want to hear you say. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we table item no. 6 pending decision by City Council on Item No. 5 request for annexation and zoning on this Cobblestone Village. Borup: Second. Smith: Well, I can't table to a date certain until l know when they are going to act on it. Really, unless that's what f need to do. ~ ~ . Meridian Planning i~Zoning Commission Meeting June 8, 1999 y. Page 46 Rossman: No need for a date certain, but Mr. Berg is correct. The proper language is continuation rather than table. Continue it without a specific ,Y designation of time. ,~ Smith: Then my motion to say continue in lieu of table. Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? ~~MOTION CARRIED: All. ayes. MacCoy: The public has vanished on us here. I want to say thank you for the publics turnout because that is the way we make decisions. As you can see it was not an easy one to come up with. We still Piave thoughts in our mind sitting in this chair up here that we'll live with for some time to come. All right, it is 9:30, we-are going to take a ten minute break here. Promise we will be back at it again. . (BREAK) MacCoy: We are under the gun, we have another half agenda to go through tonight. It's almost 10:00 o'clock. By ordinance of our city, this board meets, can meet twice a month. We already have our second meeting scheduled June 17, it's full. Our July meeting is full. VVe are working toward August; that's how much material we have to go through. We try and do the best we can, 1 apologize for the length of this part that you've just seen... (END OF TAPE) MacCoy: With the threshold of the city and everything that people would like to say and tell us, we are the ones that receive it. The material that we send on to the council is the same material, but we also give them a summary as,to where we've been. This is where the work horse is. I don't know if any of you know that, but we are not paid and we do this as a part of-we are appointed and-but we are all professionals and this is a job we do day in and day out anyway during the daytime. ITEM NO. 7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY DAYCARE CENTER FOR FIVE CHILDREN OR FEWER BY LETICIA D. VANCE-1991 SOUTH COVEY PLACE: MacCoy: We will now open this public hearing, but first staff, Shari, comment please. ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 11, 1999 Page 81 Rossman: Well, lets open the public hearing. I agree with you though, it is proper to continue it to the next June Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. Lets open it tonight and then move to continue. MacCoy: We are opening, we are not opening it, we are continuing the public hearing which was from last months hearing and is for the same program, project. The applicant, if you want to come forward and make a statement to the effect that you want to carry your material forward. BRYCE PETERSON, 1104 E. BRIGHTWATER, BOISE, ID. Peterson: I appreciate the comments that have been made by the commission. Wefi~ would like to have it continued. We would like to respond to the comments as was suggested and if you would be so kind as to continue it along with Item No. 5 we would appreciate it. MacCoy: Okay, thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move we continue the public hearing for request for conditional use permit until June Stn Barbeiro: I second the motion Mr. Chairman. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 7: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CHERRY LANE ESTATES BY JEFFREY L. MANSHIP-4375 W CHERRY LANE: MacCoy: Staff do you have any additional comments that you want to put on the floor right now? Stiles: Just to refresh the commissioners, this was tabled again because of a paragraph in the Comprehensive Plan that said development may be considered at densities less than three per acre if they would do it as a planned development and offer a cost benefit analysis. I have a little bit different interpretation of that, but that statement does exist in the`Comprehensive Plan. Still dealing with the issue of a 30' driveway that accesses`a five acre parcel to the south. Other than that, I have no further comments in addition to what we've already commented on for the annexation and zoning and the plat. That's going to Item No. 8. ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning `Commission May 11, 1999 Page- 80 MacCoy: Let me add one more comment to this the material that I've been talking about is in it's final draft stage, they won't have a final answer they will see in print until October as to changing of dates. Though we have been given the indication that the dates are being changed, will be changed. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman,-after this evenings discussion and comments of the neighbors and developer, I would be willing to listen to the developers revised plans. He has a great deal of information here based upon what we have discussed and what the neighbors concerns are. Where the developer may have the opportunity to discuss face to face their concerns and address those in a more specific manor and present us with a revised plan. I would be open to listening to a revised plan and would like to continue the public hearing. MacCoy: All right, make a motion here then. Barbeiro: I motion that we continue the public hearing to our next planned meeting. MacCoy: The date is June Stn Borup: Second. MacCoy: Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rossman: Keep in mind that the next public hearing is not a forum for us to get up and testify to the same material that we testified to tonight. If you do show up at the continued public hearing, you show up with new information if you intend to testify. Thank you. MacCoy: Thank you for coming this evening. and expressing your views, because that's how we make our decisions. We will move to Item No. 6 which is a continued public hearing request for conditional use for the same material. ITEM NO. 6: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY, 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY STAMAS CORPORATION/ IONIC ENTERPRISE INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE ~ FRANKLIN: MacCoy: Well I think we are going to have the same things that we are going to continue this same thing. Mr. Attorney do you think they need to do that? Since we are going to get. the same material. ~' ~r 911 SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell June 3, 1999 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Councilmen: R,EcE~D JUN - 3 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Enclosed for your review is general information relative to schools located in the proposed project area. If you have any questions, please contact Jim Carberry at 888-6701. Reference: Cobblestone Village Apartments Elementary School: Meridian Elementary School Middle School: Meridian Middle School High School: Meridian High School Comments and/or Recommendations: Meridian Elementary School is at capacity. Meridian Middle School is at capacity and will remain so until the fifth middle school comes on line in the fall of 2000. Meridian High School is also at capacity. , We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house twenty (20) elementary aged children, eighteen (18) middle school aged children, and thirteen (13) senior high aged students We are concerned with the amount of traffic on Franklin Road. At times our buses have a difficult time turning onto Franklin Road from Nola Street. e Sincerely, ~`ti~~~ Jim Carberry, Administrator of Support Services BOARD OF TRUSTEES Rex Harrison • Wally Hedrick • Holl}~ Houfburg • David wynkoop • Steve Mann ~,.---. ~~•~~ Ada ou,~tdJJ~l~w~~~ ~«rr«f ~~ ~e~ ~ y rc. nuoer, rresiaent 318 East 37th Street Judy Peavey-Derr, Vice President Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 Marlyss Meyer Routson, Secretary Phone (208) 387-6100 Dave Givens, Commissioner Fax (208) 387-6391 Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner a-mail tellus@achd ada id us DATE: Tuesday May 11, 1999 MEETING: Tuesday May 11, 1999 TO: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Steve Arnold Planning and Development RE: MAZ99-005/MCUP99-005 s/w corner.Locust Grove and Franklin 96-Unit Apartments On April 7, 1999, the Commission reviewed and approved this application as MAZ99-005/MCUP99-005, a request for conditional use approval to construct a 96-unit apartment complex. The applicant also requested annexation and a rezone from RT to R-40. The 6.15-acre site is located at the southwest corner of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. In Facts and Findings A (see page 2 of the staff report) and Site Specific Requirement No. 2 (see page 4 of the approved staff report) discusses the right-of-way required for Franklin Road, which is 120-feet, or 60-feet from the centerline. This is the right-of-way required fora 7-lane principal arterial. Franklin Road is currently planned to be constructed as a 5-lane principal arterial. Fora 5-lane principal arterial the District will require 96-feet of right-of-way (48-feet of right-of-way) and not 120-feet (60-feet from centerline). The report was approved with an error and should state in the Facts and Findings and Site Specific Requirements that 48- feet of right-of-way (as measured from existing centerline) will be required from this development. ACRD staff will place this application on a future agenda for Commission review with the correct right-of-way requirements stated in the Facts and Findings and Site Specific Requirements. Staff does not anticipate any difficulties in the re-approval of this site by the Commission. District staff apologizes for any confusion that may have been created by this error and will see to it that similar errors are -not repeated. If you have any questions or concerns about this application, please call me at 387-6178. Sincerely Steve Arnold Principal Planning and Development Analyst h1AY 11 ' 99 12 ~ 26 ACHD PAGE.02 ~~! tF ~_ '~-, ~ . / ~- ` . ~~Z ~.-, ~~, ~, t ft June 8, 1999 ... To: Chairman of Planning & Zoning Commission and Members of the Commission From: Bryce Peterson representing Stamas Corporation and Ionic Enterprises, Inc. Reference: Cobblestone Village k Three years ago Paul Stamas began looking for a site that-would be suitable for an' apartment project. of approximately 100 units. During this process he contacted Moe Therrien, with Ada Real Estate Surveys. At that time he recommended that we find a parcel of ground in the Meridian area because of the need for apartments. Moe Therrien and his partner publish a quarterly survey of all the apartment projects in -Ada county. The report is known as Ada County Area Apartment Survey. This report has continually shown a higher and higher occupancy percentage. The latest report dated April 1999 show the following occupancy percentages. MERIDIAN COMPLEXS LOCATION VACANCY RATE • Aspen Hills 250-300~James Court 4.20% • Creekside Arbor 1301 E. 5~' Street ~ 2.30% • Cherry Lane 302-388 Gruber 4:5% WEST BOISE COMPLEXS • West Ridge Apartments 3003-3097 N. Five Mile 5% As you can see-there are very few apartment for rent in the Meridian area. Typically a developer feels confident in building additional apartments when vacancy rate is 5% or less. In this case the average vacancy- rate of apartments, that compare to Cobblestone Village is 3.6%. t ~~ ~ Perhaps, more significant than the vacancy rate is that no new apartments aze being planned or built at this time. With the significant increase in employment centers that have already been built and the many new ones that are being planned and built, the need for moderate priced living units would be well beyond the availability of the present supply. As you know, it is our desire to balance the availability of apartments to the increase in' jobs, which tend to reduce the caz trips within the Boise Valley. -This future 96-unit project is virtually in the middle of the azea that the new employment centers aze already locating and new jobs soon will be created all`azound the Franklin Road and Locust Grove intersection. Paul Stamas feels that this is an ideal location for this project and its central location will benefit the traffic situation and the employees in this area. t~ F ~< Memo To: Angel Sims, Brittney Louie (City Clerk's Office) Frone Brad Hawkins-Clark ~~c- GC: Date: 05/12/99 Ree Change of File/Projed Name At the request of Paul Stamas, president of both Stamas Corp. and Ionic Enterprises, Inc., in the attached, notarized letter, please Hate the change of Cobblestone v0age's application frnrn Stamas to Ionic. Please make adl the necessary corrections in your office for future reference and action related to this file. Thanks. • Page 1 MaY l 1, ~ 999 Steve Siddoway City ofMeridian Planning Dep~'tmeut 200 E. Carlton Ste. 201 Meridian, lD 83642 RE: COBBLESTONE ~,~~: ~nexation, Zoa~ng, and Conditional Use .Permit. Dear Steve, The application for the above referenced project was incorrectly submitted under the nam of Stamas Corporation instead o#'Ionic Enterprises, Inlc.; the oration t e property, please consider this letter as authorizaticm to .chatt~~e applicants aamQ oe Ionic Enterprises, Inc. Sincerely, ~~ /= '~^ Paul Z. Stamas P>,csidcnt Stamas Corporation. ~~~~ Paul Z. ~ Piesidenz Ionic Ent, One' Sierra Gate Plaza Suite 3558 Roseville, CA 95678 • MAY 11 '99 14:26 ~: ~ ~ Y DESIGN, ~RPOflATION DEVELOPMENT, CONSTRUCTION a`~ 1 1 99 O1 : 26p STAMf~S GORPORH t 1 ul7 - ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~v CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of ~ ~ ~ County of ~ _. ~/f ~ ~ / On f ( ~ ~ before me, ATE ~ NAME. TlTLe OF OFFICER • E.G_'JANE DOE. NOTAf?V PVBUC- ersonall a eared </~~ p Y PP ,.~~ NAME(S1 OF SIGNER(S) L~ personally known to me OR ^ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons} whose names} is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized SHARI DURBIN ~ capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the ~ ; ~~ Comm. i~1153492 ~ instrument the p rson the entity upon behalf of •• NOTARV PUBLIC • CALIFOFNtA ru~CEaC.0uu7v ~ which per (s) cted, exe uted the instrument. Comm. Ezp. Au9.29.2001 ~ WITWES~~id 'and offic' Y ~~ OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment or this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNED DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT ^ INDIVIDUAL ^ CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT Trnersl ^ LIMITED PARTNER(S) ^ GENERAL PARTNERS} ^ ATTORNEY-IN-FACT ^ TRUSTEE(S) ^ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR ^ OTHER: SIGNER tS REPRESENTING' NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN :NAMED ABOVE NUM9ER OFFAG~S DATE OF DOCUMENT a,~ ~A~ ~7~9 PAGE. 03 MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING: MAY 11 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. ITEM NUMBER: 6 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR COBBLESTONE VILLAGE AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER 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: COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FROM 4/13/99 SEE ATTACHED REVISED PLAT SEE ANNEXATION & ZONING PACKET SEE ANNEXATION & ZONING PACKET REVIEWED SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ANNEXATION & ZONING PACKET SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS ~v ,~' P~w~~~~ 1u"' OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ,~~ 5' lano ~~~ , l ~aC~ ~ ~ c1v `~' S~ake~ ~'~~-' l~ 1 a~nn,u~~ wi-l'~~,~~e, w~ 1 MERIDIAN PLANNII~& ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 1999 PAGE 70 MacCoy: All right, all in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: Thank you Becky for your lengthy discussion and our guidance and keeping your cool. The public is leaving, thank you all for showing up today and making your statement. ITEM NO. 11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST'-FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 8,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING BY BILL & PAT GEYER - NE CORNER OF WILSON 8~ LOCUST GROVE: MacCoy: This item is to be moved to the May 11. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue the public hearing for the request of conditional use permit for Bill & Pat Geyer to May 11. Barbeiro: I second the motion. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION 8~ ZONING w.OF 6.15 ACRES (FOR R-40 ZONING) FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue the public hearing for the request for annexation and zoning of 6.1 acres for the proposed Cobblestone Village to May 11. Barbeiro: I'll second the motion. