Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPinnacle Engineers, Inc CPAi To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations 'to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12 1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 RECLAMATIQN_�RREL'IM & FINAL YOUR CONCISE REMAR • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY . Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 Council CITY OF MERIDIAN Members -PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (los) 887-2211 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 8871 CIE LANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD DEPARTMENT (tog) 884-5533 DEC 0 2 1998 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations 'to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12 1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 RECLAMATIQN_�RREL'IM & FINAL YOUR CONCISE REMAR FSC -]EST) JAN 12 13gq City of Meridian City Clerk Office 11311111 AR kT r � rr C NN �7��_� ��.5 mss+• _ AIR, ,'z�a� �541s[tt iti}s` �i I[�4e�1ii +i �... Seatember 25. 1 .. , [x fi [f Prepared By. . MK Centennial 910 Main Street, Suite 250 Boise, ID 83702, MKCE.NTENNIAL' 9 <[ 97 Eagle Road Access Control Study Ada County Highway District INTRODUCTION Eagle Road, between Interstate 84 and the City of Eagle, is a major transportation corridor in Ada County. With daily traffic volumes -approaching 32,000 vehicles per day on'the southern section of roadway, it serves a combination of local, intrastate and interstate traffic. It is a north -south arterial for the communities of Eagle, Meridian and West Boise, and is the only roadway in'the area with interstate access and a river crossing. It also provides a transportation link from the interstate to the cities of Horseshoe Bend, McCall and other destinations to the north. Recent planning studies, including the Bench -Valley Transportation Study, have identified the importance of this corridor as part of the regional transportation system. As Eagle Road approaches its traffic carrying capacity, the traffic`volumes on adjacent north -south arterials (Locust Grove, Cloverdale and Five Mile Roads) will increase to accommodate the north -south travel demand. Traffic detouring to these arterials is not desirable due to the increased vehicle trip lengths, fuel costs, vehicle emissions, and traffic impacts on arterials that are more residential in character. The Ada County Highway District (ACRD) and the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) have recognized the importance of Eagle Road by identifying this corridor for a future access -restricted expressway. ACHD retained MK Centennial to develop access management guidelines for this corridor that would progressively increase the access restrictions from the existing condition to a future access -restricted expressway. These guidelines identify approach and intersection locations, median types and locations and intersection traffic control. ACHD and ITD will employ these guidelines as they review development requests and as they program future roadway improvements on Eagle Road. These controls and improvements could occur over a very long period of time depending upon the rate of traffic growth. For instance none of the grade separations identified in the highest level of access control are contained in the twenty year construction planning program. OVERVIEW OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT Access management is the control and regulation of driveways, medians, median openings, traffic signals and interchanges to minimize disruption to the through travel movements on a roadway. The goals of access management are to: • limit the number of conflict points, Eagle Road Access Control Study MK'CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 1 i To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations 'to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12 1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 RECLAMATIQN_�RREL'IM & FINAL YOUR CONCISE REMAR • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY . Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 Council CITY OF MERIDIAN Members -PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (los) 887-2211 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 8871 CIE LANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD DEPARTMENT (tog) 884-5533 DEC 0 2 1998 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations 'to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12 1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 RECLAMATIQN_�RREL'IM & FINAL YOUR CONCISE REMAR Eagle Road Access Control Study Ada County Highway District INTRODUCTION Eagle Road, between Interstate 84 and the City of Eagle, is a major transportation corridor in Ada County. With daily traffic volumes -approaching 32,000 vehicles per day on'the southern section of roadway, it serves a combination of local, intrastate and interstate traffic. It is a north -south arterial for the communities of Eagle, Meridian and West Boise, and is the only roadway in'the area with interstate access and a river crossing. It also provides a transportation link from the interstate to the cities of Horseshoe Bend, McCall and other destinations to the north. Recent planning studies, including the Bench -Valley Transportation Study, have identified the importance of this corridor as part of the regional transportation system. As Eagle Road approaches its traffic carrying capacity, the traffic`volumes on adjacent north -south arterials (Locust Grove, Cloverdale and Five Mile Roads) will increase to accommodate the north -south travel demand. Traffic detouring to these arterials is not desirable due to the increased vehicle trip lengths, fuel costs, vehicle emissions, and traffic impacts on arterials that are more residential in character. The Ada County Highway District (ACRD) and the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) have recognized the importance of Eagle Road by identifying this corridor for a future access -restricted expressway. ACHD retained MK Centennial to develop access management guidelines for this corridor that would progressively increase the access restrictions from the existing condition to a future access -restricted expressway. These guidelines identify approach and intersection locations, median types and locations and intersection traffic control. ACHD and ITD will employ these guidelines as they review development requests and as they program future roadway improvements on Eagle Road. These controls and improvements could occur over a very long period of time depending upon the rate of traffic growth. For instance none of the grade separations identified in the highest level of access control are contained in the twenty year construction planning program. OVERVIEW OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT Access management is the control and regulation of driveways, medians, median openings, traffic signals and interchanges to minimize disruption to the through travel movements on a roadway. The goals of access management are to: • limit the number of conflict points, Eagle Road Access Control Study MK'CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 1 • reduce interference with through traffic due to side street friction, • provide sufficient spacing between at -grade intersections, • eliminate or reduce speed differentials, • minimize impacts to existing and future developments, and • minimize the expenditure of public funds. A major benefit of access control is the improvement in safety (fewer accidents and less severe accidents). For example, the Georgia Department of Transportation experienced a 37 percent reduction in total accidents and a reduction of 48 percent in injury accidents along one test arterial by eliminating conflicts with the installation of raised medians. 2 Additional benefits include an increase in vehicle capacity and travel speed as compared to roads without access management. Studies have shown that access control can increase the capacity of a roadway by as much as fifty percent, which is the same increase in capacity that can be experienced by widening a four lane roadway to six lanes, while simultaneously increasing safety and decreasing congestion.' The improvements in capacity can prolong the functional life of existing roadways without the construction of additional lanes, maximizing the public's infrastructure investment. REPORT OUTLINE The report is organized into three major sections with an Appendix for supporting information. The report is organized as follows: Section 1 - Access Control Concepts: Provides a detailed description of the decision process used to determine the recommended signal spacing, spacing of median openings, driveway spacing, and frontage road design. It also includes a discussion of at -grade and grade separated intersection. Section 2 - Recommended Conceptual Access Control Plans: Presents the five recommended access control levels, giving a description of each level as well as the thresholds for phasing from one access control level to the next. Section 3 - Site Specific Recommendations: Discusses the existing conditions, anticipated development patterns and detailed recommendations for individual roadway sections within the seven -mile corridor. This section also contains exhibits illustrating the recommended access control plans. Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 2 SECTION 1 - ACCESS CONTROL CONCEPTS This section discusses the four major access control concepts evaluated in this study: • Marginal Access Control, • Medial Access Control, • Major Intersection Control and • Frontage Roads. These access management techniques were evaluated based on' established standards presented in the NCHRP Report 348 and in access management programs adopted by other states. A detailed description of the decision process used to establish the- recommended conceptual access control plan is shown below. A summary of the access control spacing criteria used by other states and recommended in various technical sources can be found in the Appendix. MARGINAL ACCESS CONTROL CONCEPTS The driveway spacing and design are the major elements of marginal access control. There are several different criteria currently used to establish driveway spacing: • stopping sight distance, • intersection sight distance, • length of tum lanes, • right -tum conflict overlap, and • egress capacity. Stopping sight distance is one of the methods used by some states to determine minimum driveway spacing. This value is based on the AASHTO stopping sight distance for wet pavements, assuming a coefficient of friction of 0.29. This distance provides for the minimum stopping sight distance between successive driveways. For a design speed of 60 mph, the AASHTO minimum stopping sight distance is 650 feet. The minimum AASHTO intersection sight distance assumes that the stopped vehicle makes the tum and accelerates to 85 percent of the speed of traffic on the major roadway. This assumes that on -coming traffic on the major roadway decreases speed by approximately 15 percent. The minimum AASHTO intersection sight distance for a design speed of 60 mph is 1,150 feet. The length of tum lane criteria is based on the 1990 AASHTO "Green Book" statement that "Driveway terminals are in effect at -grade intersections.... and.... driveways should not be situated within the functional boundary of at -grade intersections. This boundary would include the longitudinal limits of the auxiliary left -tum and right -tum lanes." Under this criteria, the desirable minimum driveway spacing for a design speed of 60 mph is Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 �- Page 3 1,005 feet. The right tum conflict overlap provides for the minimum distances required to avoid conflict overlap between adjacent driveways. This criterion calls for adequate separation of conflicts to allow the driver to concentrate on one driveway at a time. The minimum spacing required for a design speed of 45 mph to eliminate right tum conflict overlap is 300 feet. Right tum conflict overlap does not have spacing requirements for speeds greater than 45 mph, as the resulting high speed differentials in the through traffic Lanes pose a potential collision problem on high speed, high volume streets and roads. The last method mentioned for determining minimum driveway spacing is maximum egress capacity. This is based on the assumption that driveways spaced at distances greater than 1.5 times the distance required to accelerate from zero to the speed of through traffic, 1250 feet for 60 mph, will reduce delay to vehicles entering the traffic stream and will improve the traffic absorption characteristics of the traffic stream. The .minimum driveway separation to allow maximum egress capacity for a design speed of 60 mph is 1,875 feet. The recommended marginal access spacing for the interim access control plans was based on the 1990 AASHTO stopping sight distance for a design speed of 60 mph which is 650 feet. This spacing was rounded to 660 feet to allow for an even spacing along a mile section. The AASHTO stopping sight distance is the recommended spacing criteria due to the fact that this provides for safe access and egress while allowing developments access to Eagle Road. The other spacing criteria mentioned above is based on minimizing the speed differential. On Eagle Road, It is assumed that approaches will have acceleration and/or deceleration lanes as required in order to address this concern. It is recommended that approaches which are unable to meet the minimum spacing criteria of 660 feet be labeled temporary. At such time that alternate access is made available, the temporary access can be restricted or eliminated. Driveway design greatly effects the speed differential that ingress and egress vehicles have on the through traffic. The width of the driveway (or cross street) and the curb return radius directly impact the speed at which vehicles can tum off of the arterial. The availability of acceleration and deceleration lanes can minimize the speed differential experienced between vehicles turning into an approach and through traffic on the major street. Appropriately designed acceleration and deceleration lanes can improve safety and capacity along Eagle Road. The need for right tum deceleration lanes and right turn acceleration lanes at individual access points along the corridor should be evaluated based on ACHD's established warrants as development occurs. E