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY, 96 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FOR PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. -SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: r ~ ~. r .,~ ~ • Mayor HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT i Council Mem rc CITY OF MERIDIAN (2os>as4-424 P UBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE ~ 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 53642~ECE~D (2oa> s8~-2u i RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887~~4""8' 13 PLANNING AND zON-NG KEITH BIRD MAR 1 0 1999 DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 City of Meridian Cite C?.erk Office 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: April 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 8, 1999 HEARING DATE: April 13, 1999 ..,~ FILE NUMBER: CUP-99-005 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR -A MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX BY: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MARK NELSON, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT -"'.POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER 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) IDAHO TRANSPORT T DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (A T N) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: _,, , , - •t ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~n~ ~$se~~[~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ L l ,, ~. -~z ~ _. _~ . ~ . . , m r .r n ~ ~; tS fs > t'- i^ ~ ~ L+ L ~ w , o ..:: fir . ._ ~ a a a~. ~: . - .. ,: _. o~N aD o0 0$ ~]i' 3 °m. as$ cn - ti ES O» tD co rn ~~ '~~ .: rn ~ - ~ ~ ~ , f3 ~ ~'^~Y~~~ ' N ~ ~~~ n ZN zcn ~ ~0~ ~ y ' ~O 9 ~ n 8 ~~~~~~~ ~~~ N x„9 ~ o~ y~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ,~ I ° ~~ `" m ~- y ~ ~ c ~D ~ _~ ~~~ m z N ir= 3 - ~ ~, m m it -•- -V ;D I~ ~m ~_ ~~ ;• m ~~ ~~ D Z r A 2 ~r ,' COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~ .~ Tamura ~~i~-~ ;~ FRANKLIN & LOCUS GROVE , ~ i O ~ ~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO , ~ ~ I i HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (?08) 884-126=t Council Members CITE OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (zoa> ss~-?z t t RON ANDERSON Phone -(208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ NING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD DEPARTMENT MAR 191999 (zo8, B~:I-55~~ City of Meridian City Clerk Office 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: April 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 8, 1999 HEARING DATE: April 13, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP-99-005 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX BY: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC, LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MARK NELSON, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT BYRON SMITH, P!Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION KEITH BORUP, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RON ANDERSON, C!C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) KEITH BIRD, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) GLENN BENTLEY, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL) SEWER DEPARTMENT IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) (~' !~ ~ ~ ~~ / / SE REMARKS POLICE DEPARTMENT : YOUR CONCI CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER L ~- Cv i~ E s 'GC, JLJ~ f 3~ /h CITY PLANNER F%R~ ~ ~ w'~k~-~~~ ~ 7I, ~,,. , „ t~ i ~ CR.v,-n I ,a_ ~t . 7~:.: 1 ~;.,G s c~.r ~ I.C. Iy.s..~~k' -fa ,Z~.v st•~ (,.L Fi2E s~P7.v/L,!~~ S~ sf~~ , L ~JoK..'7~ f~~rs-~ wt,r~.-F ~i~sz %~F~'r.k tau~lc~i~ n ~. E W r lt._ N.Qn~cQ ~ 13.s S~i^i„~Kf~o~ 1~Fwr~ f~ .w'L i ~, HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (2os) 8xa-:12t~a co~~~;- Members CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO ' BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642~,EcEI~D ('2os) ss~-22I I RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 pp 4 n PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD MAI{ 1 ~ ~J99 DEPARTMENT (208) 88=1-5533 City of ilZeridian City Cler. k Office 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: April 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 8, 1999 HEARING DATE: April 13, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP-99-005 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX BY: STAMAS CORPORAT{ON /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE- & FRANKLIN TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z MARK NELSON, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, 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} IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:- _F.x~~ GJ~-7~~ /~'J ,i~ 7~ ~j45~ ~b/7~~ N r/ a n _ rt-ir ~~ n JC"~ -~ SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell March 11, 1999 at .. . City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Councilmen: RECE~D MAR 1 8 1999 City of Meridian City Clerk C;iffice Enclosed for your review is general information relative to schools located in the proposed project area. If you have any questions, please contact Jim Carberry at 888- 6701. Reference:: Cobblestone Village: _,,~.:"~ Elementary School: Spalding Elementary School Middle School: Meridian Middle School High School: Meridian High School Comments and/or Recommendations: Spalding Elementary School is at capacity. Meridian Middle School is over capacity and will remain so until the fifth middle school comes on line in the fall of 2000. Meridian High School has space available. We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house twenty (20) elementary aged children, eighteen (18) middle school aged children, and thirteen (13) senior high aged students. Sincerely, _. ,. ., . Jim Carberry, Administrator of Support Services . BOARD OF TRUSTEES ` Rex Harrison • Wally Hedrick • Holl}~ Houfburg • David w}~nkoop • Steve Mann d~ CENTRAL CE L DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR ENT •• DISTRICT Environmental°Health Division H EA LT H °~ Return to: ^ Boise DEPARTMENT ^ Eagle Rezone # ^ Garden city Conditional Use # i~UGT/~ -~ct~i~ y /-~a~--i~~.~ ~o„lo%,~ -® Meridian ^ Kuna Preliminary /Final /Short Plat Cold /e sTV,, (~?`/~r~.~ ^ ACZ ^ I. We have No Objections to this Proposal. MAR 2 4 999 ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. CITY OF MERIDIAN ^ 3. ~: Specific knowledge as to the exaci 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. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water,availability. ® 8. 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 ® 9. 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 J~ central water ~(] 10. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ^ I I. Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ^ Waste Disposal ^ Injection Well rules. ^ Groundwater Protection ^ 12. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ 13., If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 14. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for'any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center 15. ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store ~/ S~P-~ ~~T~ ch -~~ d'C Co ~r++.c~ G~ R ~'~o.~ ,~~" Date: .`~ l L~ / p9 <S'T-~I'yj- Ir~2T..c~ !ncrn ~ ~i ~sjt Gar i . Reviewed By: ~ CDHD 10/91 rcE, rev. I/95 Review Sheet z CEN7RAl •• D157RIC7 ~'HEA~TH D E PA R TM E N 7 41AiIY afF(CE • i Ql iV..4R^rlSi f<GPIG ~! . • °CISE.10 93,'Gic&15 • (:C9) ~ i 5.3111 • = iX t:?.,?5~d Tu prerrrrt aru! lrra! rli.rrasr aad dlrability; tv prurnvte lrraltlry lifts•tylrs: arrd lu prolrct arrd prorrrvrr drr /rralt/r arrd grraliN ojorrr tnvirururrrrrt. STOR~tiItiVATER itil.~~tAGEI~IENT RECOI~IMENDATIOVS We recommend that stormwater be pretreated through a grassy s~vale 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) State Of Idaho Catalog Of stormwater Best Management Practices For Idaho Cities And- Counties. Prepared by the Idaho Division Of Environmental Quality, July 1997..' 2) Storm~vater Best Management Practices Guidebook. Prepared by City Of Boise Public .Works Department, January 1997. stormwater ;l93:d[y Servirt; Palley, Elmore, Boise, artd .4da Counties ACa / 8oize County Office ACc-WtC Sctellite Office Etmore County Offce ern Streer PL 52~ c Vctley Couny/ Ottice iC3 N. 1;r S,reer 1CT PL .~rm5rcng ?t. 1 ~Cb Rcceres 3iC5 . Meunrcin ~ICme. t0 836ai ?.O. cox Iee3 ?orsa. i0 33r0a Hecun: 127•ia99 En•,no 8orse.'G 3 ,a~ Pn. 33aJ....• Enviro. +?ectrn: 587•??.5 7 4tcCcn, i0. 83633 c3a-i I9d ?h . 6crray ?!cnr.:nc,: J2i •7aCC ~~: 33x•33552? fCmit•c yecttn: 537-.tr0 WIC:..3 i stG9 . ~,:,;~: 63e•Z t 7r1 imr..urotancrs: 327.7avC Sen:rr PlurnnCn: 327.7atrrJ - - ~ FA:C: 537•J52I ~~nC ]27.72? ,-. s _ '~-- ' ORGANIZED 1904 ' ~ . ~ • ~. 1 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 15 March 1999 Will Berg, City Clerk City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 RE: CUP 99-005 Dear Commissioners: REcE~D MAR 2 4 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 .- ~ ~ Use Permit for Multi-Family 96 Unit Apartment Complex The Nampa & Meridian Imgation'District's Fivemile Drain courses along the north boundary of the project. The right-of--way of the Fivemile Drain is 60 feet; 30 feet from the center each way. Idaho Code 42-1208--RIGHTS-OF WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. r The developer must contact John P. Anderson or Bill Henson at 466-0663 for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way~'oc~urs. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. Contact Donna Mpore at 466-7861 for further information. ~' , The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Imgation District. Sincerely, ~~G~" Bill Henson, Asst. Water Superintendent NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT BH:dln ~~ a Vie: BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 .- ti. • ~2a~r~ia & ~fe~udia6c ~Imugat~a~ Dw.~zict 1503 FfRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 Bryce Peterson, Representative of Stamas CorporatioNlonic Enterprises ~r'QpY 1664 S. Goldking Way Boise, ID 83709 RE: Land Use. Ghange Application for Cobblestone Village - caA- 99=oos Dear Mr. Peterson: ~;~ ,. I am sending you, as representative for Stamas Corporation and Ionic Enterprises, the enclosed Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above-referenced development. If-this development is under a "rush" to be' finalized, 1 would 1-ecommend that you submit a cashier's check, money order or cash as payment of the fees in order to~speed the process up. If you. submit a company ar personal check, it must clear the bank before processing the application. Should this development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that wilt be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, I strongly urge you to coordinate with John Anderson, Water Superintendent for- the Irrigation District, conceming the installation of the pressure- urban irrigation system. Enclosed is a questionnaire that must be filled out and returned in order to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the developer and the Irrigation District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban -irrigation system. If you have any questions conceming this matter, please feel free to call on me at the District's office of John Anderson at the District's shop. Sincerely. ' ~ ~~~ tt-~.ILA_ / t - Donna N. Moore, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer cc: File Each Director Water Superintendent Asst. Water Superintendent- Secretary/Treasurer Ionic EnterpriseslStamas Corporation-Paul Z.°Stamas City of Meridian , enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS 40.000 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 x 4_ ~ ~ ~ ~ s E ~~ ~ a m ~~ 1 ~ ~ m g D m a '~ ~ a m ~^ F~ „m -v +r D Z ~~ ~~ ~ ~ D ~ J ~ Z -d C 3 ~ o ~' Q ~ ~ -+ ~ _ o r rn / ~ (4`~ ~~~ r n -`--i ° cn ~D ~ z ~~ ~ i n O o D m ~ S '~ > ~ cn ~ o v ~ ~ C :7 _ D ~ o i'~i ~ ~ ~/ \ ~ ~ " C tNi~ _ r i Z m ~ m r- rn A'~ ~' COBBLESTONE VILLAGE ~I Tamura a j ~~ k ~ FRANKLIN 8 LOCUS GROVE I! 8 Associat¢s O I MERIDIAN, IDAHO _ __ JI ~ ~,__ ... (_' _ .., y ** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT *~ DATE TIME TOiFROM 04 05106 10 18 3368441 AS OF MAY 06 '99 10 28 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS G3--S 10'36" 016 070 OK Mayor HU9 OF 7RPASURE VgLLEY ROBERT D. CORRfE A Good Place to Livt ~o,~ it M m n CITY OF MERIDYAN CH.aRLES ROUNTREE 33 EA5T TDAHO GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 836~r2 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-+ta33 • Fsx (208) 887-x813 KEITH BIRD LEGAL DEPARTMENT (?OS) SSs•~t1G1 PUBLIC WORKS klU1LDiNG DEPARTMENT r_os) e3~-a~ I ) PLANNING AVD ZONINQ DEPARTMENT (~03)8S1-5533 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET FAX NUMBER:. 33~ •'~-~I ~ DATE: ~ ~p T0: TITLElDEPARTMENT: ~ CONFIDENTIAL: YES NO TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET):_ _ ) rJ FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN - FAX NUMBER; (208) 888-4218 r--~ . r D NAME: tl~ PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. TITLE/DEPARTMnENT: ~ COMMENTS: f ' ~il~l A 1~~VI X11 ~ ~c ~ `t'D ~11Ni 1 ~-- 117 IMF 0 f~ 0 ~ ~I AD~OUNTY HIGHWAY DP~TRICT ~,bb/~sfrMt l1,%~L ~- CC~ ~--~ .-~ 1 ~-' c~ :~--~ 1 ~-~--a CC3 ~- r~-----±1~ V Planning and Development Division Development Application Report MAZ99-OOSIMCUP99-005 s1w corner Locust Grove and Franklin 96-Unit Apartments The applicant is requesting conditional use approval to constrict a 96-unit apartment complex. The applicant is also requesting annexation and a rezone'from RT to R-40. The 6.15-acre site is located at the southwest corner of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. This development is estimated to generate 634 additional (10 existing) vehicle trips per day based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual. Roads impacted by this development: Locust Grove Road Franklin Road ACRD Commission Date -April 7, 1999 - 12:00 p.m. REcE'~'ED MAR 2 5 1999 City of Meridian City Clerk Office 4` ~~~~~ ~ ~ >s~xp ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ >>>> ' ~ ~ ~ j ~ i 3~ = Y I! ~ y i~i L ~ ' ~ ~ y m I~ n ~ p R p ~ ~ rn ~f~e~+> $ ~.....~'C ~~ N ~ a- Sv ~ ~ ~C ar ?+ , ix~E€a ~ > o. N Q > =y?~ ~ .rr ii s_a ~ ~ ~ y +~ > ~ n Z ~ ~ =~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ y m IN/f O ~ D ~ ~ ~ A ~ D ~ ~ x ~ n m N N C` N Z ~ ( r L/ m ;;t ,! ~~ ;m .~ e~ D 2 '~,/ D T~ L) T~ ~ ~~~ COBBLESTONE VILLAGE Tamura -+ ~~ ~ Ia ~ ~ ~ I ~ FRANKLW a LOCUS GROVE I ~ 8 Assodat¢s ~ ~~ I I ~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO ~~ ,_ lat^'"~ f- ., Facts and Findings: C~~..~ A. ~GeneralInformation CCU $"~ Owner -Monte and Beverly McClure ~~ Applicant - Stamas Corporation/Ionic Enterprise Inc. RT -Existing zoning R-40 -Requested zoning 1 .6.15 -Acres 96 -Proposed dwelling units 282 -Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) _ ~~ ~ West Ada -Impact Fee Benefit Zone. c. Western Cities -Impact Fee Assessment District r=--~ ~~ i.ocust CTrove Road Minor arterial with bike lane designation No traffic count available ~ °565-feet of frontage 50-feet existing right-of--'way (25-feet from centerline) 96-feet required right-of--way (48-feet from centerline) 4~ ~ Locust Grove Road is improved to 2-lanes without curb, gutter or sidewalk. There is no :--~ overpass for the roadway over I-84. Once an overpass is constructed, staff anticipates traffic volumes will increase significantly on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. Staff have considered the increase in traffic volumes with this application. Franklin Road ~ Minor arterial -with bike lane designation Traffic count of 8,804 on 10-21-97 475-feet of frontage ~,,,~~ 50-feet existing right-of--way (25-feet from centerline) ~ 96-feet required right-of--`way (48-feet from centerline) r--~ + Franklin Road is improved to 2-lanes without curb, gutter or sidewalk. This segment of Franklin Road is listed as unfunded in the District's Five Year Work Program. ~ B. Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file numbers) for details. d---~ ~~-.-~ C. On August 21, 1996, the Commission reviewed and approved MCU-18-96/MA-3-96, a CU conditional use application requesting approval to construct five industrial buildings (112,500- '"~ total square feet) within phase one of a four phase industrial complex. That 36-acre site ~~ 4 (approx.) is_located on the northwest corner of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. MAZ99005.CMM Page 2 • D. District policy states that direct access to arterials and collectors is normally restricted and that the developer shall try to use combined access points. In accordance with District policy the C+~',..~ applicant should be required to provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the ~j south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). The District intends to require a similar agreement of the owners of the parcel to the south if they are the subject of a future development application. E. The applicant is proposing to construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located ~ approximately 340-feet west of Locust Grove Road. This will align with an approved driveway on the north side of the road. That driveway was,. approved as a right-in/right-out driveway under MCU-18-96, a conditional use application for office/retail use. The subject applicant ~, should also be required to constrict the driveway proposed to be 340-feet from the intersection ~~-~ as aright-in/right-out driveway. The right-in and right-out traffic lanes should be constructed CCU 20-feet wide, and separated by an on-site channelizing island with a minimum area of 100- '`""~ square feet within the driveway throat. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and ~~ approved by Development Services staff. F. The applicant is proposing to construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located 1 approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. District policy will allow a full access driveway on a minor arterial if the driveway will have fewer than 1,000 VTD, there is no intervening driveway, and the driveway is on a minor arterial. The site's proposed driveway ~+ meets the criteria for a full access driveway. ~ G. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk should be located two feet within the new right-of--way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. ' H. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk should be located t~vo feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location 4~ and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. L. Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being "' tracked onto the roadway. In accordance with past action by the District the applicant should be required to pave the driveways their fiill width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot ~ radii abutting the existing roadway edge. J. As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, may be placed on future development of this parcel. ~~~-1 C~ K. The existing transportation system will be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic :-~ generated by this proposed development with the requirements outlined within this report. MAZ99005.CMM Page 3 ' The following requirements are provided as conditions for approval: . Site Specific Requirements: CCj 1. Dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will be compensated for all right-of--way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of--way from 1 available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section I S ofACHD Ordinance #188. d--~ ~ 2. Dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by ~ means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to r--~ issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner ~~ will be compensated for all right-of--way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of--way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the. owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD ~ Ordinance #188. 3. Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for ~~ access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits): 4. Construct aright-in/right-out driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west ~~'' of Locust Grove Road. The right-in and right-out traffic lanes shall be constructed 20-feet wide, and separated by an on-site channelizing island with.. a minimum area of 100-square feet within'the driveway throat. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. Y1 5. Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. ~~ ~ 6. Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Locust T~ Grove Road and, Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk should be located two feet within the new right-of--way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. ~ 8. Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. ~+--~ The sidewalk should be located two feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. C~ Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with,District staff. =~ 9. As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, .shall be placed on future .development of this parcel. MAZ99005.CMM Page 4 10. Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel C+ access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. ,C~` ~~ Standard Requirements: 1.. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made in writing to the ACHD Planning and Development Supervisor. T_ he re4r~est 1 a snecifically id n ifv each regnirPmPnt to ha rarnncirlarari !t • t -~ 11 ~ 1<< ~ ~ ~ d written ex inn of why such a requirement ~x,n„lrl rPs 1 in a bstan ial hardshi - - - ~ p °r inequity. The wri n reauest shall be submi d o he Dis ri no la r han •00 a m on th day scheduled for _~__, ACHD Commission actin„ Those items shall be rescheduled for discussion with the ~-H Commission on the next available meeting agenda. C~ :~--~ Requests submitted to the District after 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled for Commission action do not provide sufficient time for District staff to remove the item from the consent agenda and report to the Commission regarding the requested modification, variance or waiver. Those items will be acted on by the Commission unless removed from the agenda by the Commission. 2. After ACHD Commission action, any request for reconsideration of the Commission's action shall be made in writing to the Planning and Development Supervisor within six days of the ~~ action and shall include a minimum fee of $110.00. Th request for reconsideration shall ~ specifically identify each requirement to be recon idered and ir;clude written do nn,entatinn of c~ ata t at wa no availabl o th ('ommission a the time of it original d isinn The request for reconsideration will be heard by the District Commission at the next regular meeting of the Commission. If the Commission agrees to reconsider the action, the applicant will be notified of the date and time of the Commission meeting at which the reconsideration will be heard. ' 3. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #188, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. ~~ ~ 4. All design and constriction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District '---~+ Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services ~~ procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. 5. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit 1 (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 6. Constriction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable C~ requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. CL 7. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. MAZ99005.CMM Page 5 t ~ • 8. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this ~~ application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, ~ or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in ~~ interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless awaiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. ~ Conclusion of Law: 1. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an ;~, undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity ~-1~--~ impacted by the proposed development. C~ ~- Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Development Division at 387-6170. ,,~-~--~ CCU :-~ ~~ 1 ~"'}~ CCU ~r--~ 1 L{~ CU ~--=~ , MAZ99005.CMM Page 6 +, .,. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING: APRIL 13 1999 APPLICANT: STAMAS CORPORATION /IONIC ENTERPRISE INC. ITEM NUMBER: 13 REQUEST: CONDRIONAL U$E,PERMIT FOR AMULTI-FAMILY 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX FOR AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER 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: COMMENTS SEE ATTACMED LETTER ~~ ~a~ fi~ ~ P~r~ C~' ~' OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 01/10/1995 23:38 2083238803 _ HOMCO DEVELOPMENT CO April 9, 1999 REcE~~D APR - 9 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Will Berg Jr. Meridian City Clerk 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Cobblestone Project Stamas /Ionic Corp. Dear Mr. Berg, PAGE 02 In view of the ACRD additional right of way which may effect the current plan and number of units that can fit on the property, it is necessary to ask for a continuance of the above property until the May 11~' hearing with Planning & Zoning. Thank you for your consideration. Sinc a m ~i Bryc eterson APR 09 ' 99 10 45 2083238803 PAGE.02 • • April 9, 1999 Will Berg 7r. Meridian City Clerk 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Cobblestone Project Stamas /Ionic Corp. Deaz Mr. Berg, RECE~D APR - ~ 159Q CITY OF 1~IERIDL~v In view of the ACHD additional right of way which may effect the current plan and number of units that can fit on the property, it is necessary to ask for a continuance of the above property until the May 11~' hearing with Planning & Zoning. Thank you for your consideration. Sinc ~ SKr Bryc eterson APR 09 '99 10 45 2083238803 PAGE. 02 ~ ~ Apri19, 1999 Will Berg Jr. Meridian City Clerk 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Cobblestone Project Stamas /Ionic Corp. Dear Mr. Berg, A~~ 1 2 1999 CITY OF i~IERI~L~~ In view of the ACRD additional right of way which may effect the current plan and number of units that can fit on the property, it is necessary to ask for a continuance of the above property until the May 11 `" hearing with Planning & Zoning. Thank you for your consideration. Sinc G? .f js~~ Bryc Peterson OFFI IA c ~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY . COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Cleric JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer A GOOd PIaCe t0 LlVe CITY ~ OF MERIDIAN CHARLES M. ROUNTREE GRON ANDERSONY BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN r. sHAwcROFr, waste water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO KEITH BIRD TOM KUNTZ, Parks ~ Rec. Director DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 P & Z COMMISSION SHARt L. STILES, P & Z Administrator Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief Legal Depattment (208) 884-4264 MALCOLM MACCOY W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief KEITH BORUP WAYNE G. CROOKSTON JR., A o ey MEMORAIvDU~: ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor BYRON SMITH Aprdr~'RI>;,NFIFlSON l1 yyYY77 To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator Re: Request for Annexation and Zoning to R-40 with a Conditional Use Permit fora 96- Unit Apartment Complex on 5.03 Net Acres +/- by Stamas Corporation/Ionic Enterprise, Inc. -Proposed Cobblestone Village We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the~Meridian City Council: ANNEXATION AND ZONING COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with the application for annexation appears to meet the requirements of the City of Meridian, and State Tax Commission. 2. The property included in this application is located in an area designated as Mixed/Planned Use Development in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Located at the southwest corner of Franklin and Locust Grove, it borders the eastern boundary of Medimont (Stonebridge) Subdivision, an industrial development. The 20-foot-wide planting strip shown on the site plan is part of that subdivision. To the north, across Franklin Road, is vacant ground currently zoned C-G; a residential property zoned RT in Ada County is adjacent to the southern boundary; and RT property is located east of Locust Grove Road. CONDITIONAL USE COMMENTS As this property is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a mixed planned use development area, a requirement of the annexation is that uses be developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use permit process. 2. As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/conditions. 3. No utilities are shown on the site plan with details to indicate how the individual buildings will be served. CUP-99-005 CobblestoneVillage.CUP P&Z Cotnmission/Mayor & Council Apri19, 1999 Page 2 4. Assessment fees for water and sewer service aze determined during the building plan review process. 5. No signage details were submitted. 6. No screened trash enclosures aze shown on the site plan. 7. Although the application mentions a tot lot and swimming pool are to be provided, these features are not shown on the plan. 8. For the number of pazking spaces shown, a minimum of six handicapped accessible spaces would be required, with a minimum of one being van accessible (16-foot-wide). Apartments may require that each building have an accessible space and ramp. 9. No drainage azeas are shown within the development. State agencies recommend that drainage swales be used for pretreatment of stormwater. 10. Ada County Highway District's preliminary comments require that the entrance on Franklin Road besigned as aright-in/right-out only access. ACHD's comments also state that Franklin Road, designated as a principal arterial, requires a dedication of 60 feet from the centerline. As the plan reflects only a 48-foot dedication from centerline, significant redesign may be required. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 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. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. 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. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 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. 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. CobblestoneVillage.CUP P&Z CommissionlMayor & Council April 9, 1999 Page 3 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer{Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to 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. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 8. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 9. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS 1. Provide revised site plan detailing all existing and proposed utilities for review by the Meridian Public Works Department. Designer is to coordinate sizing and routing of sanitary sewer and water within the development with the Public Works Department. 2. Provide the Public Works Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. Flow and pressure from the existing mains should be monitored with the Meridian Water Department to determine whether adequate fire protection exists. 3. Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. In addition to these assessments, "Late Comers" fees may also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing mains to their current points. 4. A total of 57 three-inch caliper trees aze required for the project. Due to the issues of entryway corridors and buffering of adajacent properties, trees in addition to the required three-inch caliper trees should be provided. Landscape buffers on Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road need to show detailed vegetation and tree plantings. Sodding only of these areas is not acceptable. Provide detailed landscape plan for review and approval. 5. Particular attention will need to be paid to lighting plans to ensure adjacent residential properties and the traveling public is not impacted by glare, as determined by the City of Meridian. CUP-99-0OS CobblestoneVillage.CUP P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council Apri19, 1999 Page 4 6. Signage should be limited to one low-profile monument type sign near the intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road. Detailed signage plans will be subject to design review. 7. Construct five-foot-wide sidewalks along the entire frontages of Franklin Road and Locust Grove. Revise site plan to show screened trash enclosures. Coordinate locations and construction requirements with Meridian Sanitary Service, Inc., and provide a letter of approval from their office prior to applying for building permits. 