MK cENTENNI.4L Eagle Road Access Control Study -- September 25, 1997 Page 4 MEDIAL ACCESS CONTROL CONCEPTS The design of medians as an access control measure involves the following elements: • median type, • median width, • the geometrics of median openings, and • spacing of median openings. Three various types of median designs include non -traversable, traversable, and continuous two-way left turn lanes. The median type recommended for Eagle Road is non -traversable retrofitted to replace the continuous two-way left tum lane along the seven mile Eagle Road study section. One contingency to the installation of the raised median is that U -tum provisions are available at the upstream and downstream signalized intersections. The installation of a raised median will eliminate uncontrolled left turns, thereby increasing roadway capacity and minimizing conflict points. Studies have shown that accidents can be reduced by as much as 37 percent by replacing a two-way left turn lane with a raised median, while capacity can be increased by as much as 50 percent when.medians are used in conjunction with other access control measures. Other studies have shown that two-way left tum lanes often do not function safely or efficiently when traffic volumes exceed 24,000 vehicles per day.' I MAJOR INTERSECTION CONTROL CONCEPTS The major intersection control "concepts consider the type, design and spacing of major intersections along the arterial. Our analysis included evaluation of at -grade and grade - separated intersections. The interim access control plans, Levels 1 through 4, allow access to Eagle Road via at -grade intersections with uniform signal spacing. The ultimate access control plan, Level 5, has fully restricted access along Eagle Road, which requires access to Eagle Road via grade -separated interchanges. Following are the major elements evaluated for intersection control. At -Grade Intersections Spacing and traffic control are key issues for the at -grade intersection access control concept. The interim access control levels for Eagle Road, Levels 1 through 4, maintain signalization at the existing major arterial intersections and allow for signalization of the half -mile collector roads at such time that signalization is warranted. Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 5 In determining the optimum traffic signal spacing, three variables were considered: • the desired speed of the progression platoon, • the traffic signal cycle length, and, • minimizing vehicle delay along,the arterial. The choice of cycle length was based on the ability to move traffic through critical intersections, to provide adequate time for pedestrians to cross wide streets, to achieve efficient signal coordination at desired speeds, and to provide adequate platooning. Uniform signal spacing.of one mile allows for operating speeds of 60 miles per hour at cycle lengths of 120 seconds. However, with development occurring rapidly along Eagle Road, signal spacing of a half -mile is more appropriate. This spacing will provide controlled access for adjacent developments and adequate platooning to provide gaps at unsignaliied access points. Half -mile uniform spacing allows for average progressive speeds of 40 miles per hour at cycle lengths of 90 seconds or 30 miles per hour at cycle lengths of 120 seconds. By locating the signals at half -mile spacing a bandwidth for through traffic equal to the green time can be achieved: If the signal spacing is reduced to one-third mile, ,the progression speed drops to 20 mph at a cycle length of 120 seconds. Grade -Separated Intersections Grade -separated intersections, or interchanges, are required for access control Level 5, which fully restricts access to Eagle Road to interchange locations only. Service Interchanges Interchanges at the intersection of an expressway with a surface street are typically classified as service interchanges. On Eagle Road, service interchanges are planned at the existing arterial intersections: Franklin Road, Fairview Avenue, Ustick Road, McMillan Road, Chinden Blvd, and the Eagle Alternate Route. As a result of two studies prepared for ACHD in 1996, this study considered two interchange types at the arterial intersections: • the Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) and • the Tight Urban Diamond Interchange (TUDI). The primary difference between the SPUI and TUDI configurations is that right of way requirements are generally greater with the TUDI, while the bridge and retaining wall costs are generally greater with the SPUI. The reason for the increased bridge cost for the SPUI is that it requires a longer center span as compared to the TUDI. The costs also increase for the SPUI due to the additional earthwork and retaining walls required with the.tight ramp spacing. However, The TUDI does require additional width through MK CENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control Study _- September 25, 1997 Page 6 the interchange area"as the left -turn lanes cannot be located opposite each other. Operationally, the pedestrian impacts are greater with the.SPUI than with the TUDI. The.reason:for this is that the;ahrough phases�in the TUDI do provide some protected pedestrian access acrosseach roadway. When analyzed on•a per lane basis, the SPUI is slightly more efficient than the TUDI, but'as the size'of the interchange becomes i., larger the efficiency decreases. Where one-way frontage roads connect to the diamond ramps, the TUDI is significantly more efficient than. the SPUI in all situations. Frontage road through movements create.the need fora -fourth, phase; -thereby eliminating any operational advantage that the SPUI may have;over the TUDl.3 I With theTUDI, full access driveways would be restricted on the arterial cross street for a minimum distance of 925 feet from the TUDI ramp terminals. The SPUI design would have access restrictions for 700 feet.. ACHD's current policy limits the location of right - in and right -out access approaches toa minimum of 220 feet from the ramp terminals, Approval for the restricted approaches should consider their location with respect,to the arterial right lane taper. Systems Interchanges At the intersection of Eagle Road and 1-84, the existing interchange would need to be replaced with a systems interchange. A,systems interchange (classified as the ' intersection of freeways or expressways) operates at'higher vehicle speeds and_. volumes than the service interchanges and provides uninterrupted turning movements in all directions.. At the Eagle Road and 1-84 interchange, three different. systems interchanges may be feasible: • Directional Interchange, • Full Cloverleaf Interchange with collector distributor roads, and • Semi -directional Interchange with loop ramps and collector distributor roads. No recommendations as to which systems interchange type to use at this location are given in this study. It is recommended that future study efforts evaluate the appropriate interchange type based on the most current information available at the time of the study. Exhibits showing plan views, phasing diagrams, and typical sections for a typical TUDI and SPUI can be found in the Appendix, as well as schematics for the systems interchanges. MK CENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control. Study September: 25, 1997 Page 7 SECTION 2,- RECOMMENDED CONCEPTUAL ACCESS CONTROL PLANS Five different access'control "plans (Levels 1 through 6) were`developed.to-progress from the existi g access conditions to a'future restricted -access expressway:' Thee progressions of access control'along'theAEagle Road -corridor is recommended in'order to minimize the impact to adjacent developments, to allow for the` development of`a collector street network, and to"minimize the expenditure of pu6iic funds through the' acquisition -of right=of-way forNimprovemenfs-as`development occurs along EaglelRoad. Plans showing full access restrictions with and without frontage roads are presented,. allowing'site'specific'concems toAictate the need for frontage roads. Each recommended access control plan is detailed below, followed by the thresholds for -�,. progressing between,66ch level.`Ezhibits showing =the*typical access` control' planstane be found in th°e Appendix. `Exhibits illustrating site -`specific'access control plans are included in Section 3. LEVEL'.1 ACCESS CONTROL -PLAN Level 1 access control` allows for half=mile signal spacing at collector'and aiteriaCstreets and full access for quarter=mile local 'roads and eighth -mile private driveways. Medians should be installed along the length'of the corridor,'witt-openings for full access at eighth -mile (660 feet) spacing. Signals at the half -mile collectors would be installed When signal warrants are met at these locations. Level 1 `access control should be implemenfed,along sections that'do not''currently meet the minimum 660 foot -spacing. LEVEL 2` ACCESS CONTROL"PL`=AN °' s Level 2 access control eliminates the left turns at the eighth -mile driveway approaches through tK6'insiallationof raised medians: The medians should be installed in lieu of signals signal warrants are met at these locations. A variation to the median design to prohibit left -toms in with left-tums out ­permitted -may be an interirr condition to the elimination ofall left -turning vehicle`s at the eighth'=mile approaches. Ttie half =mile $' signal spacing `at'colleciof and'arterial' streets and`quarter-mile full access` at local roads is maintained for Level 2. 113y maintaining quarter -mile full access points, improved circulation- is achieved during the development of the local 'roadway network! Progression -ff6m`Levelrl'to Level`2'sho6ld be evaluated along -a -continuous half -mile segment, with median installation'at-individual intersections as `required. Eagle Road Access Control Study Ma< CENTENNIAL SePte ber 25, 1997 Page 9 COLLECTOR ST. (1/2 MILE SPACING) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ARTERIAL ST. (1 MILE SPACING) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION INSUFFICIENT GREEN TIME FOR EAGLE ROAD, NO REASONABLE WAY TO PROVIDE CAPACITY OF AT GRADE INTERSECTION, SUBURBAN ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE, ACCIDENT HISTORY ACCESS CLOSED GRADE SEPARATED EAGLE ROAD ACCESS STUDY o 0 ACCESS CONTROL PHASING ,� APPROACH LOCAL ST. oil (660' SPACING) (1320' SPACING) FULL FULL LEVEL 1 ACCESS ACCESS INTERSECTION MEETS ACCIDENT, DELAY OR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANTS ` LEVEL 2 RIGHT -IN / FULL RIGHT -OUT ACCESS INTERSECTION MEETS ACCIDENT, DELAY OR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANTS LEVEL RIGHT -IN / RIGHT -IN / 9 RIGHT -OUT RIGHT-0UT ACCIDENT HISTORY, LEVEL OF SERVICE (SUBURBAN ARTERIAL) • . LEVEL 4 ACCESS ACCESS CLOSED CLOSED 0 LEVEL 5 LEGEND, NOTES,• CONTROL U-TURN CAPABILITY MUST BE PROVIDED AT SIGNALIZED TYPE INTERSECTIONS PRIOR TO RIBHT-IWRIGHT-0UT CONTROL. ALTERNATIVE ACCESS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PROPERTIES . WARRANTS PRIOR TO CLOSURE OF ACCESS. COLLECTOR ST. (1/2 MILE SPACING) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ARTERIAL ST. (1 MILE SPACING) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION INSUFFICIENT GREEN TIME FOR EAGLE ROAD, NO REASONABLE WAY TO PROVIDE CAPACITY OF AT GRADE INTERSECTION, SUBURBAN ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE, ACCIDENT HISTORY ACCESS CLOSED GRADE SEPARATED EAGLE ROAD ACCESS STUDY o 0 ACCESS CONTROL PHASING ,� ECTION 3 - SITE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION The following section presents the recommended access plan for the entire length of the corridor describing the existing conditions, the anticipated development patterns, and the key features to the recommended access control plan. Detailed maps of the each Level of the access control, plan have also been included. The traffic counts are based on ACHD counts taken in the recent years. Land use assumptions, proposed developments, and rezones were based on information provided by ACHD Development Services staff. Because the degree of development varies throughout the length of the corridor, a standardized access control plan cannot be developed for a typical mile section. Therefore, individual sections between major arterials or collectors were evaluated for the seven mile study area in the following site specific analysis section. The site specific recommendations listed below include provisions for bicyclists. Bicycles would be accommodated on Eagle Road with ten -foot wide shoulders in Level 1 through Level 4. As Level 4 progresses to Level 5, frontage roads may be constructed to accommodate local traffic, pedestrians and bicycles. For segments that do not have frontage roads, provisions for bicyclists could be provided along Eagle Road or parallel facilities. The collector road network is an important element of the recommended access control plan for each segment of roadway. This network is essential in order to provide access alternatives for developments adjacent to Eagle Road. The proposed collector street network, shown in purple in the attached exhibits, was provided by ACHD Development Services'staff. These collector roads create a network of streets to link developments along Eagle Road to the major east -west arterials. Without these connections to the east -west arterials, a full access control plan cannot be implemented as alternative access cannot be provided to developments adjacent to Eagle Road. L Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIA September 25, 1997 Page 14 EAGLE ROAD (1-84 TO FAIRVIEW) Review of Existing Conditions Eagle Road, from 1-84 to Franklin, is currently a five -lane section with a posted speed limit of 50 mph. Jackson's Food Store, St. Luke's Regional Medical Center, Greenhill Estates Subdivision, and Montvue Park Subdivision are the existing developments located between 1-84 and Franklin Road. There are four public roads and two private drives which intersect with Eagle Road within this half -mile section. The first private drive is located opposite Magic View Drive and provides ingress and egress to St. Luke's. The other private drive provides access to St. Luke's and°is located a quarter of a mile from 1-84 and a quarter mile from Franklin Road. This access point is currently signalized.~ All of the developments listed above, with the exception of St. Luke's Regional Medical Center and Jackson's Food Store, have alternative access to an east -west arterial. It is anticipated the St. Luke's will have signalized access to Franklin Road from a future collector road. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 31,975 on Eagle Road between 1-84 and Franklin. Eagle Road, from Franklin to Fairview, is currently a five -lane section with a posted speed limit of 50 mph. Current developments in this mile section include the Olson & Bush Industrial Park, Commerce Park, Gemstone Business Center, Treasure Valley Business Center, and the Crossroads Subdivision. There are four public streets which intersect with Eagle Road between Franklin and Fairview, a private road for the Union Pacific service road, and a private road for the Settler's Canal service road. ACHD has preserved the right-of-way at the half -mile for the future extension of Pine Street and for the extension of a local/industrial street from Commercial Court to Pine Street. All of the developments mentioned currently have access, or have right-of-way preserved for access to an east -west arterial or collector. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 28,065 on Eagle Road between Franklin and Executive. Development Pattems ACHD recently received a development application for the site located on the northwest comer of Magic View Drive and Eagle Road. The applicant requested a conditional Use approval for a 76 room hotel, a 5,359 square -foot convenience store/McDonald's fast food restaurant, and an 800 square -foot carwash. Based on these land use types, this development is estimated to generate 5,500 vehicle trips per day. This site would not have alternative access to an east -west arterial. According the ACHD's Development Services, it is anticipated that the northern portion of Montvue Park Subdivision and all of Greenhill Estates will remain residential while the southern portion of Montvue Park Subdivision will rezone from residential to office MK CENTS_____ Eagle Road Access Control Study NNIALSeptember 25, 1997 Page 15 adjacent to St. Luke's private street. 'The southwest corner of Eagle and Franklin Road has recently been rezoned for an office use.. The land between Franklin Road and Pine Street, east and west of Eagle Road, is anticipated to develop as industrial along with the southwest comer of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road. The half -mile section east of Eagle Road and between Fairview Avenue and Pine Street is residential with commercial sites adjacent to Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue. Gemstone Business Center, located off of the future Pine Street extension west of Eagle Road, is the new site for the Blue Cross Headquarters buildings. ACHD anticipates that the future commercial developments to be constructed in the Crossroads Subdivision will have access to a backage road connecting these commercial parcels to a future signalized intersection on Fairview Avenue. ACHD recently received a development application for Porky Park to be constructed on the northeast comer of Franklin Road and Eagle Road. The preliminary plat shows a nineteen lot industrial subdivision with three public road accesses to Franklin Road and one public road access to Eagle Road 800 feet north of Franklin Road. Kev Features of the Recommended Access Control Plan In the half -mile section between 1-84 and Franklin Road, the proposed access control plan for Level 1 to Level 4 recommends that the signal at St. Luke's is maintained. Access restrictions would increase at the unsignalized access points as Level 1 progresses to Level 4. In Level 5, a systems interchange is recommended at 1-84 with an urban interchange at Franklin Road and auxiliary lanes between the 1-84 interchange and the Franklin Road interchange. A right -in / right -out approach at the intersection of the northern St. Luke's approach and the proposed collector road is also recommended with appropriate deceleration and acceleration lanes provided. Between Franklin Road and Fairview Avenue a signal is recommended at Pine Street at such time that it is warranted. The unsignalized access points would experience increased access restrictions as thresholds were met. In transitioning from Level 4 to Level 5, it is recommended that an overcrossing be constructed at Pine Street in order to maintain this major east -west connection between Meridian and Boise. The railroad crossing would also need to be grade separated in Level 5 in order to eliminate the conflicts of high-speed traffic and trains. Continuous one-way frontage roads would be constructed between the Franklin Road interchange and the Fairview Avenue interchange in order to maintain access to the adjacent developments in Level 5. MK CENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control Study September 25, 1997 Page 16 ii T EAGLE ROAD (FAIRVIEW TO NAINWRIGHT) Review of Existing Conditions Eagle Road, between Fairview and-Ustick, is currently a,two-lane'rural section'with a posted speed limit of 45 mph: ITD currently has plans to,improve this roadway t6 a: five- laneWrural section in fiscal year1998. The current developments include Carol's. Subdivision as,welhas six'single family homes.with direct lot access,to Eagle Road. Carol's=Subdivision has one public street, access°tbAn east-west`arterial and the only public street access to Eagle Road within this mile section. The -six 'sin`gle family homes receive.their only access from Eagle,Road. ACRD Traffic Cdunts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 17,901 vpd on Eagle Road between Fairview and Ustick. The half -mile section from Ustick to Wainwright is currently a rural two lane section with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. ITD currently has funds allocated for the construction of a five -lane rural section in fiscal year 1998. The current developments in this half - mile include the Cameron Park Subdivision as well as seven single family residential homes that have direct lot access to Eagle Road. All of the existing developments, with exception to the single family residential homes, have access to an east -west arterial. There are two private streets and three private driveways that intersect Eagle Road in this mile section. All of the existing private drives are for single family dwellings. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 19,049 on Eagle Road between Ustick and McMillan. Development Patterns It is anticipated that the mile section from Fairview to Ustick will develop as residential, with commercial sites on the northeast and northwest comers of Eagle and Fairview and the southeast and southwest corners of Ustick and Eagle. These commercial developments will have direct access to an east -west arterial. ACHD's development services staff anticipates that the half -mile section between Ustick and Wainwright will develop primarily as residential, with commercial sites on the northeast and northwest comer of Ustick and Eagle. Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 21' Key Features of the Recommended Access Control Plan This mile and a half section is one of the most undeveloped segments of Eagle Road within the study limits. Therefore, the recommended conceptual access control plans can be strictly applied to this section of roadway. Signals are recommended at the proposed half -mile collector road between Ustick and Fairview, and at Wainwright, the half -mile collector road between Ustick and McMillan. Both signals should be installed at such time that signalization is warranted. Approaches should be spaced at a minimum of 660 feet apart with the local street at 1320 feet. Level 5 proposes the construction of urban interchanges at Fairview and Ustick with continuous one-way frontage roads between Fairview and Ustick, and Ustick and McMillan. Eagle Road Access Control Study MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 22 Ji e i EAGLE ROAD (WAINWRIGHT TO CHINDEN) Review of Existing Conditions The half -mile section from Wainwright to McMillan is currently a rural two-lane section With a posted speed limit of 45 mph. ITD currently has funds allocated for the construction of a five lane rural section from Ustick to McMillan in fiscal year 1998. The current developments include the Arabian Meadows Subdivision, the Madison Park Subdivision, the Mahogany Subdivision, as well as five single family residential homes that have direct lot access to Eagle Road. All of the existing developments, with the exception of the single family residential homes, have access to an east -west arterial. AThere is one private street, two public streets, and three private driveways that intersect Eagle Road in this mile section. All of the existing private drives are for single family dwellings. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 19,049 vpd on Eagle Road between Ustick and McMillan. The mile section from McMillan to Chinden is currently a rural two lane section with a posted speed of 45 mph. ITD currently has funds allocated for the construction of a five -lane rural section from McMillan to Chinden in fiscal year 1998. The current developments include Lowell Scott Middle School, the Legends Subdivision,, Hobble Creek Subdivision, Bristol Heights Subdivision, and the Candlestick Park Subdivision as well as three single family residential homes that have direct lot access to Eagle Road. All of the existing developments, with the exception of the single family residential homes and the Candlestick Park Subdivision, currently have access to an east -west arterial. There are stub streets already constructed in Candlestick Park that will allow access to an east -west arterial when the adjacent unplatted parcels develop. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 15,055 vpd on Eagle Road between Ustick and McMillan. evelopment Pattems There are a -number of proposed developments along the half -mile section of Eagle Road between Wainwright and McMillan. The Albertson's Commercial Center, located on the southeast corner of Eagle and McMillan, is currently under construction and is estimated to generate 8,740 trips per day. Albertson's received approval for two private approaches on Eagle Road, but also has two approaches on McMillan and two approaches to adjacent local streets. Lots are currently for sale in Phase 1 of the Mahogany Subdivision, located south and east of the Albertson's Commercial Center, and the ACHD recently approved a conditional use permit for a church site located south of Arabian Meadows. ACHD has established a temporary non -development agreement with Arabian Meadows for Block 1, Lot 5 and Block 4, Lot 5 to potentially provide access for the church site to Meadowdale, thereby eliminating the need for the MK CENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control Study -- September 25, 1997 Page 27 church to have direct access to Eagle Road. The church was granted two temporary accesses on Eagle Road until alternative access could be provided. ACHD's development services staff anticipates that the half -mile section between Wainwright and McMillan will develop primarily as residential with commercial sites on the southeast corner of McMillan and Eagle. The mile section from McMillan to.Chinden has very few unplatted parcels. ACHD has received development applications for the southeast and southwest comers of Chinden ,and Eagle, requesting conditional use approval for a convenience store/gas station on ' each comer. The Flying J proposed for the southwest comer, will have one full access driveway approximately 250 feet south of Eagle Road and one full access approach to Chinden, the full access approach on Eagle Road will be converted to a right -in / right - out when Eagle Road is improved in 1998. The Stinker Station will have one temporary full access driveway on Eagle Road aligning with the Flying J approach with future access through the potential commercial development anticipated on the southeast comer of Eagle and Chinden. i ACHD has also received a development application for conditional use approval for a 83,561 square -foot ice skating facility within a Boise City park to be constructed on the northwest comer of Eagle and McMillan. This facility is anticipated to generate 1,440 trips per day and is proposing one private drive access to Eagle Road, approximately 800 feet north of McMillan, and.two private drive accesses to McMillan. a i ACHD's development. services staff anticipates that the mile section between McMillan and Chinden will develop primarily as residential, with commercial sites on the southeast and southwest comers of Chinden and Eagle, and one commercial parcel �. adjacent to Eagle Road north of the Legends. Key Features of the Recommended Access Control Plan A raised median is recommended for the northern approach of the new church site located south of Arabian Meadows, at such time that the signal is warranted at Arabian Meadows. Left turns should also be eliminated at the norther Albertson's approach as driveway offsets from McMillan are not met based on ACHD's current development policies. The approaches for Stinker Station and Flying J, located on the southeast and southwest comers of Eagle and Chinden, will be restricted to right -in / right -out with raised medians when the roadway is improved next year. The other unsignalized approaches should have increased access restriction as threshold values (discussed in Section 2) are met. Eagle Road Access Control Study JMK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 Page 28 The mile section between McMillan and Chinden is the only mile section that does not meet the recommended minimum half -mile signal spacing. Third -mile signal spacing is recommended as collector roads are currently spaced at a third of a mile and a half - mile collector road is not an option. Level 3 allows access at the commercial site located at the half -mile between McMillan and Chinden due to the fact that provisions for alternative access are not available at this time. If this parcel was able to access the signalized intersection through the Legends, then this full access location should be restricted to right -in / right -out only. In Level 5, one way continuous frontage roads are recommended between Ustick and McMillan. 'Frontage roads are not recommended in the mile section between McMillan and Chinden because of the amount and type of development that has occurred in this area. The park and school located on the northeast and northwest comers of Eagle and McMillan do not require frontage roads, and the subdivisions already constructed in this area have adequate access to either McMillan or Chinden. Eagle Road Access Control Study [MK CENTENNIAL September 25, 1997 1 -- Page 29 F-P.