9. Provide handicapped accessible parking spaces in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. All building and parking lot construction needs to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 10. The parking areas shown do not meet minimum Ordinance requirements of a 9'x19' stall with a minimum 25' driveway aisle. The parking dimensions shown could be acceptable given consideration for bumper overhang; however, the adjacent wallcways should either be divided by a planting strip or increased in width to a minimum of seven feet wide. 11. Drainage swales should not be within the landscape setbacks along Franklin and Locust Grove, as they do not provide buffering. 12. Provide a landscaped setback of 35 feet be.~ required right-of--way along Franklin Road. 13. No City water will be allowed for landscape irrigation. 14. Six-foot-high, permanent perimeter fencing and buffering shall be provided adjacent to the existing residential use. 15. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. The development agreement should incorporate a limitation on maximum density, buffering details, entryway corridor requirements, etc. 16. Five Mile Creek is designated as multiple use pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Fish, wildlife and vegetation species and habitat should be protected and maintained, provided it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian. Consideration should be made for the land uses in these areas to minimi?P the risk of pollution and to preserve the natural beauty of Five Mile Creek. CUP-99-0OS CobblestoneVillage.CUP f~ P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council Apri19, 1999 Page 5 t 17. Due to the topography of this site, the parcel currently accepts drainage water from the residential properties to the south. This drainage will need to be accommodated for in'the T ~ development of the property. 18. Staff reserves the right to prepare additional comments when a revised site plan has been received, and recommends this item be continued until May 11, 1999. t ` 1 r CUP-99-005 CobblestoneVillage.CUP P- e • ** TX STATUS REPORT ** AS OF APR 09 '99 10 56 PAGE. 01 PUBLIC FORKS ^ - ~ ^ ~ ~ DATE TIME 200 E. Carttan, Ste. 201 Meriden, ID 836x2 Phone: 8845533 Fax 887-1297 ^~ TOiFROM ti a ~ ~,~ . ~ ~~ ~~2~v ~~~~ ~y2~ `~ 2 v ~2 ~' '~ J ~ v ~~~a ~ kQ"~ e~~~ Fa~c To: O,pu Ta.rnura, MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD#2 STATUS From Fax: 336 - ~'1~-1 I ~Y gate: y - 9 - 9 °1 Phony: Pages: 6 (Inducting cover sheet) Re: Co6.~.~P~S-Fnne Vill Q C,ommQntSCC: ^ Urgent I$f Fvr Review ^ Please Conre®nt ^ Please RePIY ^ Please Recyde •Cornments: ** TX STATUS REI~ORT ** • RS OF APR 09 '99 11 23 PAGE.01 PUBLIC WORKS DATE TIME TOiFROM 30 04109 11 21 3368441 MODE MINiSEC PGS CMDiS STRTUS G3--S 02'00" 003 224 OK P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council Apri19, 1999 Page 3 5. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 6. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section l 1-2-4I4.D.3. ~• All sgnage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs wfll be permitted. 8. Provide five-foot-wide sidewallcs in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 9. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS 1. Provide revised site plan detailing all existing and proposed utilities for review by the Meridian Public Works Department. Designer is to coordinate siaong and routing of sanitary sewer and water within the development with the Public Works Department. 2. Provide the Public Works Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements-for the proposed site. Flow and pressure from the existing maims should be monitored with the Meridian Water Department to determine whether adequate fire protection exists. 3• Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agieement with the In addition to these assessments, "Late Comers" fees may also be c ed ~ of Meridian. to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing mains to their~curren~t point ~~1 4. A total of 57 three-inch caliper trees aze required fior the project. Due to the issues of entryway corridors and buffering of adajacent properties, trees in addition to the required three-inch caliper trees should be provided. Landscape buffers on Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road need to show detailed vegetation and tree plantings. Sodding only of these areas is not acceptable. Provide detailed landscape plan for review and approval. 5. Particular attention will need to be paid to lighting plans to ensure adjacent residential properties and the traveling public is not impacted by glare, as determined by the City of Meridian cup-~.oos CobbiattoneV illugaC UP C ~dcc ~ou~ctr~~ic~~cva~ oC.Ji~tN~ct Sherry R. Huber, President 318 East 37th Streets Judy Peavey-Derr, Vice President Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 Marlyss Meyer Routson, Secretary Phone (208) 387-6100 Dave Bivens, Commissioner Fax (208) 387-6391 Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner a-mail: tellus achd.ada.id.us April 8, 1999 TO: Stamas Corporation One Sierra Gate Plaza 358 Roseville, CA 9678 FROM: Steve Arnold, Senior Analyst Planning & Development Division SUBJECT: Cobblestone Village/MAZ99-005/MCUP99-005 Multi family development ~{~~ `~`l2 ~ ~1~ J ~ ~~~ a,~.~ CI'TI' DF r~~ I~II~~ Your application for the above referenced project was acted on by the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District on April 7, 1999. 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 387-6170. L' ~~ ' ~'r sA ~~ cc: Plan&Dev Svcs-chron/file John Edney Chuck Rinaldi City of Meridian Tamura and Associates ADA~OUNTY HIGHWA Y DI RIOT Planning and Development Division Development Application Report MAZ99-005/MCUP99-005 s/w corner Locust Grove and Franklin 96-Unit Apartments The applicant is requesting conditional use approval to constrict a 96-unit apartment complex. The applicant is also requesting annexation and a rezone from RT to R-40. The 6.15-acre site is located at the southwest corner of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. -This development is estimated to generate 634 additional (10 existing) vehicle trips per day based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual. Roads impacted by this development: Locust Grove Road Franklin Road ACHD Commission Date -April 7, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. '~~ i ,; .,t `~ Q T 0~ d ~ ~~~ ~ ~ Y f~- ~ i ~~ _- sarooossy g ~ D1~1WDj ~~ -~ t a ~~ ~~ ~> ~. °~~ OHb'p! ~1d1011i3W ~ I 3/10li~J SfIOOI Y Nf1~INb~ ~ i ~ 3Jb'TII/1 fiNOlS3'1fiS0~ ;! W. ~I Q _! W .i o = W \ / ~ O ~ Q I W H ~ _ < 0 3 h < ZI U -~ ~ u C y .. <V C 2. O` e~p 2! ~_ _~~ L- _ ~ ~7: °'.' y ~~~~ I. '" r V7 biS 1~.~... :9~ W J mI ~ ~ ~ 0 I ~ ~ C .- ~ ~ -~~~ O III `~ r ~ ~ iI I_ I8 1~a ¢ III ~3 Z a a ~= N~ r i i i i ¢ ~ ~ i ' _' ' ~ 4 ii C ~ < 4 $ L W ~ ~~Fl313 S ,bi3 ~~ ~ i ~ `f0~ a1 ;::7e e ¢ ~~ S Y d it6lt} I t~L J g !tl~~i ' ~ 33 ~~ ~3 Facts and Findings: A. General Information Owner - Nlonte and Beverly McClure Applicant - Stamas Corporation/Ionic Enterprise Inc. RT -Existing zoning j R-40 -Requested zoning 6.1 ~ -Acres 96 -Proposed dwelling units 282 -Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada -Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities -Impact Fee Assessment District I.o .i~st C'rov Road Minor arterial with bike lane designation No traffic count available y 565-feet of frontage 50-feet existing right-of--way (25-feet from centerline) 96-feet required right-of--way (48-feet from centerline) Locust Grove Road is improved to 2-lanes without curb, gutter or sidewalk. There is no overpass for the roadway over I-84. Once an overpass is constructed, staff anticipates traffic volumes will increase significantly on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. Staff have considered .the increase in traffic volumes with this application. Franklin Road Principal arterial Traffic count of 8,804 on 10-21-97 475-feet of frontage 50-feet existing right-of--way (25-feet .from centerline) 120-feet required right-of--way (60-feet from centerline) Franklin Road is improved to 2-lanes without curb, gutter or sidewalk. This segment of Franklin Road is listed as unfunded in the District's Five Year Work Program. B. Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file numbers) for details. C. On August 21, 1996, the Commissiori reviewed and approved MCU-18-96/MA-3-96, a conditional use application requesting approval to construct five industrial buildings (112,500- total square feet) within phase one of afour-phase industrial complex. That 36-acre site is located at the northwest corner of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. MAZ9900~.C~t~i Page 2 D. District policy states that direct access to arterials and collectors is normally restricted and that the developer shall try to use combined access points. In accordance with District policy the applicant should be required to provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). The District intends to require a similar agreement of the owners of the parcel to the south if they are the subject of a future development application. E. The applicant is proposing to constrict a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west of Locust Grove Road. This will align with an approved driveway on the north side of the road. That driveway was approved as a right-in/right-out driveway tinder MCU-18-96, a conditional use application for office/retail rise. The subject applicant should also be required to construct the driveway proposed to be 340-feet from the intersection as a right-in/right-out driveway. Staff would normally recommend a median in the center of the roadway to restrict the left turns in and out of the driveway. However, this would not be desirable at this time because it could cause traffic problems on Franklin Road. The driveway should be signed to prohibit left turns. The District will construct a median in Franklin Road when the Locust Grove Road intersection is reconstructed. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. F. The applicant is proposing to construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. District policy will allow a full access driveway on a minor arterial if the driveway will have fewer than 1,000 VTD, there is no intervening driveway, and the driveway is on a minor arterial. The site's proposed driveway meets the criteria for a full access driveway. G. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk should be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. H. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk should be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. I. Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being tracked onto the roadway. In accordance with past action by the District the applicant should be required to pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. J. As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, may be placed on future development of this parcel. K. The existing transportation system will be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by this proposed development with the requirements outlined within this report. MAZ99005.CMM Page 3 The following requirements are provided as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-~vay dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to 6reakin~ ground, in accordance with Section 1 ~ of ACHD Ordinance X188. y 2. Dedicate 60-feet o'f right-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-~vay dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD Ordinance #188. 3. Provide a recorded cross access easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). 4. Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Franklin Road, located approximately 340-feet west of Locust Grove Road. The driveway shall be signed to control left turns. The design and sight distance should be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff. 5. Construct a 24-foot wide driveway on Locust Grove Road, located approximately 315-feet south of Franklin Road. 6. Pave the driveways their full width and at least 30-feet beyond the edge of a pavement of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 7. Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Franklin Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. Constrict a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk on Locust Grove Road abutting the site. The sidewalk shall be located 2-feet within the new right-of--way of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the location, elevation and grade of the sidewalk with District staff. 9. As required by District policy, restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. MAZ9900~.C~t~I Page d 10. Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road or Franklin Road is prohibited. Standard Requirements: A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made in writing to the ACRD Planning and Development Supervisor. The request chap snecificall, id n i y each requirement to be recc~ncid .red and inchrde a written explanation of w y such a requirement would result in a substantial hardship or ine4~ity. The written r~~uect shall be submitted to the District no later than 9.00 a m on the day scheduled for ACHD Commission action. Those items shall be rescheduled for discussion with the Commission on the-next available meeting agenda. Requests submitted to the District after 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled for Commission action do not provide sufficient time for District staff to remove the item from the consent agenda and report to the Commission regarding the requested modification, variance or waiver. Those" items will be acted on by the Commission unless removed from the agenda by the Commission. 2. -After ACRD Commission action, any request for reconsideration ofthe Commission's action shall be made in writing to the Planning and Development Supervisor within six days of the action and shall include a minimum fee of $110.00. The re~~PCr for reconsideration shall ~necifically id n ify each requirement to be re~~nc;dPrPd and ;nclnde written documentation of data that was not available to the Commission at the time of its original decision. The request for reconsideration will be heard by the District Commission at the next regular meeting of the Commission. If the Commission agrees to reconsider the action, the applicant will be notified of the date and time of the Commission meeting at which the reconsideration will be heard. 3. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #188, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 4. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 6. Constriction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. MAZ99005.CMM Page ~ 8. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the sub~ect application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinan~ sthl laps or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its sticcessorps in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the sub~ect property unless a waiver'variance of said requirements or other legal relief is Granted ptirstiant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. y Conclusion of La~v: ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not lace a undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinit n impacted by the proposed development. y Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Division at 387-6170. ~ Development l~IAZ9900~.CM~~( Page 6 ~: . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR COBBLESTONE VILLAGE JULY 1999 ~ V•8 ~ _/ Prepared By J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners 250 South Beechwood, Suite 20I Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 ~~C~~~~~ AtSG ~ 5 ~9~~, City of Meridian _ J~ity Clerk office t 4 ~' ~ ~ .. ' Y TRAFFIC IMPACT•~ STUDY , ~. . FOR COBBLESTONE PILLAGE ;. ~ .. ~~ - r. , i .. -_ , -. .., .~ ..~ .. ._ .. - .. . - ~ .. .N • ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ , , . JULY ~1 ~ ~ `,$ ~; t ~ ~ } ~ ' -;.: ~• ;p ;~, o .' ~~ r ~' '=+~ t - - Z.. ~ r_ry~ x~. ,~'~ r '~ ~ k;t ~~-:~f il~~r 1f lax x .s ? n Y.t ~yiS,~_ a ~_ _t- n^ .. r` ~ ~ .' ~r~ •,;,,,y.. / ~ ~ r r ~~~ _. Y tF~ t`> 4 .v yr5 ''f~l+._ir4 i .r '2'.• ~`, j.1 t' { - ' ~ .. - `'~ { .~ r, ~~~M~ rti ! fin, - .~_'i blrbi ~ Y tok 4~ t, . t '. 4 ~i L *~ 4' 1 4 y. ., _ !~' ~ ~ • t of t ~~ ~..:5- 1,°~ 4 ' t _i `! .. .. i ~ . _ _ • •, Prepared By,~:. ~ -~ ,~µ ;, . _•. }_ J-U-B~ ENGINEERS, Inca> ' _~ - .. Engineers .Surveyors'.: Planners ~250South Beechwood,. Suite 201 ~ ~ " - ~ ; , - 'Boise,`- Itlaho x83709=0944 • ., r. `: u . ~ _~ ~~ AEG ~ ~ 1~9~ , -- _ ~ ~Lity of~bgeridia~. • F, ~ .. ity Clerk ~3ffice , . _. ~ 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR COBBLESTONE VILLAGE JULY 1999 ~- ~ C ~~~~ ,~~,~/~/99 ~, ~ri~~rF QP t~P4~~ ~~:~ ~l. tty~~ Prepared by J- U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Engineers Sur ~ eyors Planners 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 e # ~e EyO ~, _n r A ~~ ;-, `~ 1i ~~~ ~l ~~ ,p t 1_ '~ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. COBBLESTONE VILLAGE Traffic Impact Study July 6, 1999 j , Stud yObjectives -~ , - ~ .