-.L CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 0 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of ORDER OF DENIAL OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW was mailed to: PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. 870 N. LINDER ROAD, SUITE B MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 properly enclosed in an envelope, with postage prepaid, on this 3rd day of May, 1999. af\e4 J� 1�� Depu City Clerk Copy: Shari Stiles, Planning and Gary Smith, Public W04 +C 3 3 •r HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY - Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live . CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Members CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 KEITH BIRD CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 0 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that a true and correct copy of ORDER OF DENIAL OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW was mailed to: PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. 870 N. LINDER ROAD, SUITE B MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 properly enclosed in an envelope, with postage prepaid, on this 3rd day of May, 1999. af\e4 J� 1�� Depu City Clerk Copy: Shari Stiles, Planning and Gary Smith, Public W04 RM MUM NK - b. 11 rl n W4A 1 EAGLE ROAD (CHINDEN TO EAGLE ALTERNATE) .Review of Existing Conditions Eagle Road from Chinden to the Eagle Alternate Route, is currently a two-lane rural section with a posted speed -of 50 mph. The Banbury Subdivision, Island Woods Subdivision, North Channel Center which is currently under construction, and 14 single family homes are the existing developments located within this nearly two-mile section. "There are two public roads, three private drives, and 14 private approaches which intersect with Eagle Road within this section. None of the current developments along this portion of Eagle Road have alternative access to an east -west arterial. ACHD Traffic Counts taken in 1996 show an ADT of 15,775 on Eagle Road between Chinden -and the Eagle Alternate Route. Development Patterns ACHD has received a number of development applications for this section `of the Eagle Road Corridor. The Banbury Meadows Subdivision, the Streamside Subdivision, and the Fall Creek Subdivision have*all recently been platted. Banbury Meadows has two public street approaches to Eagle Road with access to Locust Grove, and the Streamside Subdivision takes access to Eagle Road and Locust Grove through Banbury Meadows. The Fall Creek Subdivision is proposing two public street approaches which will align with Banbury Meadows public street approaches. Island Woods is also beginning construction on the next phase which includes the construction of a new public street approach. The Island Woods Subdivision and Fall Creek ,Subdivision have no alternative access to Eagle Road. According.to the ACHD's Development Services, it is anticipated that a large portion of Eagle Road from the Eagle Alternate Route to Chinden Blvd will develop as residential. It is anticipated that commercial parcels will be located on the southwest and southeast corner of Eagle Road and the Eagle Alternate Route, as well as on the northeast comer i of Chinden Blvd and Eagle Road, and along the Eagle Road frontage for Fall Creek and Banbury Meadows. ft Features of the Recommended Access Control Plan Signals are recommended at the proposed collector roads for Fall Creek and Island Woods in order to provided controlled access to these developments in Level 1 through Level 4. The northern approach to North Channel currently warrants the elimination of left turns based on ACHD's development policies. Uncontrolled access points between the signals'will have increased access control as thresholds are met. MK CENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control Study �S September 25, 1997 Page 34 In Level 5, interchanges are recommended at Chinden, Island Wood Drive, and Eagle Alternate. The interchange at Island Woods -is necessary based on ACHD Development Services estimate that the land on the west side of Eagle between the North and South Channel will have 2,000 homes, which can generate 20,000 vehicle trips per day, requiring access to Eagle Road, the only arterial that will be available to them. Frontage roads are recommended between the Island Wood Drive interchange and the Chinden interchange. Frontage roads are not recommended between the Island Wood Drive interchange and the Eagle Alternate route interchange, as the right - in right -out approach at North Channel will remain allowing them easy access to either the Island Wood interchange or the Eagle Alternate interchange to make U-turns. The approach can remain as a lower speed right in / right -out, as Eagle Road will remain signalized at the Eagle Alternate Route in Level 5. Eagle Alternate is the priority movement and will remain free flowing through the interchange. MI; cENTENNIAL Eagle Road Access Control Study September 25, 1997 Page 35 sco o Z � Q ooWo J U� SiU WO y Q� T� yT� Q Q U O 40 WSJ a W W WCo 2V w Q 0[O f�n� QO� W co OHO Oail 4 O > CCvOU a �l ZQ Z C7'Q i O �� ZN UJ � G000) C Ell,IIIIII<< IIS, Q� �1 ,f n Q ° i i � ��� �� TIGHT URBAN DIAMOND INTERCHANGE W W F— N J Q E5 F— Q w • w ms SC"W Firr EAGLE ROAD CENTENNIAL ENGINEERING, INC. MEMO DATE: July 22, 1997 TO: Dave Szplett FROM: Heidi Carter SUBJECT: Eagle Road Access Study - Action Items from June 30 meeting As requested by the ACRD at the previous progress meeting the following four action items ,are addressed in this memo for conceptual review at the July 23 progress meeting: • Concept to Estimate Potential Benefits of Access Management on Eagle Road, • Estimated Cost Comparison of the TUDI versus the SPUI for a typical interchange, • Estimated Cost for Frontage Roads and Beneficiary/Funding Sources for Implementation. Concept to Estimate Potential Benefits of Access Management on Eagle Road - In order to develop potential benefits for access management along Eagle Road, the following articles were reviewed for content that could be applied to develop an estimated benefit of the,elimination of conflict points. This information would be used to develop a generalized qualitative or quantitative per conflict point benefit value for speed increase, capacity increase, delay reduction, accident reduction, cost savings/mile based on capacity increase and fuel savings/mile due to the elimination of conflict points. These values would then be applied to each level of access control for Eagle Road to develop an estimated speed, safety and capacity benefit per level. Stover, Virgil G., Hawley, Patrick E., Woods, Donald L., Hamm, Robert A., and the Texas Transportation Institute. "Access Management as a Congestion Management Strategy." 1993 Conference on Access Management Compendium of Papers. pp. 207 - 217 - (capacity, speed, fuel savings) Increasing the signalized intersection spacing to uniform intervals of one-half mile and the use of non -traversable medians to restrict left -turns will increase the capacity of a four -lane urban arterial by about 50% as compared to quarter -mile signal spacing and unrestricted left -turns. This is the same increase in capacity that can be obtained by widening a four -lane divided arterial to six lanes. Also, safety will be,increased and congestion reduced to a greater extent than by the roadway widening. Fewer but better designed driveways reduce the conflict between turning and through traffic which translates to reduced congestion. It also increases the capacity for traffic to'enter the arterial street from adjacent properties. And, interparcel circulation reduces congestion by removing trips from the public streets. An added benefit of effective access management along major arterials is the improvement of fuel efficiency. The fuel consumption rate per mile is reduced by improving the quality of vehicular traffic flow. Decreasing the number of stops, starts, and their respective. accelerations and decelerations improves"a vehicles fuel efficiency. Studies conducted by the Texas Transportation Institute documented the fuel savings as a result of access control measures. The study compared an arterial with half -mile signal spacings and right turns only to an arterial with quarter -mile signal spacing and allowing left and right turns. The arterials considered had the following conditions and results: Conditions: ten mile section of urban arterial, 700 vphpl in peak direction, 55-45 directional split, two-hour morning and two-hour evening peaks, speed of 13 mph without access control, 22 mph with access control Fuel Savings: 575,000 gal/yr The Florida Department of Transportation has concluded that an access controlled 4 - lane arterial has the same capacity as a 6 -lane roadway without access control. A study conducted in Georgia concluded that raised medians resulted in safer operation that C2WLTL's when the ADT exceeded 24,000 to 28,000 vpd. As the ADT surpasses 24,000 vpd, gaps in the opposing traffic stream become shorter and more infrequent. This makes it increasingly difficult for vehicles to execute left -turns at midblock along a C2WLTL. A raised median forces all turns to the next intersection where left -turn phasing can eliminate the conflicts from the opposing traffic. Bretherton, Martin W. "Are Raised Medians Safer than TWLTL's." ITE Journal. December, 1994. - (accidents) Georgia showed a 37 percent reduction in the total accidents and a reduction of 48 percent in injury accidents. The "before" traffic volume was 43,000 and the "after" traffic volume was 50,400. Georgia DOT estimates that in the past two years since the median was installed, they have saved 600 accidents and 300 injuries. Vargas, Freddie A., and Yogesh, Gautam. "Problem: Roadway Safety vs. Commercial Development Access." ITE 1989 Compendium of Technical Papers. pp. 46-49. - (accidents) By controlling left turns out of an approach the left turn conflict points are reduced from 16 to 4. FDOT conducted a before and after study and found that the implementation of the U -Tum concept for roadway access control and safety improvement can reduce the frequency of accidents by 22%. Fallat, George A., and the New Jersey Transportation Institute of Technology. "New Jersey's Use of Access Spacing Standards for Highway Access Management A National Comparison." 1993 Conference on Access Management Compendium of Papers. pp. 83-93. - (construction cost) Comparing a six lane roadway with unrestricted access, to a four lane roadway with managed access, Colorado estimates a 34% cost saving per mile, which does not include increased saving through accident reduction. (Koepke, Frank J. and Levinson, Herbert S., "Access Management Guidelines for Activity Centers", Appendix B, NCHRP Report 348. Washington, D.C., Transportation Research Board, 1992, p. B-13.) Demosthenes, Philip B. "Access Management Lessons from Over Twelve Years in Colorado." 1993 Conference on Access Management Compendium of Papers. pp. 5-7. - Fewer accesses, better spacing, better design including tum lanes, can and does reduce conflict frequency, reduces accident potential and thereby reduces accident rates. Safety research clearly shows that access manages routes experience 50 to 65 less accidents. A Policy on the Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1984 - The failure to recognize and accommodate by suitable design each of the different trip stages of the movement hierarchy is a prominent cause of highway obsolescence. Levinson, Herbert S., and Koepke, Frank J.. "Access Management - Key to Mobility." 1993 Conference on Access Management Compendium of Papers. pp. 53-59. - (delay) Our streets and highways are an important resource and represent a major public investment that should be preserved. This calls for their efficient operation --for effectively "managing" the access to and from adjacent properties. Access management increases the public's tolerance range and thereby lengthens the time in which a roadway will have to be rebuilt or relocated because of increased development. The provision of a continuous median in Oakland Park Boulevard in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida with half -mile openings resulted in 32% fewer mid -block conflicts and 30% less delay per mile than nearby Sunrise Boulevard that has frequent (every 300 to 400 feet) median openings. The accident rate was 10% lower than before the project was implemented. Accidents along Memorial Boulevard in Gwinnet County, Georgia, declined 44% after a physical median replaced a two-way painted left tum lane on a six lane arterial. Similarly, the accident rate on Jimmy Carter Boulevard, also in Georgia, was 40% lower after a "New Jersey" median replaced a painted two-way left tum lane. Accident rates on several New Jersey highways were cut in half after left tum lanes were installed. ITE Traffic Engineering Handbook, 41h edition. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1992. p. 377. - (accidents, capacity) Several studies have found that each commercial driveway adds between 0.1 to 0.5 accidents per year. It has also been found that the street capacity in one direction along a two-way, four -lane arterial with a 45 -mph speed limit is reduced 1 % for every 2% -per -mile of traffic turning into and out of driveways. (ITE Engineering Handbook pp. 377 - For example, if the arterial carries 1,500 vehicles per hour in one direction, with 150 vehicle turning into driveway along a 1 -mile section and 150 turning out of driveway (20% turns), the one-way capacity will be reduced by 10%.) Sokolow, Gary. "An Important Traffic Management Strategy." 1993 Conference on Access Mangement Compendium of Technical. Papers. pp. 9-12. - (volume) In a study done for the FDOT, analysis showed that the typical 4 lane arterial road with a high level of access management can handle almost 10,000 more vehicles per day than the same 4 -lane road without a high level of access management. Maximum Daily Traffic at LOS D on a 4 lane arterial with low access management is 23,592 vpd with high access management it jumps to 33,500 vpd. Frawley, William E., and The Texas Transportation Institute. "Access Management in Florida." 1993 Conference on Access Management Compendium of Papers. pp. 123-128 - (conflict points) I 36 conflict points at an unsignalized access point with no tum lanes and four travel lanes. 16 conflict points with right -in, right -out, and left -in with median. 4 conflict points with right turns only. Driveway and Street Intersection Spacing. TRB Circular 456. March 1996. p.16 - (accidents) Relative accident potential on at -grade arterials based on speed differential: Speed Differential -10 -20 -30 -35 Relative Accident Potential 1 3.3 23 90 The relative accident potential values were obtained by dividing the accident rate at each speed differential by the accident rate of vehicle(s) traveling about 10 mph slower than other traffic. This indicates, for example, that a vehicle traveling 35 mph slower (a 35 mph speed differential) than other traffic is 90 times more likely to become involved in an accident than a vehicle traveling only 10 mph slower. A vehicle traveling 20 mph slower than the traffic stream has 3.3 times the likelihood of being involved in an accident as one going 10 mph slower than the other traffic. i Estimated Cost Comparison of a Typical TUDI versus a Typical SPUI - The following cost comparison was based on information provided in the NCHRP Report 345 Single Point Urban Interchange Design and Operations Analysis, and the conceptual studies prepared for the TUDI and SPUI. The estimated cost could vary greatly based on more detailed design information', the actual construction year, and the difference between costs used in the NCHRP Report and local costs. Item Unit Cost TUDI TUDI SPUI SPUI Ouantity Quantity Right -of -Way $5.00/sf 552,702 $2,764,000 297,063 $1,485,000 Bridge* $90.00/sf 23,741 $1,899,000 27,389 $2,465,000 SPUD $80.00/sf TUDI v A Earthwork $5.00/cy .a 220,000 $1,100,000? 140,000 $700,000 Retaining Walls_ $35.00/sf 0 $0 '49,700 $1,740,000 -Pavement $2.50/sf 660,254' $1,65100_e"r 700,971. $1,752,000 Other-ConsL° a 25% of>° $2,471,000 $2,714,000 Items** ; _ total cost , Total Const. Cost $9,885,000 _ $10,856,000 Operations and 10% of j $988,500 $1,085,600 Maintenance**' total cost ESTIMATED COST,,. - $10,873,500 k $11,941,600 * The unit -cost for the bridge varies between the TUDI and the SPUI as a more costly bridge `structure is required with the SPUI. ** Includes signalization, lighting, curbs and guners,rdrainage, traffic control, mobilization, striping, signing, landscaping, and demolition. *** Includes signals and lights (electricity to operate, -changing light:,bulbs and burned out. components, etc.)„ resealingpavement joints, bridge Painting and replacement of ,guardrails, upkeep of.,signs, pavement markers,andtstriping assuming a,20:year,life. r , RJ - t 0 Estimated Cost for Frontage Roads - The following costs were developed for the: construction of a.30' one=way,frontage road .based on ACHD's Development Surveys Cost Estimate List and the conceptual design for the frontage road. This cost estimate assumes that a 146' right-of-way has been purchased as,shown.in the TUDI and SPUI exhibits prior to,the,consteuction of the frontage road -and a 214' right-of-way widtKis'required .for the frontage -roads. _ • the License Plate Recognition (LPR) costs which included the leasing and insurance of four "Smog Dog" vans and technicians, • the operating costs which included rental phones, printing and mailing surveys, and purchasing a hard drive, a disk drive, and back up tapes and • the labor costs for local staff, consultants, and temporary staff. i� 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 January 12, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. for an amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and Map to extend the current mixed planned use development designation along a corridor approximately 800 feet on either side of Eagle Road between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road. 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 21st day of December, 1998. PUBLISH December 23, 1998 and January 6, 1999.Of r SEAL 4 C•7 Bz I_ I I fes~' 1� lm� r X 6 n O X X S u PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. 870 N. LINDER ROAD, SUITE B cn—Ax, z MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 —XVi;Z- PH: (201) 887-7760 FAX: (2081 X887-7781 L governing board, shallduct at least one (1) public he in which interested persons shall ave an opportunity to be heard.*east fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place and a summary of the plan to be discussed shall be published in the official newspaper or paper of general circulation within the jurisdiction. The commission shall also make available a notice to other papers, radio and -television stations serving the jurisdiction for use. as, a.public.service_announcement. Notice of intent to adopt, repeal or amend the plan shall be sent to all political subdivisions providing services Within the planning jurisdiction, including t school districts, ga1 st fifteen - (15)_ days _prior to -the -public hearing scheduled by the _commission. Following the commission hearingif the commission makes a material change in the plan, further notice and hearing shall be provided before the commission forwards the plan with its recom- mendation to the governing board. A record of the hearings, findings made, and actions taken shall be maintained. (b) The governing board, prior to adoption, amendment, or repeal of the plan, shall conduct at least one (1) public hearing using the same notice and hearing procedures as the commission. The governing board shall not hold a public hearing, give notice of a proposed hearing, nor take action upon the plan, amendments, or repeal until recommendations have been received from the commission. Following the hearing of the governing board, if the governing board makes a material change in the plan, further notice and hearing shall be provided before the governing board adopts the plan. (c) No plan shall be effective unless adopted by resolution or ordinance by the governing board. An ordinance enacting a plan or part of a plan may be adopted, amended, or repealed by reference as provided for in sections 31-715 and 50-901, Idaho Code, three (3) copies of which shall be on file with the city clerk or county clerk. (d) Any person may petition the commission or, in absence of a commis- sion, the governing board, for a plan amendment at any time. The commis- sion may recommend amendments to the plan to the governing board not more frequently than every six (6) months to correct errors in the original plan or to recognize substantial changes in the actual conditions in the area. The commission may recommend amendments to other ordinances rautho- rized by this chapter to the governing added b 1975, ch. 188, § 2, . 515 I Y P � p Compiler's notes. Section 4 of S.L. 1992, ch. 269 is compiled as § 67-6511. Sec. to sec. ref. This section is referred to in §§ 39-6410, 39-7407, 67-6504, 67-6511 — 67-6515, 67-6517, 67-6518, 67-6520, 67-6524 — 67-6526 and 67-8208. Cited in: Langmeyer v. State, 104 Idaho 53, 656 P.2d 114 (1982); McDonnell v Board of County Comm'rs, 116 Idaho 824, 780 P.2d 146 (1989); Lowery v. Board of County Comm'rs, 117 Idaho 1079, 793 P.2d 1251 (1990). ANALYSIS Initiative legislation prohibited. Notice and hearing requirements. TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12, 1998 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor LEGAL LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live (208) 884-4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Mem r 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30, 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12, 1998 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: "A X�) C ir NOT,'t 3"1998, -CITY OF MEAIDIAN� PI�TG & ZONING 7, 8 ]n -7, e�ers To— /,City of Meridian, CPA g=,goo own //,-Planning and Zoning Commission v2 00_E: Suite 201\ Men 'dian Idaho -"83642 IED_ REGEN October -49,_19981 NOV City,,of Meridian Re!`­(_�y Application to Amend the- Me'din-Co Comprehensive ;City . -Clerk'Office T Ene Proposed TektAniehdmend'J /Proposed Map, Amendment —., Eagles R6ad,C6iiid6r ly� Dear Commissioners -4 'We, are requestirigia Comprehensive -Plan and Map'amendment-to provide -for Mixed/Planned' Mixed/Plann Use Development designation- within tfiezEaglAo -between FairviewAvenue ad ule-,and" Usti6k Road. Based upon the,currerit Comprehensive Plan'.Map; this corridor would, b& a,2,900 feet by :800 feet -ori, �eithef, side d' - ,area'\ of Eagl&Rodd from -the existing Unit -,- A'. ,Deve[6pment-(PUIj)',designation at the inferseaions;of Fj dirview'Avenue, and Eagl6load and'-- 1 k'N Ustick'Rodd a n'd Eagle Road,.- Y A c n k6rdai icF with -ih'e,Meiidian'Co�iprehengive,Plan, lmole fmeiitAtidn),Chdpter',,,iCoinoreheiisive Plan Amendments Section; we 6ffer the/Ulowing analysis: _j 1. /,Specific definition of the cha*requested . 'Map ndme �,Feque�ting'd,Comprdhi��,n's'ive Plan and J , 1� / - As stated tar ame nt to', extend the current 1 d/PUDAesignation a ong a,corridoi approximately 890 feet on eitheesi&`of 7 M xe' -Eagle Road between Fair'vie'wAvenue and-Usiick- Road.- F' 41 Specific ai�y inf6rmdtion on pri,vty \ropeinvolved. K With the ekcepti6n' of Carols Subdivision to the west (one, acre lot subdivision), the majority Of the property, 6cated within jthepr�posed co'm-"* 8or is vacant largef 'Acreage I 'th an parce s wi 'existing x §mFl&Family Residential designation.,/ I/ 47 j, P) B',- i�;ERIDLAN,.,'IDAHO, 83642,-i(208) 887-774- PAX (208) �87-7781 /0 'A t TV -situat1'O"hichWarkdnt§, a change eing made inthe Plam 3., Jhe condition or b With -the current C6rnDrenensive PlaWdesigtidtiodof Single Fainily'Residentiai 6n4tid'se'", properties adjacent to`Eagle Road,Ahe development of thek propertie's will'be severely limited, due'f6 the traffic Volume's creating noise and safety issuesr,- 4 TThe,­publicneed, forand �behefii_from_ such a change i n/1he -Plan T P_ The'propoged change to the Miked/PUP'desi ationwoul&allowa�variet_\) grf y of d6vel6pment' "'ova of a '- -,' -! /'within'this area through the Planned Developmentprotess,requiring app'r 6 �c ning dnd, within' 2/401- D 0 dth6' Meridid/it Z6 VIA-- Condit use., As deiim4 Section -,Development Ordinance -the (M0k),Mix'e'd(Us_e Review Areas are I - those areas 'which, o J, eir unique ion, and vari& because location, I potefitiath6edjo be planned ai*,,�,hole have, f h' que o 7 h \/ - "% - I " 11 1 " , n ",/'(been designated in-th6 Meridian Comprehensive Plan Mixed Use Review Areas.ijhese --7, citional' -useareas shall btdevel6ped\as Plarir�ed,Develop�#eritGeneraI (PI)G),-and\must-be,ap0roVed as,a Id ,. -1 By, on granting thisAmendinent , development inthis/ corridor'and in the,, general,C, =area x,611'provide general, c61nmerciat'services along Eagle Road including the extension of ,public utilities.such4s sewer and water At no cost tolthe lochl,taxpay6rs t`l D6curneiitation'that -no' other -solutions to the problem are presentedJ, by ihe.ctyTent policy 0� -,'of the Plan are possible ,�ofrea§onabl6., 4 -A- /The current,policies"bthomprehensive Plan and Map' a116 w f6�C for'kngle fitmily residential Any �hy proposed use area would not be permitted due to mixed wiihinihis' niy in,this area. -,/-\non-coi upliance With Ihe'Coinpreh&isive Plan. - A) _6.-,.�Develop ent intentions f'or"any land'i6olved� '1V i ' " o \ . y- , )" � --We'are-conte Olatingtheinstaflation ofa privatei�dobr.nd-o­td66r,storag�,,facility on the,- east'side\of Eagle Road apprqxin 1/2 mile north ofFairview Avenue. -,The Meridian June Zoning City, C6uncif'supp6rted this, pi�ieci(,in 1995�,�_]_We have initiatd'd,'an A6 C'ounty/ v\ Ordinance Amendment '46- allow'such a facility within the C2 - zone of the County -but areho being t6ld1hat a zone change to_C-2Wouldnot 'be'ifi,compliance with the Meridian Com pre ive Plaii, V T7., -'Any, other data and, infbrmationth emission in eeddd by the�Plafifiihg and/Zoning (fd�imiss k\ '- '' ),, -Ili � .�) 11, \ , � J ) .1- , I i e�,al'uati'ng''the 'proposai,-sucti aswho'does it,help,.Who'does it huiit,'�liow' much'i§ it'going AJA to cc o(, and,)* ist ko is going' X,� - This a\mendmenfwilfallodo`w ntrolled. devel6pment'thdVis public serviceoriented dlongg­thie Eagle corridor. \_In -addition, amik of,affordable'h' d lirnitdd offikes could b ousing an e If ded,through the PUD process' -Sin' -along/this cohidor is primarily vacarif f \ the property p ovi -/areA-N6uld not -adversely effect the pfop6rty-oviiners. -Th6 cost of Ed; development -in this 'service's-withiii *do\ Wdiild be-bofriby(-the; developers and not ,by'the: and extensions to the'e-orri r t axpayers 2 J. 'I A _/J Y - (T '17 Based upon theinformationprovided above', we believe that this amendment is,�6f benefit to.-,� 6 rs-directly effected\in-the area.-Amixe use, ,the'publ as,well-ds ihe\property jc� wn6, ' _/ I I ��i_ �\ � I I - •V A I corridor rridor-will �.tovide'services and a�nlex6elleht buffer zone between, the- increasing traffic -on Eagle Road dfid'the",fe'sid0iitial development occurring within 6e- -thig'aftiendment-would s6lelybe at the expense of the:` \1 VY area. Any development realized by P developer/ Ancludirig th6exi'en"sio�'n"o'f�/serviceg to the area./\ Thi§ - J, and fi6t of the public, d, progression in the 'updating of the C6inpreheiisive Plan in propose ametidniefitlis,afidtural,progr s A" o' ihat/the inixe&lu�e esignation currently exists at the intersections f Fairview Avenue and/ 1)� -Eagle Road -,and \'Ustick Rod Road.' Road and Eagle icipating a'subii We understand'thai the City -is, currently aint" -stantiAI,C6mprehensive'Plah,,,� amendment in�the,fdll of 1999.1Idaho' Code alloWs�the-Planning'and Zoning-Cbmmission to.,. - 1(red6m"mend aine'rdinefits46 the� Co iriprehefis'ive -Plan to the- City)Council /ndt snore fr,6,4,u,en-tly; \than every /six\ftionths. If Weare amendment, the Commissidn"s)' re to proceed With this reconiffiendatiori, could occur in suffdent all io,futurei recomme'ndlations in Al. conjunction with the anticipated Coiriprehe"ns e'Plan arhendiri 6iit'in- &4411_6f :1999. -,A We look forward -to your, favorable recommenddtion on this J amendrn��ni ) "If you have any questions orl concerns on this',proposal,' please &elTree'.to,cbhtact me'at\(208) 887,= 760 4 Sincerely�, "off JA y z Robert/ C. Unger, Project Manager. i 7 cc:','File /#,98760( L if J 4 11 J V J �p T 4 f -A 7/ Cl --I-\ v , 4 6 - ;C A V_ A din ty , A Iz PROPOSED MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN `' TEXT AMENDMENT F 5. MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT The Comprehensive Plan identifies the following Mixed -Planned Use Development: Old Town: As the original townsite of the City of Meridian, it includes the area south of Carlton Avenue, north of Franklin Road, andathe areas that are immediately contiguous to Meridian and East First Street, as defined by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Old Town should continue to serve as a shopping, as well as a governmental and public activity center. In recognition that its shape and character will increase with additional population growth and development, the Comprehensive Plan sets the stage for there -development of Old Town to reflect market and economic trends. Probable mixed - uses for Old Town include specialty commercial, higher density residential, offices, medical facilities and public and semi-public facilities. OLD TOWN POLICIES 5.1 The City of Meridian shall encourage existing.business and commercial enterprises to remain in Old Town. 5.2 Detailed market studies should be undertaken to explore and clarify issues -related to mixed-use development within Old Town. 5.3 The development of a variety of compatible land uses should be provided in plans and proposals for the future development of Old Town. 5.4 Special analysis should be undertaken concerning existing uses within Old Town so' that specific recommendations can be made for the development of transitional uses which will enhance the area and prevent future deterioration. 