- _ - The objective-of this study is to-determine the overall transportation iMpacfof the proposed Cobblestone Village apartment complex to the intersection of °Franklin Road -and South Locust Grove Road, southeast of Meridian, Idaho. The study. wilt^use counts of the existing traffic,,the anticipated growth, and~the+traffic generated by the proposed development to examine a horizon year after full build--out of the apartment complex. ~ ~ , ~' ~~ i I .+ks ~ I • Site Visits. -Visits were -made to the proposed development site to review anticipated. traffic access locations-.and observe traffic movement at the major ; roadways surrounding the site. • Turning Movement Counts. The turning movements,at{the intersection were ~j counted at the morning and evening peak-hours. ~ , ' t Methodology • Traffic Growth Rate. The Ada Planning Association was consulted for a growth rate in the Meridian area. • Trip Generation. The INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS (ITE) Tr~i Generation Manual, 6th Edition, was used to determine the amount of traffic' generated by this development. • Trip Distribution. The distribution of traffic from and to the development was determined by the engineer using his judgement and the behavior of existing traffic patterns. ` • Average Daily Traffic Counts. Traffic counters were placed on South Locust Grove. Road and Franklin. Road from June 29, 1999, to July 1, 1999, to collect average daily. traffic counts for both roadways. Existing counts collected in 1997 were acquired„from the Ada County Highway District. ~ ~ :. ~ • -Level of Service. The Level of Service (LOS) of the intersection was determined ~ ~ using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Special Report 209, by the ~ f Transportation Research Board with its associated software. Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 4 r w` E FRANKI IA1 Qr-~nrti • CQBBLI=STONE VI LLACE SITE PLAN N. T. S'. 1 1 u 1 1 ~~~ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. n - Proposed Development The developer plans to build an apartment complex at the southeast corner of the Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road intersection. Eighty-four apartment units are planned (54 two-bedroom, 24 three-bedroom, 8four-bedroom). A preliminary site plan can be found on the previous page. There are two intended accesses for this development. One on Franklin Road is a partial access; only right-in and right-out movements are allowed. It is approximately 400 feet west of the South Locust Grove intersection. The other access is a full access on South Locust Grove Road. It is located approximately 400 feet south of the intersection with Franklin Road. Sight distances are adequate from both proposed intersection locations. Existing Roadways Franklin Road is classified as an arterial. It is currently atwo-lane rural roadway with 28 feet of asphalt pavement and gravel shoulders. The average daily. traffic count, taken by ACRD in October 1997 had 8,804 vehicles west of Locust Grove Road and 11,313 vehicles,east of Locust Grove Road. The posted speed is 35 mph. Much of the traffic on Franklin Road seems to be east-west commuter traffic between Meridian and Boise. ``' ~: Cobblestone Vi(loge Traffic Impact Study Page 3 Franklin Road, west of Locust Grove looking east. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. South Locust Grove Road intersects with Franklin Road to form a tee intersection approximately one mile east of Meridian Road. South Locust Grove Road is classified as a local roadway. It is a "dead end" street and does not continue over the freeway (I-84), south of Franklin Road. South Locust Grove Road is also atwo-lane rural roadway. It has an asphalt pavement width of 21 feet. The shoulder areas are minimal, if non-existent. The speed limit is posted at 35 mph. Pavement radii at the intersection are approximately 30 feet on the east side and 20 feet on the west side. Locust Grove Road is~ stop-controlled at Franklin Road. Nola Street is also a tee intersection on the north side of Franklin Road. Nola Street (shown on some maps as Locust Grove Road) seems to garner more traffic than South.. Locust Grove Road. It intersects with Franklin Road approximately 660 feet east of the South Locust Grove intersection. The=eventual .plan for South Locust Grove Road is to be a continuous collector. It will connect to Locust Grove Road, south of the freeway, and also to Locust Grove Road at Fairview Avenue. Traffic Counts Franklin Road was last counted for average daily traffic (ADT) on October 21, 1997. At that time, the counts showed 8,804 vehicles per day, west of South Locust Grove Road, and 11,313 vehicles per day east of Locust Grove Road. Locust Grove Road has not been previously counted, to our knowledge. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. counted vehicles for two days -June 29'and June 30, 1999. One counter was set on South Locust Grove road, approximately 150 feet south of the Franklin intersection. The other counter was set on Franklin Road, approximately 150 feet east of South Locust Grove Road. The average daily traffic count on South Locust Grove .Road was 1,075 vehicles per day. The ADT on Franklin Road was 11,060. Manual turning movement counts were also taken by J-U-B ENGINEERS at the intersection for both the morning and evening peak-hours. The results of those counts are shown below: Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 4 South Locust Grove Road, looking north. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 e ~, ~ _ ~, '€. TURNING M0IAEMENT COUNTS- # '' JUNE ~0. 1999 € a ~~ AM (7:3o-sso~ FRANKLIN ROAD 343 air-- • P M ~s:oo-s:oo~ r_~ ~ O ~ ~ V W oa ~o .~ ~o N. r FRANKLIN ROAD 415 521 ~ ~ 32 ,~~ 18 8 14 ~ . Q O OC y W O a ~ O ~ (%! , ~ __ RBYEYOR3 • PLANNERS 8 • ~; J-U•B ENGINEERS, Inc. ° ~, x k: Existing Level of Service A°Level of Service (LOS) was calculated using the software from the Highway Capacity Manual and the turning movement counts. During the'morning peak-hour, between 7:30 and 8:30 am, the Level of Service was LOS "B" for the minor approach. The left turns from Locust Grove Road onto Franklin Road had to wait an average of 8.8 seconds. The afternoon peak-hour had a bit higher traffic volumes on Franklin Road. This resulted in a longer delay for motorists on the northbound approach to the ,. - intersection, Locust Grove Road. The delay during the afternoon peak-hour (5:00 to 6:00) was 10.b seconds, which equates to LOS "C": Trip Generation } F F i, The amount of traffic generated by this proposed development was determined by a study of hundreds of apartment complexes. -The traffic generated is dependent upon the number of apartment units. For an 84-unit apartment complex, 64 trip-ends are anticipated during the afternoon peak-hour. Of these trip-ends, 43 enter the complex and 21 depart from the apartments. During the morning peak-hour, 7 vehicles enter and 38 exit the apartments..:, Trip Distribution The traffic generated by these apartments must enter and exit from the two adjacent a roadways, Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road. As mentioned earlier, there are proposed two accesses to the property, one access on Locust Grove Road, and the other on Franklin Road, which is a "right-in, right-out" access. The PM traffic was distributed onto the existing roadways in the following manner: Franklin Road Access: 12 $ enter 5 exit Locust Grove Road Access: 31 enter (28 turn left from WB Franklin Rd. ) 16 exit (7 turn left, 9 turn right on Franklin) This traffic generated by the proposed apartments is added to the existing traffic and the expected growth in traffic until the horizon year. The horizon year for this study is at full build-out and full occupancy of the development. in this situation, we have used the year 2001 as the horizon year. The anticipated traffic growth in the Meridian area is 6.25% per year. This is a very high growth rate, but it is the growth rate used for the years between 2000 and 2005, according to the Ada Planning Association. i~ Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study ~ ~. 16 25 ~ O ~~ ~~ a> ~~ ^ Page 7 y F. w r IRVWORC . AfwuYCOa t F ~~ PROJECTED TURNING- VOLl~MES 2001 AM FRANKLIN ROAD 3s7 351 13 7 'I I ~N. ~: ~& f <° ~L ~° ~ ~C' ~~ v J O vi °C c~ PM FRANKLIN ROAD ~~~~ 468 588 ®~~ 64 23 16 25 O ~ O ~ oC v W ~ O SURVEYORS • PLV7NERS 3'. :. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ~ Existing Level of Service E' l A Level of Service (LOS) was calculated using the software from the Highway Capacity Manual and the turning movement counts. ' During the morning peak-hour, between 7:30 and 8:30 am, the Level of Service was LOS "B" for the minor approach. The left turns from Locust Grove Road onto Franklin ' Road had to wait an average of 8.8 seconds. The afternoon peak=hour had a bit higher traffic volumes on FranklirrRoad. This resulted in a longer delay for motorists on the northbound approach to the ' intersection, Locust Grove Road. The delay during the afternoon peak-hour (5:00 to 6:00) was 10.6 seconds, which equates to LOS "C". ' Trip Generation The amount of traffic generated by this proposed development was determined by a study of hundreds of apartment complexes. The traffic generated is dependent upon the number of apartment units. For an 84-unit apartment complex, 64 trip-ends are anticipated during the afternoon peak-hour. Of these trip-ends, 43 enter the complex and 21 depart from the apartments. During the morning peak-hour, 7 vehicles enter and 38 exit the apartments. `.J Trip Distribution The traffic generated by these apartments must enter and exit from the two adjacent roadways, Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road. As mentioned earlier, there are proposed two accesses to the property, 'one access on Locust Grove Road, and the other on Franklin Road, which is a "right-in, right-out" access. The PM traffic was distributed onto the existing roadways in the following manner: Franklin Road Access: 12 enter 5 exi t Locust Grove Road Access: 31 enter (28 turn left from WB Franklin Rd. ) 16 exit (7 turn left, 9 turn right on Franklin) This traffic generated 6y the proposed apartments is added to the existing traffic and the expected growth in traffic until the horizon year. The horizon year for this study is at full build-out and full occupancy of the development. In this situation, we have used the year 2001 as the horizon year. The anticipated traffic growth in the Meridian area is 6.25% per year. This is a very high growth rate, but it is the growth rate used for the years between 2000 and 2005, according to the Ada Planning Association. Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 7 ~, ~. r TRIP DISTRIBUTIQIV (AM) •~ k B. 14 4 FRANKLIN ROAD 14 1 10 1 ~ 1 OG W O n O 1~~~~ 9 ~~ ~. I .. /V. ~L ~~ ,: r~ ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS t 1 1 gx a a F a e ~ TRIP DISTRIBUTION (PM) r M. .f FRANKLIN ROAD S 1Z ~:~ 7 28 3 9 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE SITE (4s ~rrreR. s~ exrr- 11 ~ ~~ a W -0 K F ~~ 3 a~~ / N. F 1( ~ 6 ~~/ ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PIANHERS 1 [I C 1 n ~` ~ .~ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. s ~; . ~ The AM traffic was distributed onto Franklin Road as follows: ~ ~; ~. Franklin Road Access: 2 enter i, 4 exit m Locust Grove Road Access: 4 enter (all turn left from WB Franklin Rd. ) 34 exit (14 turn left, 20 turn right on Franklin) The morning traffic has higher volumes for the- northbound approach to the intersection. Commonly, the afternoon peak-hour traffic volumes are higher. In this case, the traffic volumes are heavier in the afternoon, but more vehicles are`entering the development than departing. The morning finds much more traffic departing from the site. Future Level of Service The additional traffic generated by the community's growth and the proposed collection of apartment buildings is shown on the revised peak-hour projections. The LOS was recalculated using the existing traffic, plus the traffic. generated by growth and the proposed development.. The resulting LOS follows: The morning level of service at this intersection under the projected conditions is LOS "C" with an average delay of 14.2 seconds per vehicle for the northbound approach. The level of service during the afternoon peak-hour is projected to be LOS "C" also. The average delay per vehicle is 17.6 seconds for the northbound approach. The westbound left-turn for motorists from Franklin Road onto South Locust Grove Road has a delay of 5.5 seconds, which is LOS "B". This was the only condition investigated where any movement on Franklin Road was not an LOS "A". The level of Service for all movements within this intersection did not deteriorate below a LOS "C". Cobblestone Vi(loge Traffic Impact Study Page 10 P~ ~_ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ~, t l Recommendations - ti Franklin Road -has considerable traffic for atwo-lane facility. The PM peak-hour is the most demanding time of the day for traffic at this 1 intersection. A left-turn bay for westbound traffic is worth consideration. J-U-B has investigated the addition of a westbound left-turn bay for traffic on Franklin Road. The Highway Capacity Manual shows no appreciable delay, whether the ' left-turn bay is operable or not. Intuitively, separation of the left-turn traffic from `the total traffic flow will improve the delay for the remaining through vehicles. Average delay per vehicle wishing to turn left was 5.5 seconds. The critical gap is ' 5 seconds and the probability of a queue free state was 0.92. Basically, the Highway Capacity Manual is stating that, under these conditions, the delay is not excessive and a separate left-turn lane on Franklin Road wilt not improve the conditions dramatically. The traffic volumes at this intersection would not, most likely, meet the warrants for the installation of a traffic signal The major road carries enough traffic,;but the minor road must have over 150 vehicles per hour for 8 hours of a typical day. The 1 minor street volumes do not appear to be heavy enough to warrant a signal. The Destination 2015 Regional Transportation Plan for Northern Ada County published by Ada Planning Association states that Franklin Road from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road is scheduled to be widened to five lanes in the next 20 years. This report also shows improvements to be made to Locust Grove Road between Pine Street and Overland Road. Neither project is scheduled immediately. Both are in "Preliminary Development", which implies that their construction would be at least five years into the future. When these projects are more seriously considered, a closer look at this intersection wilt be needed. At that time, turn bays, a traffic signal, a possible realignment of .Locust Grove Road, and a change of the Five Mile Creek channel should be considered. fl i~ Cobblestone Village Traffic Impoct Study Page 11 LI I! t APPENDI~C 1 i 1 1 • N ~~~ 7 ~ V M W +' ~ W ~ Z O c~ ~ +3 N ~ W G ~ m ~ C •L L~ r O 2 ~O d a Q ~ ~ N t!') C! (fl cfl p L[1 h r O ~ - 2 F ~•~ ~ ~cO~d't~O ~~t ~C ~ MMI`O~AeO ~~ ~ T T T T N T T T T ~ ~/~~ ~y~ O ' r O i 0 O: O O: O. O: O O r OEOEOFOEOOEOO O ` ~ ~ .. ~. ?° OEOEOG'. ~OEOEO O m' "..... .. .. .....;. .... ...........:.. .. .....i ...:..... m€°' CV. o0€c0- 1~ cnECQ M.c~ NEN;o co T: M io ..... ...:.:... ..... ......;.....~.... .....:.... ~1 ,~ • N m i z : ` .. ~~ ~` ~i m n ~ ~ NENEd~FMCO€Nln@O OiCOi~ ~~ ;'~ i zi . N ~O micfl € € € € € i O O; O OO~O`:O~O O o; ~E -, .. .. t: `n D c mi ~i~i0 ~;LniCpiT; n ME~o > >: Ji i ~~ min T:~oM~t*-o::N ac~~ ~ 3€ € io o ........... .. .................................. ......... ..... ... .... ~ ich _ m:M ME~;NT?ON@M@O ~cvcQ Y W; c E c :O ~ .. LL ': i i i i i E ~:N (~ECOe~ECOcCQ~00'a0`:~ ri~~ O M w...... ......i ................... a......i....... i......:;...... ... .... ~~ ,j mEr OEOEO;OEOEO:O@O OEO WE m lC3 0 Ln O Ln 0 Ln 0 7 ~_ p E T M~ O T M ~ O O p > f~ I~ tom- 00 Ca d0 Op O S Q ~ 0 0 0 O O O O O ~C p' o~o~no~no~n a~ o ~ oTc~~oTM~ a ° ~ r -~ t~ -~ 6o ao ~ a~ 01 - O M d 3 O 2 Y t9 d a a ~ ~ TN~::MO,; ' O O O O O 2 H r' c~o~~ N lnM*-M0p(OT- p rn p NMctN~T~~ ' ~-~ T NNNNNNNNP ~ O ~~ Oi0i0:0:0 0:0:0 0: ..}• ...y. ..p. .. ,. Oi.O€O€OOOEO€O OE S. 'C .. ... ... p.... .. p `O _ OHO€O;OE000`;O OE m' _ . .. '~ ~~ ~i w mi c :` i I~E~;t1) ~t=M C05~€r d'i~`:~ r`~ ., Z EO ~ _ .....:.... ......_. .....i.....;:..........; .. .. ... ....;..;. ~ J ~Eoo OEOO O; O.O"O:O% OpE N Z ~ .. .. ~: m,r~ N;NT CO?M 0='MEN COME Zi :o ~~ ~ E E ~' 'tn O '~ Mi €~n m: TiO:T: ST? O:O: v' ~'T•'~ rn r: O ~ O • T; T; : T: T: .. .. : .. mid O:O:~:~•~' ~~~~ M ^'~ -a ~€ . T € : io o .. C .c'~ mi OT€MO~~~GO;Mcfi T OOiMr Ti Y W; : i i C i i E i ~ ti ~iN •OicflsOiM:0E0~E0 :TEN; 03 ~ QE r2 ~ rE it NS ~ aO m: ;rETETEr:T-r{r- LA: EO .w .:..... ...... E......s......i.......i......:.-......i......i...... ....i...... J 7 mEr pipipip7O;U'.OO OEOE . W: c N t!') O In O In O In O. L t LJ.. 3 ~ 2 o E TM~tOrM:~YO O ~ > d' ~ ~ In tf') [n ~ CO = a p O O O O O O O O ~ °" OtnO ~Otf)O~ d p ~ ~y~ o T t' J ~ o ~ M mot' a ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ici iri ri ci k~ tl k Y ~: ~ '; x U X C O N Q O U T U a~ .o Q p, N n n t m HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c Page 1 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc., 2.50 South Beechwood Avenue, ##201 Boise,. ID 83709-0944 Ph: (208.) 376-7330 , --- - ------- ---------------- ------- Streets: (N-5) S. Locust Grove Rd. (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW ~ Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/4/99 Other Information.........Counts: June 30, 1999 AM Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ----------------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T ~R No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's. (%) PCE's 0 > 1 0 • N 8 343 .5 .69 0 1.10 0 > 0 < 0 20 32 .56 .`67 0 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors 0. 0 0 _ ~' i.. Vehicle _ Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) >~ Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 a Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 I9~`~ A"` 0 1 < 0 N 311 5 .85 .63 0 i r,.. ~ ~ _ T ~ _ ,.~ -. ~- . - - - ~~ ~ HCS: Unsi nalized Intersections Release 2 lc LGOlp,M.HCO Pa e-- g t -_=_____ ___---------------- For-=•Mrcrocomputers In Transportation ' Center. ~ ~ University of Florida. _ , ~,, ..<•°` -~- , F ,., ~,~, , 512 Weil Hall' °~ . - - - ' ` Gainesville -FL r32611•=2083 ~ ~ ,; ,o~ ,f ,.W 4 ~ ~ ~ , Ph: (904) 392'w'0378 -~ ,_ _ _ = ___ - -~ _._. ~. i R ____ _______ ____________ _______________ Road `(E-W)rFranklin Streets (N- S) S . Locust Grove ~ ~. 4 ', ; a. ~~ ...~~.~ Major. Street Direction.... ~EW f t r ~. ` > , -~>~ .. ~ ~ t, t ~: , E 60 (min) Length _of Time Analyzed...- - ~ ~ ;<~~ ~~~~' ~ ,.~ ~ h, Analyst ......... ........ gYif-/ 99 ~ 7/2 _ Date 'of Analysis 2001 k Am P ,. , ~: „ -m J+ ~ , ea ....... Other Information. . ~_ - ... ~ ------- Two-way Stop-controlled-Intersection ~: --- -.- -Y,,.~._-_ ~ ~_~+_~__ .., ! ~ -- --- Eastbound ~ Westbound Northbound ``Southbound ' ` E^ , yL~,.. ,I, R L T R T>• R, ,L ~ g ` e~' i No. Lanes ,N N , + .. a , i ~ "~~ Stop/Yield .3 ~ 361 7 13 387 ~ ._~ 4 5 -~ ~ ~ ~' ' ~`~ Volumes PHF .85 .63 r5 .69 .56 0 ~ :67 _ .,~ ;, Grade ~ 0 ~, . , e € ~ SU/RV's (°~) (~) ~ x ' ~ ~ t, ~ i ~~~ r ~,/ ~S e, as ro ~. i=t~ ~'~. , ~ . ~ ~ s CV ~ 1:10 1 10 l 10 ~_} ~' •~ PCE' s -------- , _ , ._ _ = _ _ ~ -- --- ... ------- ----------- r, ~ ~ ~. --, Adjustment Factors ~ ~.~ fr ~ ~ r ~• , M i ~ ~ Critical y 'Follow-up~"~ Vehicle' ~ Gap (tg) Time (tf) ;. n Maneuver --------------------------=--- - ----------- 4 ------------------- 2.10 ,. ~; 5.00 g 5 50 Left Turn Major Road 2.60 n . Right Turn Minor Road ~' 6, 00 ' r ° 3 .3 0 -~ 1 . Through ~Traf f is Minor Road ~ e 6 . 5 0 d ~ 3 . 4 0 _ .. ~.. s~ .ti a ~° ~ ~ Left Turn* Minor Roa _ s _. < M . . t .~ . ~_ d u ~.~ - .. ~. . ~,,j ~ .. -J t: ~~ . ~J 1_ M ~ '4 ~~ l q P ~ ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • N Y U ~ ~ E N ~ W ~ W ,Z v Z ~ W. ~ °~ u ~ 0 ~% L a ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ F- d-- .. N r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0101 1 1 1 1 : .....E..... _ 1 1 i i T~~T~~~ 1 1 1 1 I' ~ •~' ;~N r 1 1 1 1 O' O i ,z ,~ c 1 1 1 1 1 1 O 1 1 O O r l l 1 1 1 1 .m C .....:..... ~ 1 1 _ T__T.__ 1 1 1 1 (~ ¢'O~ m Ni~iO Cfl ++ : Z e c7; ;N i i In 1 1 O 1 1 J L~ f'Eao i i O;O;O (n m C 1 1 .3 `r Z: 1 1 1 1 1 1 w`7 ~ ~- .: --~ c m: ~ 1 1 O iM i '~ (V I ~I _ I~ N ZE T i ~ ~; i i id i i 1 1 1 1 OiOi , ~: = 1 I 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 ~ r •: L: ~'~ m~ 1 ~i~i0 -y O ~I l 1. 1 1 1 1 1 •: J 7 1 1 M1 1i M 1 1 1 1 W .. ;..... 1 1 _ o ~--f--- ¢ Y . C ¢~M m E 1 1 L(')irir 1 1 ~ Y WE 1 1 ~ i .....~..... _i i - -~--f--- ti ' ~ ; L: ~:N r~ ~ x1010 r ~ m: Miami C'') W E 1 1 .....i..... 1 1 _ - 1 _T__;_~_ 1 1 J: m T W : 1 1 i i ~ j ~ j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ m t U m p ~ > W ~ _~ O ~ F' ~ o ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °' Q o °' o N i 7 Y Rf d a Q (~ c N O 2 f6 ~ O t0 N v L y Q. (~ o >. N N +~ _ ~ ~ L D Y ~a oo ~ ~ ~~ C'') O ~ r T- ~ r r - i' N : ~ E t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0101 1 1 1 1 ' ~. 1 '~0 .....E..... i i --i---T-- 1 1 1 1 i I 1 1 1 OIQI 1 M~ ,„ C 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 to 1 1 1 1 ~O _ 1 1 O O T ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 Q'~ 1 ~' ' ~ U m; N O) r1 1 N ~ Z~ i i 1 1 Q 1 1 J t ~2co i i O;O;O N m; 1 1 p' Z: 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 ~~ y' /~ • ' 1 1 1 1 O . m^ ~Iri~ i i , r .w iq }3 Z i 1 1 1 1 '~ ~: m?~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OiOi ~: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 L; ~Hc m:`n ~i(+')i r;~;0 ~ ~ ~cDy >: 1 1 1 1 1 1 v •'1: , • E 1 1 1 7 ~ ~~ J~~ m? N~~~O MI IN ~h c0 1 1 1 1 W o .....;..... 1 t - i---}-- _ BEM mE ~iNiC'7 rl M N Y W: 1 1 1 C e i i ~ .....;..... - ~---F-- ~ ' ~€ L; ~~N r~ ~ N1~10 O CO m i In i 0 i L1~ ' W C 1 1 1 ; ..... i..... 1 1 -1~°~-- 1 1 ,: J : m'T 1 1 1 1 OIOI W: 1 1 1 1 1 1 N ~ +' ~ 3 N ~ 7 0 ~ ~ ,. W ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ rn Q o r ~• O ' N O Y d a a ~$ B 3 1 a, 1 i 0 H_CS: Unsignalized,Intersections Release 2.1c Page;2 J~ Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ~ ~ ------------------------------------- °St'ep l: RT from Minor St t ---------------- ~ -SB ~ , ree NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 370 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 899 , Movement Capacity: (pcph) ggg Prob. of Queue=Free State: k 0.94 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - St 2 L f - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - ~ ep : T rom Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 374 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1137 , Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1137 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.98 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) •1700 ' RT Saturation Flow Rate. (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of-Queue-Free State: 0.98 Step 4: LT from Minor Street ---------------- NB --- Sg Conflicting Flows: (vph) 883 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 326 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor:... O,gg ' Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.98 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements p.gg , Movement Capacity: (pcph) -------------------------------------- 319 --------- ------- Intersection Performance Summary -- , Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------ NB L 40 319 > = ------- ----- --------- 1 504 8.8 0.8 B 8.8 NB R 53 899 > WB L 18 1137 3.2 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection Delay = 0.7 sec/veh ' P >Y 1. .. ~ /~~ '' \ 6 4 ~~ , " HCS: Unsignalized'Intersections =====___________ _________________ Release 2.1c IvLGOlAM.HCO Page,2 ___________,=__________---------------- y Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step l: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 430 Potential. Capacity: (pcph) 838 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 838 Prob. of Queue-.Free State: ---- 0.91 ------------------------ ----------------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB ,F Conflicting Flows: (vph) 436 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1062 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1062 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.97 '` TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 " RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.96 Step 4: LT afrom Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1018 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 272 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.96 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 Movement Capacity: (pcph) .261 ' Intersection Performance Summary g Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS' Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph} (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ -------- ------- ----- --------- NB L 73 261 > 402 14.2 1.9 C 14.2 NB R 76 838 > WB L 29 1062 3.5 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection Delay = 1.4 sec/veh 6' HCS: Unsignalized~Intersections Release 2.1c LGOlAM1.HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection , -- Step 1: RT from Minor Street ------ ---------------------SB NB ----------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ------------ ----------- 418 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 850 Movement Capacity:'"(pcph) 850 Prob. of Queue-Free State: p,gg - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 'F --------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street ------EB WB + ------ Conflicting Flows: (vph) ----------------------- 424 ` Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1077 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1077 Prob. of Queue-Free State: _ 0.97 -- Step 4: LT from Minor Street ----------------- ---------------------SB NB -------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ------------------------ 1006 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 277 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.97 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0,97 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.97 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 270 Movement NB L NB R WB L Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) 73 270 18.3 - ----- 1.2 C --------- 10.1 92 850 4.7 0.3 A 29 1077 3.4 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection De lay = 1.2 sec/veh r 3 t a d. ao ~ ~~ . 'N2 ~ ~ f ~ bwy .. Y ' i J 1 { HCS: Unsignali,zed Intersections Release~2.lcr LG99PM.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection --------- ----------------------------- Step 1: RT from Minor Street ------------------ --------------- NB - --- SB -------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ------ -------- 655 --- Potential Capacity: (pcph) 645 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 645 Prob. of Queue-Free State: --------------- 0.96 . ----------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street ---------------------- --------------- WB --- EB, ---------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) a --------------- 667 --- Potential Capacity: (pcph) 825 Movement Capacity: (pcph) g25 Prob. of Queue-Frei State: 0.94 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: ------------------ 0.92 --------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street -------------------- --------------- NB --- SB ------------------ Conflicting Flows: (vph) --------------- 11.60 --- Potential Capacity: (pcph) 225 , Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.92 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.92 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.92 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 207 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue ~ Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ---- (sec/veh) --- NB L 13 207 > . ------- ----- --------- 378 10.6 0.3 C 10.6 NB R 26 645 > WB L 48 825 4.6 0.1 A 0.3 Intersection Delay = 0.4 sec/veh 19~~ ~'- 9 3 5 ~. P HCS Unsignalized Intersections Release 2., 1c LGOIPM.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB ~SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 742 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 583 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 583 Prob. of Queue-Free State: - - 0.92 - ------------- ---------------------- ~Step 2: LT from Major Street --------------- WB --- EB F Conflicting Flows: (vph) 757 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 747 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 747 Prob. of Queue-Free State:_ 0.87 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 100 ~ RT Saturation Flow 'Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.81 ;. Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB w SB ' Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1350 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 175 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.81 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.81 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements` 0.81 Movement Capacity: (pcph) -------------------------------------- 142. ---------------- -- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (.pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) - (sec/veh) ------- ------ ------ ------ ------ NB L 26 142 > - ------- ----- --------- 277 17.6 1.2 C 17.6 NB R 47 583 > WB L 97 747 5.5 0.5 B 0.7 Intersection Delay = 0.9 sec`/veh ti 1 Zoos ~'w` 3 s~~a ~~`M- •~~ (M ~M~ ipnZ Y Oi~'E OS'9 p~og zoutW uznz ~~aZ 0£'8 00'9 p~og zouzW o-rj~~zz ubnozus 0 9' Z O S' S p~og zouzyi wins _~gbzg OT ' Z 00 ' S p~og zo CeW uzn,i, ~~a+1 ------------------------------------------------------------------ (,~~) awes (b~) d~~ Y zannau~W dn-MOTTo3 Z~oz~tz~ aTotuan szo~o~,3 ~uaw~snCp~ -------------- '0 0 0 OT'T s.SJd (o) s,~ (o) s,~W ap~z~ 3Hd sawnTon PTaTI~/do~S' s au~Z -• oN OT'T OT'T 0 85' L9' SZ 9T I T 0 T 0 6' 8L' 89~ fi9 N 0 Z T 0 ~5L' T ' ~Z 88~'S N '-0 > T 0 H Z ~ H Z Z H Z Z H Z ~ punoc~~noS punoqu~zoN punoq~saM punoq~s~~ uo-r~oasza~ul paTToz~uoo-do~S ~~M-oMs" lnid TOOZ :s~uno~•••••••••uoT~~wzo~ul zau~p dub ...................~s~T~u~ y(urw) 09 •••paz~CZ~u~ awns ~o u~buaZ M3 '•••uoz~oazzQ ~aaz~S .zoC~W p~og utj~{u~.zg (M-g) 'P2i anoz~ ~snooZ ' S (S-N) ~ s~aaz~S O~~L-9LE~ (80Z) ~LId • ~fi60-60L88 QI 'as-rog " - TOZ# 'anuan~ pooMuaaag u~noS OSZ ' ouI ' S2IHHNI~NS 8-n-r T abed O~H'TWdTO`J'I aT'Z as~aZaH suot~aasza~ul pazzT~ubzsun ~S~H i 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LGO1PMl.HCO Page" 1 _______________________________________________________________________ x. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 South Beechwood Avenue, #201 Boise, ID 83709--0944 , Ph: (208) 376-7330 Streets: (N-S) S. Locust Grove Rd. (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (minj 3 Analyst ....................ghf t Date of Analysis.......... 7/4/99 Other Information.........Counts: 2001 PM Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's 1 1 0 N '64 468 .73 .9 0 1.10 1 0 1 16 25 .67 .58' 0 1.10 e 1.10 Adjustment Factors 0 0 0 e Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) ------ Time (tf) n =------------- -------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road -------------- 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road. 6.50 ~ 3.40 3 0 1 < 0 N 588 23 .81 .75 0 k- ~~~ ~t• ~<^ b`~`15 Apartment (220) ' Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 69 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 238 Directional Distribution: 16% entt3rin 84° g, /o exiting ' Trip Generation. per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.51 0.10 - 1.02 0.73 Data Plot and Equation ' v_ 7oc soo 500 N C W a i-- ~ 400 L N ' N m 300 N Q I I H .~ 200 ' 100 0 i~v [vv 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 X =Number of Dwelling'Units ' X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve ---~-- - Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.497(X) + 3.238 R2.0.83 Trip Generation, 6th Edition 301 Institute of Transportation Engineers r: 9 s a a Apartment (220) , ,,, d Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling. Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 78 Avg. Number of Dwrelling Units: 232 Directional Distribution: 57% entering, 33%° exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.62 0.10 - 1.64 0.82 Data Plot and 700 w a .