5.5 Public parking development is a priority in Old Town. Mixed -Use Areas Adjacent to I-84, Overland Road and Franklin Road These areas are unique in that they are surrounded by arterials, immediately adjacent to the freeway (I-84), are relatively level in topography, have a distinct linear shape, and are greatly affected by contiguous industrial, residential and commercial land uses. In order that compatible land uses and efficient use of the land might occur, this corridor is anticipated for a variety of planned, compatible mixed uses. Probable mixed uses for the areas could be commercial, combined medium -to -high density residential, open space uses (as a means to buffer highway noise), tourist lodging, industrial, office, medical, and related land uses. 'Franklin, Overland/I-84 Mixed Use Policies 5.6 The development of a variety of compatible land uses should be provided in specific_ plans and proposals for future development. 5.7 Detailed market studies should be undertaken to explore and clarify the issues that are related to mixed-use development in these areas. 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. a. 5.9 The integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open + space and other landscaping -techniques. 5.10 Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed. , 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of development should be harmonized with previously -developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential area, including noise and traffic reduction. 5.12 Strip development within this mixed-use area is not in compliance with the goals and. policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be required. 5.14 Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals iri' this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. 5.15 The mixed-use area in -the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/Eagle Road/I-84 interchange is a priority development area. Mixed -Use Area at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue plus the Eagle Road Corridor North of Fairview Avenue These areas are within Ada County, but are rapidly becoming contiguous to the City Limits 'of the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots, and sparse development pattern. In order that compatible land uses and efficient use of the land might occur, this corridor is anticipated for a variety of planned, compatible mixed uses. Probable mixed uses for the areas could be highway commercial, combined low -to -high density residential, open space uses, office, medical, and related land uses. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: 5.16 All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. 5.17 A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desirable for this area, including low -to -high density residential, office, and commercial land uses. 5.18 Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land -use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. 5.19 A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. Mixed -Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue plus areas North of Fairview Avenue These areas are within Ada County but nearly surrounded by the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots and a sparse development pattern. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: 4"5.20 All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. 5,4Z5.21 A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desirable for this area, including low -to -high density residential, office, light industrial and commercial land uses. X5.22 Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land -use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. 5-W5.23 A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. 4,2,05.24 Pine Street will connect to Emerald Road and serve as a collector to this neighborhood. 5-U5.25 Any development in this area must be compatible with the Idaho Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) and related industrial/commercial development associated with the FTZ. C Residential uses adjoining the FTZ will incorporate screening buffers and open space. P J MLL-L99A3OZ) :XVA 09LL-L88 (*Z) :Hd Zt,9£9 OHVCII `NVlGllJ3W 9 311ns `GVMJ 2AGN1- 'N OLS 'ONI `S�133NION3 310VNNId I t §U�- 1 11 I I - •I o, azo I COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman • Planning & Zoning Dear'Mr. Unger: s The City- Council of Meridian heard a presentation by Robert Montgomery regarding the above - referenced property on May 16, 1995. The Meridian City Council voted to write a letter of favorable recommendation to Ada County with conditions that there be adequate screening (landscaping) and that provision for a future easement for the South Slough sewer extension be made. It should also be noted that bur Comprehensive Plan designates the South Slough as a future pathway and that a school and park site are needed in this section. This approval does not; however, include hookup to any Boise City services. Minutes of the meeting are attached for your information. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you Have any questions. Sincerely, CITY OF MERIDIAN Shari L. Stiles Planning & Zoning Administrator cc: Robert Montgomery, Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live WILLIAJANICE L. BES. City , Treasurer Clerk JANICE L. GASS. City Treasurer 1 �4�T T ® MERIDIAN �� CITY GARY D. SMITH,'P.E. City Engineer �H,_ f BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO KENNY W. BOWERS. Fire Chief • MERIDIAN, IDAHO.83642 W.L. "BILL" GORDON, police Chief WAYNEG. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone 208 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 ( ) Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor June 6, 1995 r Mr. Bob Unger Ada County Development Services 650 Main Street Boise, ID 83702 _ Re' Weiss Property - Eagle Road s/o Ustick I COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman • Planning & Zoning Dear'Mr. Unger: s The City- Council of Meridian heard a presentation by Robert Montgomery regarding the above - referenced property on May 16, 1995. The Meridian City Council voted to write a letter of favorable recommendation to Ada County with conditions that there be adequate screening (landscaping) and that provision for a future easement for the South Slough sewer extension be made. It should also be noted that bur Comprehensive Plan designates the South Slough as a future pathway and that a school and park site are needed in this section. This approval does not; however, include hookup to any Boise City services. Minutes of the meeting are attached for your information. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you Have any questions. Sincerely, CITY OF MERIDIAN Shari L. Stiles Planning & Zoning Administrator cc: Robert Montgomery, Attorney Meridian City Council May 16, 1995 " Page 67 Kingsford: Moved by Max, second by Ron to approve the beer and wine license for Bolo's Pub,and Eatery, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #18: TEXACO TRAVEL CENTER: REQUEST FOR BEER AND WINE LICENSE: Kingsford: Any problem with that Chief? } (Inaudible) Kingsford: Entertain a motion on that. Tolsma: So moved Yerrington: Second Kingsford: Moved by Ron, second by Max to approve of the beer and wine license for Texaco Tiavel Center, we did by the way_ get their County license they tumed that in today, all those in favor? , Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #19: ROBERT MONTGOMERY: PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED STORAGE FACILITY WITHIN MERIDIAN CITY AREA OF IMPACT: Montgomery: It has been a long evening so I will be very brief,. I am here, my name is Bob Montgomery and I am here on behalf of`Steve and Lavon White (End of Tape) Mr. Bob Unger and he`indicated to us before Ada County would with the review of the project that. ` they needed some indication from the City, of Meridian as to their feelings about this, because the Comprehensive Plan at the site of their property I believe calls for a single family residences. So, Mr. Unger suggested that we visit with the Council and get some indication from them or at least an indication that they didn't object to a review'by Ada County to proceed onward with the project. So, Mr. Steve Wiess is here and he would like to explain very briefly what the project is and what they are planning. Weirs: I will try to make this as brief as I possibly can. On your Comprehensive Plan you will notice on the right hand side up near the outer border there is a red mark next to one of your I believe it is a proposed park. That is our property, it is located at 2500 North Eagle Road. It consists of 12 acres. It is a very irregular shape and we are severely limited by the ' slough on the north side and an irrigation lateral on the south side regarding Meridian City Council May16, 1995 Page 68 ingress/egress. We would not be accessible to the properties on either side of behind us because they are literally the first spot from the division of the slough to an irrigation lateriaL And it is very narrow at the back of the property' and very wide towards the front. The second page is the aerial photograph taken by the Idaho Transportation Department E in March 1994, again outlining the property boundaries that we currently have. You can see 'the development in the area. What we want to do is provide a service for the continuing growth of the Meridian area and allow people to meet with the covenants of the subdivisions and such of the single family dwellings around us to have a place to park there excess vehicles, motor homes, boats. It is excess storage units instead of filling their garage and parking on the street they would have another place to locate those_ extra items. The Ithird page if you, unfold it is a preliminary landscape. Shari indicated that there would need to be some extensive landscaping. Idaho Transportation Department does have plans in fiscal year 1996 to widen that section of highway. They have already purchased 70 feet from us for.the`entire length of our frontage which is I believe 212 feet, nearly 213. Idaho Power, unbeknownst to Ada County was quite surprised and somewhat -dismayed over the fact that they are running a major transmission line down that section of road. They evidently indicated they thought it was possibly going to be a buried line. Anyway we are limited on the constraints of the irrigation,canals, the slough, the progress,.. that'is coming our direction as to what we can do with that property. Being as it is such a small parcel of ground single family dwellings after we put in street and curb and gutter and"utilities and what not wouldn't be a viable.option for us. Kingsford: Roughly how many acres are you looking at there? Weirs: The entire parcel that we own is 12 acres, what we are looking at doing is developing 7 acres in possibly 2different stages. We would put in an entirety of 600 storage individual storage units, along that, that includes RV and outside covered storage for different vehicles and what not. Kingsford: That is your intended use for the whole parcel? Weirs: Yes, right now we have a plan of doing the 7 acres in possibly within the next 5 to 10 years, we would go ahead and extend it on back. Currently we have a residence on that property, 3000 square foot house with a tote car garage and the remaining 5 acres until such time as they are ready to develop the rest of it would remain a rural setting we might put one steer out there on grass or something like that. I do have a preliminary, it didn't get into your little thing here but I do have a preliminary outline of 'what the entire land would be consumed of if you would like to see that? Kingsford: Go ahead. 