` F- N U L N d 01 c0 Q H soo soo 400 300 200 100 0 0 100 200 300 X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.541(X) + 18.743 700 800 900 1000 1100 ------ Average Rate R2 = 0.75 400 s00 600 X =Number of Dwelling Units Fitted Curve Trip Generation, 6th Edition 3~ ~ !ns±it~„+e ~f ?'~~.^~n^~~+~^~ ~~~~~-~°- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SEP 1 4 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ~~~ FOR COBBLESTONE VILLAGE JULY 1999 Revised SEPTEMBER 1999 ~J Uf Prepared By J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners 250 South Beechwood, Suite 201 Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR COBBLESTONE VILLAGE JULY 1999 Revised SEPTEMBER 1999 r - ~ pp ~e,_ :- i Prepared by J- U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 r 1 1 1 fl J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. COBBLESTONE VILLAGE Traffic Impact Study Revised September 14, 1999 Study Objectives The objective of this study is to determine the overall transportation impact of the proposed Cobblestone Village apartment complex to the intersection of Franklin Road and South Locust Grove Road, southeast of Meridian, Idaho. The study will use counts of the existing traffic, the anticipated growth, and the traffic generated by the proposed development to examine the traffic impacts after full build-out of the apartment complex. Methodology Site Visits. Visits were made to the proposed development site to review anticipated traffic access locations and observe traffic movement at the major roadways surrounding the site. • Turning Movement Counts. The turning movements at the intersection were counted at the morning and evening peak-hours. first in June 1999. The afternoon turning movement counts were taken again, after the start of school, for comparison. • Traffic Growth Rate. The Ada Planning Association was consulted for a growth rate in the Meridian area. An increase in traffic due to any specific development, other than the Cobblestone Village, was not included in this report. • Trip Generation. The INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, was used to determine the amount of traffic generated by this development. • Trip Distribution. The distribution of traffic from and to the development was determined by the engineer using his judgement and the behavior of existing traffic patterns. • Average Daily Traffic Counts. Traffic counters were placed on South Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road from June 29, 1999, to July 1, 1999, to collect average daily traffic counts for both roadways: Existing counts collected in 1997 were acquired from the Ada County Highway District. • Level of Service. The Level of Service (LOS) of the intersection was determined using the HiQhway Capacity Manual (HCM), Special Report 209, by the Transportation Research Board with its associated software. Cobblestone Villoge Traffic`Impact Study Pope ~ N ~~ __ .., - - --- -• -FRANKLIN ROAD -~ ..-,~ _ _ YfV •N /~ /_ (~ Q H ^2 'J Z C~ S . ,h • s I*~ - - .1 ~• .~- ~• ~ • i SI f E PLAN _G~'1.j ..:: ;,I COBBLESTONE VILLAGE F ~ 1 I ! s J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 1 Proposed Development Th d l ` e eve oper plans to build an apartment complex at the southeast corner of the Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road intersection. Ninety-six apartment units are planned. A preliminary site plan can be found on the previous page. There are two intended accesses for this development. One on Franklin Road is a partial access; only right-in and right-out movements are allowed. It is approximately 400 feet west of the South Locust Grove intersection. The other access is a full access on South Locust Grove Road. It is located approximately 400 feet south of the intersection with Franklin Road. Sight distances are adequate from both proposed intersection locations . Existing Roadways Franklin Road i _ s classified as an arterial. It is currently a two lane rural roadway with 28 feet of asphalt pavement and gravel shoulders. The average daily traffic count, taken by ACHD in October 1997 had 8,804 vehicles west of Locust Grove Road and 11,313 vehicles east of Locust Grove Road. The posted speed is 35 mph. Much of the traffic on Franklin Road seems to be east-west commuter traffic between Meridian and Boise. 1 l east. Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 3 ~I ' J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. t [~ South Locust Grove Road intersects with Franklin Road to form a tee intersection approximately one mile east of _____ _._____ _ . _ __ Meridian Road. South Locust Grove Road is classified as a local roadway. It is a "dead end" street and does not continue over the freeway (I-84), south of Franklin Road. South Locust Grove Road is also a two-lane rural roadway. It has an asphalt pavement width of 21 feet. The shoulder areas are minimal, if non-existent. The speed limit is posted at 35 mph. Pavement radii at the intersection are approximately 30 feet on the east side and 20 feet on the west side. Locust Grove Road is stop-controlled at Franklin Road. Nola Street is also a tee intersection on the north side of Franklin Road. Nola Street (shown on some maps as Locust Grove Road) seems to garner more traffic than South Locust Grove Road. It intersects with Franklin Road approximately 660 feet east of the South Locust Grove intersection. This intersection was not a part of the study. The eventual plan for South Locust Grove Road is to be a continuous collector. It will connect to Locust Grove Road, south of the freeway, and also to Locust Grove Road at Fairview Avenue. Traffic Counts Franklin Road was last counted for average daily traffic (ADT) on October 21, 1997. At that time, the counts showed 8,804 vehicles per day, west of South Locust Grove Road, and 11,313 vehicles per day east of Locust Grove Road. Locust Grove Road has not been previously counted, to our knowledge. ' J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. counted vehicles for two days -June 29 and June 30, 1999. One counter was set on South Locust Grove road, approximately 150 feet south of the Franklin intersection. The other counter was set on Franklin Road, approximately 150 feet east of South Locust Grove Road. The average daily traffic count on South Locust Grove Road was 1,075 vehicles per day. The ADT on Franklin Road was 11,060. Manual turning movement counts were also taken by J-U-B ENGINEERS at the intersection for both the morning and evening peak-hours. The afternoon peak hour counts were taken again, after the commencement of the school year for the Meridian School District. The results of these revised counts are on the following page: Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 4 South Locust Grove Road, looking north. TURNING MOVEMENTS COUNTS AM (7:30-8:30,. JUNE 30,.1999 FRANKLIN ROAD 311.x' 5 ~~ ~ 8 20 ~O ~ OC OW ~O as of C9 i / " - N. ul PM (5:00-6:00, AUGUST 31, 1999 FRANKLIN ROAD y477 14 X1120 ~O ~ OC OW ~O ~ ~c c~ ~- ~ 42 r~•B, ...,..~ 11585TM7ggg PROJECTED TURNING VOLUMES 2001 .y AM PEAK HOUR FRANKLIN ROAD 387 ~- - 351 7 -~ 1! ~O ~ OL V ', O to OG O 13 i N. es ~~r . PM PEAK HOUR FRANKLIN ROAD ~~~ 517 538 ~~~ 19 78 ~O ~ OC V JO ~~ ~S~B, ~ ~ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Existing Level of Service A Level of Service (LOS) was calculated using the software from the Hi~hway Capacity Manual and the turning movement counts. During"the morning peak-hour, between 7:30 and 8:30 am, the Level of Service was LOS "B" for the minor approach. The left turns from Locust Grove Road onto Franklin Road had to wait an average of 8.8 seconds. The afternoon peak-hour had a bit higher traffic volumes on Franklin Road. This resulted in a longer delay for motorists on the northbound approach to the intersection, Locust Grove Road. The delay during the afternoon peak-hour (5:00 to 6:00) was 11.5 seconds, which equates to LOS "C". Trip Generation ' The amount of traffic generated by this proposed development was determined by a study that included hundreds of apartment complexes. The traffic generated is dependent upon the number of apartment units. Fora 96-unit apartment complex, 71 trip-ends are anticipated during the afternoon peak-hour. Of these trip-ends, 47 enter the complex and 23 depart from the apartments. During the morning peak-hour, 8 vehicles enter and 43 exit the apartments. Trip Distribution The traffic generated by these apartments must enter and exit from the two adjacent roadways, Franklin Road and. Locust Grove Road. As mentioned earlier, there are proposed two accesses to the property, one access on Locust Grove Road, and the other on Franklin Road, which is a "right-in, right-out" access. The'°PM traffic was distributed onto the existing roadways in the following manner: Franklin Road Access: 13 enter 6 exit Locust Grove Road Access: 34 enter (all 34 turn left from WB Franklin Rd.) 17 exit (7 turn left, 10 turn right on Franklin) This traffic generated by the proposed apartment complex is added to the existing traffic and the expected growth in traffic until the horizon year. The horizon year for this study is at full build-out and full occupancy of the development. In this situation, J-U-B has used the year 2001 as the horizon year. The 'anticipated traffic growth in the Meridian area is 6.25% per year. This is a very high growth rate, but it is the growth rate used for the years between 2000 and 2005, according to the Ada Planning Association. Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 8 TRIP DISTRIBUTION (AM) 'ii FRANKLIN ROAD 14 4 14 ~ 10 COBBLESTONE VILLAGE SITE ~ (7 ENTER, 38 EXIT) O E; O N F dD J as .~ N. r~•B ~ 11585TDAM 0 t 1 L i J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. The AM traffic was distributed onto Franklin Road as follows: ' Franklin Road Access: 3 enter 5 exit Locust Grove Road Access: 5 enter (all turn left from WB Franklin Rd.) 38 exit (15 turn left, 23 -turn right on Franklin) The morning traffic has higher volumes for the northbound approach to the intersection. Commonly, the afternoon peak-hour traffic volumes are higher. In this case, the traffic volumes are heavier in the afternoon, but more vehicles are entering the development than departing. The morning finds much more traffic departing from the site. r Future Level of Service The additional traffic generated by the community's growth and the proposed collection of apartment buildings is shown on the revised peak-hour projections. The LOS was recalculated using the existing traffic, plus the traffic generated by general area growth and the specific, proposed development. The resulting LOS follows: The morning level of service at this intersection under the projected conditions is LOS "C" with an' average delay of 14.2 seconds per vehicle for the northbound approach. ' The level of service during the afternoon peak-hour is projected to be LOS "C" also. The ,average delay per vehicle is 19.2 seconds for the northbound approach. The ' westbound left-turn for motorists from Franklin Road onto South Locust Grove Road has a delay of 5.2 seconds, which is LOS "B". This was the only condition investigated where any movement on Franklin Road was not an LOS "A". The level of Service for all movements within this intersection did not deteriorate below a LOS "C". The LOS for the northbound approach is currently "C" at 11.5 seconds per vehicle, the impact of the apartment traffic increased the delay to 19.2 seconds per vehicle, but this remains LOS "C". Cobblestone Vi(Iage Traffic Impact Study Poge 11 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Recommendations ' Franklin Road has considerable traffic for atwo-lane facility. The PM peak-hour is the most demanding time of the day for traffic at this ' intersection. The afternoon peak hour traffic volume is 42% higher than the morning peak hour traffic. A left-turn bay for westbound traffic is worth consideration. J-U-B has investigated the addition of a westbound left-turn bay for traffic on Franklin Road. The Highway Capacity Manual shows no appreciable change in delay, whether the left-turn bay is operable or not. Intuitively, separation of the left-turn traffic from the total traffic flow will improve the delay for the remaining "through" vehicles. Average delay per vehicle wishing to turn left was 5.2 seconds. Basically, the Highway Capacity Manual is stating that, under these conditions, the delay is not excessive and a separate left-turn lane on Franklin Road will not improve the conditions dramatically. ' J-U-B also examined the use of two northbound lanes at this intersection, one for left- turn traffic and a separate lane for right-turn traffic. This operational change to the intersection made an improvement reducing the approach delay of 14.5 seconds per ' vehicle. The left-turn vehicles had an average delay of 29.0 seconds (LOS "D"), while the delay for the right-turn vehicles was 6.1 seconds (LOS "B"). The traffic volumes at this intersection would not, most likely, meet the warrants for ' the installation of a traffic signal. The major road carries enough traffic, but the minor road must have over 150 vehicles per hour for 8 hours of a typical day. The minor street volumes do not appear, at this time, to be heavy enough to warrant a signal. The Destination 2015 Regional Transportation Plan for Northern Ada County published by Ada Planning Association states that Franklin Road from Five Mile Road to Meridian Road is scheduled to be widened to five lanes in the next 20 years. This report also shows improvements to be made to Locust Grove Road between Pine Street and Overland Road. Neither project is scheduled immediately. Both are in "Preliminary Development", which°implies that their construction would be at least five years into the future. Another development adjacent to South Locust Grove Road may also have an impact on the traffic at this intersection. The extent of traffic generated by this ' development is not available to Ionic Corporation or a part of this study. The accumulative effect of traffic on this intersection from other developments would effect the intersection. In essence, additional traffic due to the growth rate attempts to mimic the impact of unknown developments in the area of the project: This report ' does clearly show the extent of the traffic impact by Cobblestone Village. When these projects are more seriously considered, a closer look at this intersection may be prudent. At that time, turn bays, a traffic signal, a possible realignment of Locust Grove Road, and a change of the Five Mile Creek channel should be considered. Cobblestone Village Traffic Impact Study Page 12 r~ APPENDIX Apartment (220) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Plumber of Studies: 78 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 232 Directional Distribution: 67% entering, 33% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.62 0.10 - 1.64 0.82 Data Plot and Equation 700 soo 500 N C W a ~ 400 d U L N d ~ 30( Q I I H 201 10 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 X = Number of Dwelling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve equation: T = 0.541(X) + 16.743 Trip Generation, 6th Edition 302 80U avu ivvv ..00 ------ Average Rate R2 = 0.75 Apartment (220) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 6y Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 238 Directional Distribution: 16% entering, 84% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.51 n ~ n _ , nn _ __ UBta t'IOt arIC1 7 soo 500 y .D c w a ~ 400 U L ~: d m 300 N Q H 200 100 u iu0 200 300 400 500 600 700 X =Number of Dwslling Units X Actual Data Points Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T . 0.497(X) + 3.238 800 900 1000 1100 '-'--' Average Rate R2 = 0.83 Trip Generation, 6th Edition 301 Institute of Transportation Engineers 1 Cobblestone Village Trip Generation 4M Peak Hour Apartment ITE Trip Generation (Page 301) Per Dwelling Unit On a Weekday, Peak hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One hour between 7 and 9 Dwelling Units: 96 Trip Ends: 51 Enter: 8 Exit: 43 PM Peak Hour Apartment ITE Trip Generation (Page 302) Per Dwelling Unit On a Weekday, Peak hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One hour between 4 and 6 Dwelling Units: 96 Trip Ends: 71 Enter: 47 Exit: 23 f:\projects\11585\Cobblestone.xls 9/10/99 • en u ~+ O O o V ~ W +' ~ W O ' 'Z N (~ ~ C1 ~ W p C ' m C ~ C r OO ~ a ~ ~ f~i Lf> ~ ` O ~ 2 Ip- ~ Efl ~ O Cfl I p ~ M M I'- O ~ ~ : ~ CO r ao H~ ~ ~ ~ c- ~ r+ r«>? r ~ C 1` o Q';N mt , L O;O~~J l x ~f~ ~ E ~Q O(O E I ~ Ot Ni ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` i i t L ~r S 3 ~ O~O~~ O' Q 3£ Q.'.€O~O S _ O~ I ~~ t ~ f.--._..._....~ -.-.-i-.•._ ~ _.... ~w.~ f [[~ r F -0 ~i ~ i E i Y/ .. 1 ~ m . rn Z i oO ~ Co ~~„ S ~ ~ w- ~i? F $ i k7Q M Cp : I i E ~~ N N j co M~~ p N ' t f....... .............. _._. ~ ~ s i ..-~-_ V J: t micro t z OjO~b i - =C'S { C~ F i >Cy~O~O ~ . O r E ` 3 ( -^--•-- S 2 F Z~~ ; N`N fSi: C~ -f.C3 ~(*nl.~~O F `p `IMO ~ ~ ~ x ; ~ i m~~ ~ £ O'O~d E' - D~ $ $ CJ ~ TQ,aO€O $ t f O [O 9 i ~ . V L,~ F t M M ~? ~ ~ by ~ ~ Cal ~ M i ~~ ~ ;> : C~ 07 d'.~ ....». .....--._._.. .a ii 7 E «._.. ... .._d.... ! i ff _.. ._~_.6..ti. ....¢... ' J i ~ ~ ~O ~v ~-~ p: C!`~, ~t ~ MGM O[N.~ ~ 0 _ ~ '; { .......... E ~ .......... y........ « ~.. j f t ~ .........-.. i i0 ~ ..._. .....p..._m - ; ~-_ Y: ~ m°M ~ M`:,Ln ~: 'r"'~ 3 Q- i ~ ~ N~MIf~ ~ `M OiN~(D L ~ ~ ... F I ... ..... ...... i......_. L t W i ~ t ' ......... f .............b......_ .. . ~ ~ ' ~ J W .. . OO~O~ ... Q 2 O £ _....... O~O~O ...~.-.... i i ~~ O~ i ~ . a ~ #: a> E L(~ O~ Q~ O. l~ 0 ' "• 3 0 v ~ M~ ~ ~ t* O O o c o o ti ti #*» Cib CO CO ' a0 d7 = Q LL ~ O O O O O D> O O Y p- ~ o ~n Q cc> ca cn : o ~n m o x c Q C 0 o ab' N 1`~ ~Li U7 ~ 2 F- O C37 f3~ f3 F- in r N N N N N N N N; ~ o .~ ~ N m~~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i O OjO~O { E ~CjI { Q Gj, ~ O< s c O ~ ~ ~ i i 1i ....~....~.i~.~+.w..~....... L [[ m~~ 1 { i O O O~O Q O Q Q': i O ~ ' E t E f!! x i i ~ ,~~ E i €... _..._~.;__..~..__ ~ • ( J ~ 4 ~ z OIO~O' O ' ~ i i [ t v m~ - ~ 4+ Q O O 0 ~" ~ € ? ~ 1 i W _ ...._.p....... ~ mjrn f~f~stlpi~ ~M Cfl '~ ~, ~~~ r ~ ~ z~ ~ i ~ a ~ ~O ~ , I j ~ 1 1 _....»._.:....... .. ..... ~ ~ J L mEao ~ i E O~O~O~O .O O O ~ O[ i z! C I [ I , ~ J m!~ zi e E ~ N;N~~CO ~ ~~ M'` O M - f~E ~ i~ ODroi~o i ~o `: ~ ~ F ! i N i LL E F ~ ~ ~ : -.. iI 1 • 1 111 F E F- 1 E 1 E F ~ 1 ' _ ~ ...._. E...W. _s m~ ~: ~€r.:~~-~ i #,« ~ 'R'te ~;OO ..N .„........t.~...~....._~i i i ~ ~ ~ .. .. .„.... ~.. ~. ~ '8 ~ O -: ~C 3i'a' ......... ! ! O~OO~~iIO~ ~ ~ I ..~....F.....-............. ~S7 :~.° ' I'"- (31 ~M M.I~E~ I ! i :O i t i ... -........, ~ . p._.............-. ~ Y' ~! m_M E ! I ~?~IMjO~ ~7 O M: 1f7 '~ ~ sM ~~ L I ~. W1 ~ i E € a i s S i J i wig ii i 1 € i i OsOsO(O~: CS C3 C5 O O _ E € a~ E ~ O ~ O i.{7 ~ ~ Q: r M d' O~ M fit' Q L 3 ~ p O f° v , g O O O O C7 O O O Y ~' ~ o~no~n;ra~c~:~: m o= o ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ 11') Ln lF) kf3.. N N ~- ..' a. R G O Y d a G a rn rn M rn U H X N c O _~ p in T U p O Q u c c . ~ N ~ ~ U W +' W C _Z N ~ ~ W p m ~ ~ ~ C_ ~ ~C H e 0 i 1 C cv N ~- 0 U L ~ 2 ~ c~ U ~ a U f0 ~a ~ 2 F- X37 ~, O ' p S io •~ ~ N f~ c^. rt3 if'? In (p N N '€ F f ~ €~ OiOip~q L~~<3~00 O E [ i ~ ~ ~ ~- ;. E ~ ~ ~ t L E `- I i ~` pfp~'~fQ C~ q~O~p p~ m c~ (/1 € 7 i e i t ~ _.~_...__~._ m~° OO~C3 G'~ ~ ~,: ~i j I ~ ~ ! I ~... '- > ~ ; ~ ( i r ~ ap =NtC~ CV~LtJ ~:CflE~ N:~ao Z, j ;o ..,. ~ t ~ N __...~ ........ .....-•~...._......p _ V E ~ ~ -'~-~--.-.~. ......i_.._......s ......... { Z : z ~ a ~ = e t 7 ~ ....................+.._._s a 1 s ........._~ .._---..,...__. ,...~_ f i z.~ N~~=~~N. N~'C1'~N~ ~ IM...E.~. [ ~ ~ ~ ! €O i ~ ~ ~ i s ~ t E ~` ; 3 i m!co OO pip pEC?iOEp O i I L ~ 4 t f F I p~N4Q'~#. r.f>Q ~ In iv ~ r- ~ rM: r- r~- ~ r~ ~ : ~ tt ~ ' o ~€ ; a , i E i .~ _.....~ .___? _~ ' E i { ~ ~ Eo 0 - 1 i _ : ~ 1 ....~... ....~ ....m... ... .. .. ~. ~ ... m[M CO~iCL3~~'~#.:Lf'1 ~~NtM...~lch~~ W` j - ~ _.~_'.w._ __...;.__._ .._.. i !t ~ ; o W: # € ~ s ~. ~ ~: ... _ EE ....y........ .~€ € J € W' pip>.C~~C3~;OEd10i0 O i I i t ~ E i L ~ L U O ~ ~ O 'tf3 CJ ~ Q tf') O 7 ~ U E ~ M~ Q~ C~J ~ p C ~ O O O Q O Q O O Y °- ~ ~ +. +. ~ +. +-~ ;~.. ... ... ~ Q o ~, o .- c~ ~ c~. r» c~ ~ a o ~ rn w rn3 M ' 1 r 1 U ' . Vj x , C ~ .a O ' U U O Q , y U ~ ~ E N C ~ ' W W Z_ ~.. t7 ~ Z ~ W ~ ~ GJI ~ ~O L a w~ W a -~ c`c m 0 N O 2 N f0 O O N L d N C O i 7 D L d A d Q 0 to N r~+ .C O ('3 2 Y l^Q` W a G a rn rn i c a~ c~ H c 0 U 0 0 U _O 'a N .~ Y t0 W a G a M a ~ C O .~ O d vi X N C O .-. N 0 U T U 'o a .~ Cobblestone Village DELAY Comparison: (Average seconds delay per vehicle during the peak hour.) E 6 AM NB Total NB Left NB Right WB Left WB total" Int. Total 1999 Count 8.8 3.2 0.1 0.7 2001 Projection 13.5 3.4 0.1 1.5 2001 w/ LT Lanes 10.1 18.3 4.7 3.4 0.1 1.2 PM NB Total NB Left NB Right WB Left WB total Int. Total 1999 Count 10.6 4.6 0.3 0.4 2001 Projection 17.6 5.5 0.7 0.9 2001 w/ LT Lanes 15.2 28.6 6.7 5.5 0.7 0.8 Revised PM w/ school NB Total NB Left NB Right WB Left WB total Int. Total 1999 Count 11.5 = 4.4 0.4 0.5 2001 Projection 19:2 5.2 0.7 1.2 2001 w/ LT Lanes 14.5 29.0 6.1 5.2 0.7 1,0 f:\projects\11585\Cobblestone.xls, DELAY 9/1.4/99 HCS: Unsi nalized Inters g ections Release 2.1c _____ Page 1 ______________________________________________ J-U-B ENGINEERS,~Inc. __ 250 South Beechwood Avenue, #201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 - Ph: (208) 376-7330 ___________________________________________________ Streets: (N-S) S.~ Locust Grove Rd. (E-W) Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) ____________________ Franklin Road Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/4/99 Other Information.........Counts: June 30, 1999 AM Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ~. -------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound I~ T R L T R L T R -------------- Southbound L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- No . Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > l 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N ---- ---- ---- 0 0 0 Volumes 311 5 8 343 20 PHF .85 .63 .5 .69 .56 Grade p ;, 0 MC's ( o) 32 .67 SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's 1.10 1.10 -------------------------------------------- 1.10 ----- -------------- adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Maneuver Gap (tg) Follow-up Time (tf) ---------------------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5.00 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 ----- ------- 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Rele ase.~2.lc Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersec tion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i - Step 1; RT from Minor Street ------- NB SB ~ ------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) --------------- 370 --- Potential Capacity: (pcph) 899 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 899 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.94 St 2 LT f M ep : rom ajor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 374 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1137 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1137 Prob. of-Queue-Free State: TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 0.98 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate. (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.98 -------------------------------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street --------------- NB --- SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 883 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 326 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.98 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) --------------------------------------- 319 --------------- -- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach j Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 40 319 > 504 8.8 0.8 B 8.8 NB R 53 899 > ' WB L 18 1137 3.2 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection Delay = 0.7 sec/veh ' ~ ~ ~~ 1`~ 1 n HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LGOlAM.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida °512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Streets: (N-S) S. Locust Grove (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/2/99 Other Information.........Am Peak, 2001 Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC' S (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's o 1 0 N 13 387 .5 .69 0 1.10 o o o 37' 46 .56 .67 0 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors 0 0 0 Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver - Gap (tg) - Time (tf) ------------ ------------------- Left Turn Major Road --------- ---------- 5.00 -------------- 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 0 1 o N 361 7 .85 .63 0 g HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LGOlAM.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Int ersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB~ SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 430 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 838 Movement Capacity: (pcph) g38 Prob. of Queue-Free State: ------------ 0.91 --------------------- Step 2: LT from Major Street --------- ---- ----------------------- WB EB - ------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ----------------------- 436 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1062 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1062 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.97 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: ----------------- 0.96 ----------------- Step 4: LT from Minor Street ---------------------- NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1018 Potential Capacity: (pcph). 272 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.96 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.96 Movement Capacity: (pcph) ---------------------------------- 261 ---------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) -------- ------ (pcph) ------ (pcph)(sec/veh) ------ -- (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 73 261 > ----- ------- ----- --------- 402 14.2 NB R 76 838 > WB L 29 1062 3.5 Intersection Delay = 1.9 C 14.2 0.0 A 0.1 1.4 sec/veh i] n ~i HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LGOlAMl.HCO Page 1 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 South Beechwood Avenue, #201 Boise,m ID 83709-0944 Ph: (208) 376-7330 .. ______________________ Streets: (N-S) S. Locust Grove Rd. (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/4/99 Other Information.........Counts: 2001 AM - Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection -------------------------------- _____________________________ Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Southbound I, T R L T R L T R L T R No . Lanes ~ U 1 < 0 1 1 0 11 0 1 ~ 0 0 0 Stop/Yield II Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's N N 351 7 13 387 .85 .63 .5 .69 0 ^ J 1.10 37 56 .56 .67 0 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver ------------------------------- Gap (tg) Time (tf) - Left Turn Major Road -------------------- 5.00 -------------- 2.10 -,Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Z ~ o ) ~~ S W) ~ r HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LGOlAM1.HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection NB SB Step l: RT from Minor Street ---------------- -- ------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ------- 418 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 850 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 850 Prob__of_Queue_Free_State: 0.89 ' Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 424 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1077 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1077 State______ Queue_Free Prob. of ________0_97_ ' _ _ Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB ------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ----------------------- 1006 -- , Potential Capacity: (pcph) 277 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.97 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.97 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.97 Movement Capacity: (pcph) -------------------------------- 270 ----------------------- -- ' Intersection Performance Summary , Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ NB L 73 270 ------- ------- ----- 18.3 1.2 C --------- ' 10.1 NB R 92 850 4.7 0.3 A 0 A 4 0 3 0 1 , WB L 29 1077 . . . Intersection De lay = 1.2 sec/veh , 2do i A bW~S ' ~1 ~.-i-~ HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LG99PM.HCO Page 1 J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 South Beechwood Avenue, #201 F Boise, ID 83709-0944 Ph: (208) 376-7330 ` ----------------------------------- Streets: (N=S) S. Locust Grove Rd. (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/4/99 Other Information.........Counts: 1999 PM Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection --------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's 0 > 1 0 N 32 415 .73 .9 0 1.10 0 > 0 < 0 8 14 .67 .58 0 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors 0 0° 0 Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 L9~`) ~~ 0 1 < 0 N 521 18 .81 .75 0 1 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Rele ase 2.1c LG 99PM.HCO Pa ge 2 _______________________________________________________ t Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ----------- ----------------------- Step l: RT from Minor Street -------------- NB --SB ff ~ ' Conflicting Flows: (vph) 655 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 645 ( ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 645 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.96 Ste 2 LT f p : rom Major Street ------------------ WB EB , ----------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) --------------- 667 ~ --- Potential Capacity: (pcph) 825 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) g25 ' Prob.. of Queue-Free State: 0.94 ~ TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 ' ' RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. -of-Queue-Free State: 0,92 I ' Step 4: LT from Minor Street N'B SB ~ Conflicting Flows• (vph) 1160 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 225 ~ Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.92 ' Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0,92 ~ Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0.92 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 207 Intersection Performance Summary t , Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach ' Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ~ NB L 13 207 > 378 10.6 0.3 C 10.6 NB R 26 645 > r WB L ~ , 48 825 4.6 0.1 A 0.3 r Intersection Delay = 0.4 sec/veh I ' t 199 ~ m f 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LG8-,99PM.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation ,'. University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 f - ------------------------------------- Streets: (N-S) Locust Grove Road (E-W) Franklin Road Major Street Direction.... EW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Analyst ................... ghf Date of Analysis.......... 7/1/99 L Other Information.........PM Peak Hour, Count taken 8-31-99 Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound ~ Westbound Northbound Southbound I~ T R L T R L T R L T , R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No . Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 ~ 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 477 14 42 458 11 20 PHF .82 .58 .75 .94 .69 .83 ~ Grade 0 0 0 MC's (%) SU/RV's (%} CV's (%) PCE's 1.10 1.10 1.10 ~ Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 ~ Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 I Left Turn Minor Road 6.'50 3.40 ~ M~4% ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ :\`~``~ S~"~" J~`~~ ~ x 1~~~ ~ ,~~~~ 1 HCS__Unsignalized Intersections Release 2.1c LG8-99PM.HCO Pa~ e 2 Worksheet for TWSC Int ersection - Step l: RT from Minor Street ---------------------SB NB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 594 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 692 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 692 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.96 l" Step 2: LT from Major Street -------------------- Wg gg ------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ----------------------- 606 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 882 ~ Movement Capacity: (pcph) 882 i Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.93 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0.90 I Step 4: LT from Minor Street -----------~------ NB SB i ----------~----- Conflicting Flows: (vph) ---------------------- I 1137 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 233 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.90 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.90 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.90 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 210 ~ Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 18 210 > NB R 2 6 WB L 62 692 > 882 Intersection Delay 4.4 0.4 C 11.5 0.1 A 0.4 0.5 sec/veh 1 1 1 357 11.5