0 Meridian City Council May 16, 1995 Page 69 Weirs: This ,is the entire piece of ground, the boundary lines, the slough and this is how much of it we would be developing right away. The remainder of the residence and the pasture back here (inaudible). Morrow. Type of construction of the buildings? if we looked around Ada County and the cities in Ada County what would this project most look like in terms of building construction? Weirs: Most of the storage facilities in Ada County are a frame with a metal covering, we are looking at doing it out of block or concrete (inaudible) so that it is a more permanent ,more pleasing; easier to design as far as making it easy on the eye -and what not for people to come by and to rent and what not. Morrow. Based on what you are saying these would be very similar to the ones that are being_built currently on State Street? Weirs: Yes, very much so, the buildings of course would be much longer and what not because we do have more room to'work with but yes they would be very up class. Morrow. Just east of Collister? Weirs: Yes,.they would all be surrounded with a,cyclops security fence, we would go ahead with that all the way around our property liner Problems we have right now with other types of developments that we have considered you know we owned this property since 1969, 1 grew up on it, I used to hunt and fish around it, you can't do that any more. Livestock is a problem because Eagle Road is`going to become such a busy thoroughfare that if we did have an animal get out onto the highway the liability would be atrocious. The surrounding neighborhoods have got dogs and what not that come in and attack young calves in the spring. I don't know if I should say this but I have shot several dogs in the years past before there were many homes around. As far as growing a crop it is a very small parcel of ground, (inaudible) farmers'are hard to come by. Things are changing we can't put in a sewer system we can't put in water because it is not available and this would be the way for the property to help pay for itself, increase the Meridian City's tax base in the years ahead and a benefit to the future development of the area. Corrie: Have you run this by the Fire department yet? Weirs: I talked to Mr. Voss about it because I needed to talk to him about what type of fire protection, fire suppression would need to be detailed into the plans as we go along. He indicated that internal sprinkler system would not be necessary. That there would need to be fire hydrants with a minimum of 1500 gallons per minute for the fire trucks in case.of Meridian City Council May 16, 1995 Page 70 some sort of horrendous disaster. But he did indicated also that if we discussed it with the fire department overseeing Council or whatever it was that he was talking about at the time there could be a possibility they could waive it until such time as the City water did come our way. Now if you look in your Comprehensive Plan half mile north of us on the south west comer, well actually I guess it would be the northeast corner of Eagle and Ustick Road you do have a proposed well to go in there for City water. He kind of indicated they might be able to work something out if we get your approval, if Ada County is willing to work with us that we could go ahead an stem in all the systems and everything and then when the water came by, we could just hook up to it. Kingsford: Either of those ditches that are adjacent to you are they live ditches year round? Weirs: The Slough on,the north side had been a live ditch for years, the last 3 years it is dry ,from before Thanksgiving until May. I don't know if it is;because the water table has dropped, I actually had Health and Welfare tell me that at one time the water table out there was 2 feet deep and our house sits 4 feet in the ground and I said I don't think so. It has been live in the past and we used to water livestock out of it and it has been dry in the last 3 years in the winter time. Corrie: You will probably have to run that by Rural fire and I don't know what they -will tell you. Kingsford: Of course that is one of the things that Ada County gives them approval that they will have to meet. Weirs: An option we may have is to drill a well that will pump whatever required water. Basically what we are asking for right now is a preliminary (inaudible) from the Council that would indicate in a letter form to Ada County Planning and Zoning that you wouldn't necessarily stand in the way for us to go ahead with this project. Kingsford: Any further questions of the Council? Is there a motion? Smith: Mr. Mayor, I would just like to make a comment that the South Slough is one of our designated locations for a trunk sewer. We don't at this point know where that sewer is going to be exactly other than the Comprehensive Plan shows the trunk sewer route. Whether it is on this gentleman's property or on the other side of the slough I don't know. But in terms of locating your buildings I would request that you give consideration to enough space so that a sewer line could go through if necessary. At least the option is available to be located there. Typically we try to stay within the easement that has been designated by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District who maintains that ditch, l don't know Meridian- City Council May 16, 1995 Page 71 what that width is at that point, it varies up and down the ditches. Weirs: On the Slough Meridian I don't believe has an easement they just asked if they - could enter our property'to cut the trees and to drudge out the area that is plugged. On the south side of our property where the irrigation lateral is there is a lane that goes down on our property that they do maintain. That is another problem with the progress of the area as we have a lot of people running their dogs and riding their horses and riding bicycles and motorcycles up and down that lane and again we have a liability problem there if they trip and fall through a gofer hole and break their leg they are going to sue me not Ada County or Nampa Meridian Irrigation. So again this would fence this material, it would no longer be irrigated on that front portion that I showed you here on this map. The remaining back portion would still be accessible to Nampa Meridian for maintenance on those surfaces. Kingsford: I think Gary's point,is we would like to have access and be able to put a sewer line there. Weirs: At this point in time we are looking at possibly having a driveway back to the home that is there right now. if we go ahead with possible purchase of another piece of property adjacent to us if they are willing there will be a 25 foot driveway down the side there that will be paved and you can put your sewer line in under that. When we develop on it will not be a problem. Carrie: What minor change is required (inaudible). Weirs: You have single dwelling homes in that area and we are going to commercial. I am assuming it is a commercial set up. You have on your comprehensive plan you have mixed use and commercial within possibly a 1000 feet of us on the north and the south. It is just again a small parcel of ground that if somebody were to buy it and try to develop it and put homes on it, it wouldn't pay. Kingsford: I don't know so long as it is green I don't know that it necessarily would be a violation of our comprehensive plan. The request is for a letter from the Council to Ada County P & Z, is there a motion? Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we send a letter to the Ada County P & Z with a favorable recommendation subject to a couple of conditions. The one of course being the completion of the screening and secondly that Ada County P & Z as a condition of approval stipulate some future easement area for sewer line access as per Mr. Smith's recommendations. That is a decision that he needs to make. Meridian City Council May 16, 1995 Page 72 Tolsma: _ Second Kingsford: Moved by Wait, second by Ron to approve or to write a letter of favorable recommendation to Ada County Planning and Zoning with 2.stipulations one that have adequate screening and two that there be provided future easement on South Slough for sewer extension, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #20: TERRY ADAMS: Kingsford: Mr. Adams is the current holder of the Foreign Trade Zone in Meridian. We have had some discussion with Port of Lewiston and he, wants to make a presentation to Council with regard to granting that transfer to Port of Lewiston for use of the Foreign Trade Zone. I will let him speak to that issue. Adams: Thank you, first I thought it would be in order to do a quick review of the Foreign Trade Zone. One, the goal is to assist existing international business by providing an area outside of the US jurisdiction -so that any raw products that are imported in the United States are not assessed a duty so long as those goods are used in the manufacture of a finished good which is then being exported. Second, there was an assumption that the real potential in this`area lay in the ability to provide this capability to existing businesses that their existing location not expecting them to build a new facility just to come inside of this zone so to speak. And that we would do so by granting special purpose sub -zone licenses to those existing businesses. There was a further assumption that any facility that was physically placed within the Treasure Valley Business Park which is designated in the original application as the geographical boundary that any facility would most likely be in, the form or an administration building only. It was a further assumption made that I believed that we did not see that just because this was zone was granted that we would see an immediate rush to participate in that. I think that last assumption has proven very much true. Currently I have been approached by the Port of Lewiston and, also Inland 465. Inland 465 is a warehousing venture a limited partnership comprised of Phost Maritime which operates the barges from Lewiston to Portland. Lewiston Grain Growers and Ken Cook who is alias manager of West Best Trucking based in Lewiston. The Port of Lewiston is serviced by Union Pacific and the Burlington Northern. Terminal #2 of which the warehouse is a part is 150 acres consisting of barge docks, container transload facilities, there are 10 truck lines and 11 international container companies represented there. The warehousing facility is 150,000 square feet of multi -module warehousing. Both Inland 465 and the Port of Lewiston are interested in obtaining the Foreign Trade Zone status. The granteeship of an FTZ I think needs to be understood is really not a commodity this isn't something that is sold such as real estate. It appears we have some options here, one I 0 m N 00 o, N W � W O _00 00 a N N M CID :mp 3LUz W W �rL t J Z o n OD N a y M N 00 E O a O O C t7 E 4� N G U cMn � 0 U Ln 0 0 Ln S 0 0 Ln r. Ln r. 0 a s ru a Q' ru 0 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN "Hub of Treasure Valley' 33 E. Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 888.4433 Customer's t R- 13 -C1 w Order No. Date Name Pi noacle c�iq4► nPPIi- s. 1 nC. Address Phone: SOLD BY • 0. D. CHARGE ON ACCT. MDSE. RETD. PAID OUT 1 Plan 11 11co1 O° I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I All'claims and returned goods MUST be accompanied by this bin. TAX 0 0 0 910 9 Received RTOTAL By I i CO GS -202-2 PRINTED IN U.S.A. (� VXiNTED WITH SOY INK ._ 99 i 11 s 1),INNACLE, Engineers, Inc. 870 N. LINDER SUITE B, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 PI -1i (208) 887-7760 (208) 887-7781 FAX TO: I 1 li 1 1 H WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ 11 x 17 Drawing(s) .211"Copy of letter /JZAftached ❑ Blueprints ❑ 3 1/2" disk 0 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE:/JOB !o NO: cl -5 76 O l -2a/ ATTENTION: :1.e RE: Cuf I v ❑ Revise and Resubmit ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ Under separate cover via ❑ SepiasNellums ❑ Calculations ❑ Mylar/Ammonia Mylar ❑ Change Order ❑ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: /&.'For review ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE 4 DESCRIPTION ❑ Specifications ❑ Field Report the following items jY8-1/2 x 11 Drawing(s) ❑ No exceptions taken ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Make corrections noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Revise and Resubmit ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING: FEBRUARY 9, 1999 APPLICANT: PINNACLE ENGINEERING ITEM NUMBER: 1 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (EAGLE RD CORRIDOR) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FROM 01/12/99 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 FINDINGS All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. a MERIDIAN PLANI'AND ZONING FEBRUARY 9, 1999 PAGE 3 and we hope that we are making them the right way. So, I appreciate that everybody is here tonight. As we go through this, we have a position that we can take on several different things. This is all done by law. We can continue the hearing if we feel that we come to a place we need more information, that's what we call tabling it. We can approve it, at that time we give the work to the attorney who gets passed on to our City Council to review. We can modify it, which you will hear a lot of discussion because after you have had your chance to talk we close'the public hearing and then we have the chance to talk in front of you but among ourselves here as to how we understand and how we want to rule. So we have that time so we can make some modifications as we see fit. This is all put in print or we can deny it. When you have a denial what we do, we do the same thing, it goes to the attorney and the attorney writes the material up and it goes to the council. The council makes the second decision. So there is a very democratic way of doing business here. I think that is all I'm going to say about all that. I have some other thoughts, but I'll come up with those later. The first part of the evening we have item no. 1. KFOR TEM NO. 1: FINDINGS OF FACT•AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ENGINEERING — EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR: MacCoy: Commissioners, what do you have in mind here? I De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission determines that upon review of the applicable standards, goals, policies setforth in the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, the established record and the applicable law, that amendment of the Comprehensive Plan is not warranted in the; instant case. Given the forgoing, the subject application for a plan amendment should be denied. Absent a timely appeal, the forgoing decision and recommendation of denial will not be forwarded to the governing body City Council of the City of Meridian. Borup: Second. MacCoy: Okay we are going to go roll call. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Borup-aye, Commissioner De Weerd-aye, Commissioner Smith -absent, Commissioner Nelson -aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves this Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and decisions and recommendation. MERIDIAN PLANNA AND ZONING FEBRUARY 9, 1999 PAGE 4 Nelson: Second that. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. (Inaudible) MacCoy: You want to do a second time? All right, we will do it a second time. All right we are going to do a second roll call the way this thing is written now. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Borup-aye, Commissioner De Weerd-aye, Commissioner Smith -absent, Commissioner Nelson -aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM,NO. 2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 10.02 ACRES FOR PROPOSED YUKON SUBDIVISION BY JAMES AND KAREN HOLLISTER—EAST SIDE OF LOCUST GROVE RD, BETWEEN USTICK AND MCMILLAN RD, JUST NORTH OF SUMMERFIELD SUB: MacCoy: Staff what do you have? Stiles: Chairman MacCoy, commissioners, this application for 10.02 acres it's a little misleading, it talks about the Yukon Subdivision, this is not actually a subdivision, it will be for the annexation and zoning of this parcel and it's entirety and at this time no subdivision is proposed. The applicant is aware that the frontage that they have proposed on Locust Grove Road would not allow for a further subdivision without some kind of variance from the City Council. This property that is directly north of Summerfield Subdivision has been requested at this time because of the school districts application, which public hearing follows this public hearing. Staff has made the comments in our memo dated February 5, 1999. One additional item, I would like to add as a condition is that the private road that is proposed back to the existing home also have some buffering with a planting strip for the adjacent residential subdivision so that private road does not directly abut the existing homes there. MacCoy: Bruce, anything? Freckleton: Commissioner MacCoy, members of the commission, 1 have nothing further. MacCoy: All right, with that we'll open the public hearing, will the applicant come forward on the positive side please? I • BEFORE" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE' CITY, OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST ) ORDER OF DENIAL OF APPEAL FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ) AND AFFIRMATION OF AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ) FINDINGS OP FACT AND ENGINEERS, INC. - EAGLE ROAD ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND CORRIDOR ) DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION The above entitled matter coming before the City Council for hearing on the appeal of the Applicant avits regularCouncil meeting on the 6th day of April, 1999, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., on.said date at -the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and no one appearing in support of the appeal and the Council taking notice of the record of this matter, -and of its ordinances and Comprehensive Plan, and the notice of appeal and filings, and being fully advised in °the matter finds: 1. That there is a reasonable basis for the Planning and Zoning Commission Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Recommendation in this matter, and that said action was 'not, in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions of the State of Idaho and/or the City of Meridian; and 2. That the recommendation was not, nor is this action, in excess of the - statutory authority of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the _City Council; and t; ORDER OF DENIAL OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION OF - 1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. - REQUEST FOR COMP: PLAN AMENDMENT 0 C"') 3. That the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, in this matter, is not arbitrary, capricious, or -an abuse of its discretion. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the above and foregoing Findings and upon the record of this matter, it is -,hereby ordered and this does order,that: 1. The Applicant's appeal is hereby denied; and 2. ,� The Findings of Fact and Conclusions -of Law and Decision and, Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission are hereby adopted and affirmed, and that the above entitled application for f Comprehensive Plan amendment is"hereby denied By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 6th day of April, 1999. By: ROBER D. CORRIE M , City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Works Department. Dated: _"" — 6 ? 9 I ORDER SOF DENIAL OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION OF - 2 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION OE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PINNACLE ENGINEERS, .INC. - REQUEST FOR -COMP. -PLAN AMENDMENT A P Code . a ry x- r msg\Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Pinnacle\OrderDenial r a r ORDER OF DENIAL; OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION. OF - 3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION . PINNACLE -ENGINEERS, INC. - REQUEST FOR COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT N .. 4 2 3 V JUSTIN P. AYLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. R GIGRAY, III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NYE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRUSS ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE, SUITE 31 POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680-1150 TEL (208) 288-2499 FAX (208) 288-2501 Email via Internet @ wfg@wppmg.com William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642- April 26, 1999 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA, IDAHO 83653-0247 TEL (208) 466.9272 FAX (208) 466.4405 PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE KECEIVED APR 3 0 1999 City of Meridian City Clerk Office Re: PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. REQUEST - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Dear Will: 1 Regarding the above referenced matter, please find enclosed the original of the ORDER OF DENIAL OF APPEAL AND AFFIRMATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION for signature by the Mayor and yourself. Please serve a conformed copy of the ORDER, along with the Notice of Final Action, upon the Applicant, with a Certificate of Service in the file and a copy to Planning and Zoning and Public Works. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly yours, Wm. F. Ger, I msg/Z:\Worlc\M\Meridian 15360M\Pinnacle\ClerlcLtrApr26 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 6, 1999 PAGE 56 Bentley: Thank you. Corrie: Okay, any other questions for staff. Since Mr. Hickey is not here, can't talk to him. Now I'll entertain a motion on the final plat of Oliason Park Subdivision. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, move we approve the final plat for Oliason Park Subdivision by Tony Hickey. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the final plat for Oliason Park Subdivision by Tony Hickey, any further discussion. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 23: APPEAL OF PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS: AL Corrie: Since they are not here, I recommend that we table that. Bird: I move that we table the appeal of Planning and Zoning Commission denial of Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Pinnacle Engineers till April 20, 1999. Corrie: I've got a motion, do I hear a second? Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table Item No. 23 till 4-20-99. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I would assume that these folks knew this was going on, if they are not here, I don't see any reason why we can't take action on this unless there is great amount of discussion on the part of the council. My recommendation would be to take action on it this evening and get it over with, unless we need some more input, it seems pretty clear in here what has gone on. We've got a (Inaudible) conclusion from our city attorney and a basis for the denial. Bentley: I agree. Bird: I'll go with that. • a MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 6, 1999 PAGE 57 Rountree: Mr. Counselor can we do that? Gigray: Mayor and members of the council, I assume tonight they were given notice that tonight was the night set for hearing of the appeal and they have the duty of prosecuting that appeal if they requested a continuance and there had been approval that such continuance would be given then I would say continue it. Otherwise, I think you could move forward with it. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, the City Clerk has indicated that he's made a telephone call to Mr. Unger on the 5th of April. I guess the question for the city clerk is was a message left or was there contact made? Berg: Mr. Mayor and member of the council, the staff calls each applicant when their packet is ready and either leaves a message or talks to them personally saying the packet is ready for a certain meeting, so I'm sure Mr. Unger was left either a message or he was talked to in person, I don't have that indicated on my report, but he does work for Pinnacle Engineering so I'm sure there was something left on the 5th (Inaudible) this was ready to be brought before the City Council tonight. Corrie: Okay, does that change your mind Mr. Gigray at all? Gigray: No. Corrie: Rather than going through the table of motion, if you would like to (Inaudible). Bird: I never had a second. Corrie: Yeah we did. Bird: Oh we did? I'll withdraw my motion. Bentley: I'll withdraw the second. Corrie: Okay, I'll entertain another motion to appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Pinnacle Engineers. Bentley: I move that we deny the appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Pinnacle Engineers. Bird: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion made that we denial the appeal denial. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion to refuse the appeal say aye. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 6, 1999 PAGE 58 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, question for the clerk, would it be possible when you notify these people to put a footnote on the coversheet the date they were notified. Berg: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bentley, on the copy—the original copy that I have after we have made the packets and distributed them to the councilmen, we write down that we made the phone call and when we made the phone call on our original sheet, because we sometimes can't do that until Monday morning after the packets are sometimes down late Friday. Bentley: So was that noted on yours? Berg: Yes it is. Bentley: All right, that's all I wanted to know. Berg: That's how communicate that. So we do it on the original packet, unfortunately it's not copied on yours. Bentley: Just so we have a record somewhere. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members -of the council, I'll prepare appropriate order of denial on this appeal for your signature. ITEM NO. 24: AMENDED ORDINANCE # --ADD ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF: Bird: I'll bet it's #820. Corrie: I'll bet it is too. Do we have it? Bentley: Well, we've got a blank assistant chief. Corrie: All right, Kenny? Bowers: Mayor Corrie and City Council this ordinance stated that members of the Meridian Fire Department was the Fire Chief, full time firefighters, and the volunteer pay call people. We have changed that and we are going to hire an assistant chief, so we need to get the assistant chief in there and also the fire marshal, we need to get him in there as members of the fire department. Also, this ordinance stated that we would only hire within our volunteer ranks when we hired full time firefighters and possibly this next time around we might have to hire nine firefighters at one time so we are going to have to go and open this up to outsiders also. Also this ordinance we wanted to make sure we get in the readings and the language Human Resource Officer in the ordinance, we did not have her in there and that's probably most of the changes. I� SS8'I -1110 0 - bP8�u- uyt VwrN All e MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING: JANUARY 12, 1999 APPLICANT: PINNACLE ENGINEERS ITEM NUMBER: 2 REQUEST: REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:��C�+' CITY ATTORNEY: , CITY POLICE DEPT: REVIEWED CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT` SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: wu�an o�...em a oodK o.w.w.n.n w.o�re raw All Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. I� SS8'I -1110 0 - bP8�u- uyt VwrN All • 0 BEFORE THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST ) FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ENGINEERS, INC. - EAGLE ROAD ) AND DECISION AND CORRIDOR ) RECOMMENDATION The above entitled application for Comprehensive Plan amendment having come on for public hearing on January 12, 1999, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., on said date at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing in person, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A notice of the time, place, and a summary of the proposed amendment plan to be discussed at the January 12, 1999, hearing was published fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio, and television stations; the matter was duly considered at the January 12, 1999, public hearing; and the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 1 0 0 forth in the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and Idaho Code § 67-6509. 3. The property which is the subject of the application for amendment is described in said application and by this reference is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 4. The Applicant is Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., of 870 North Linder Road, Suite B, Meridian, Idaho. The Applicant filed a written Comprehensive Plan amendment application. 5. Pursuant to the application, the affected property is generally described as a 2,900'x 800' corridor on either side of Eagle Road from the existing Mixed/Planned Unit Development (PUD) designation at the intersections of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road and Usticic Road and Eagle Road; the majority of the affected property located in the proposed corridor is designated as Single Family Residential; the Applicant requests the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map amendment to extend the current Mixed/PUD designation along a corridor approximately 800' on either side of Eagle Road between Fairview Avenue and Usticic Road. 6. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and 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, Ord. No. 629-Jan.4, 1994 and Maps and Ordinance establishing the Impact Area Boundary. 7. The Applicant requested the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC.,. EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 2 application was not initiated at the request of the City of Meridian. 8. The proposed application requests a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation of the subject property from Single Family Residential to Mixed/Planned Use Development. The designation change requires an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian as requested by the Applicant. (City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, pg. 78-79). 9. The Applicant testified at the public hearing that the particular characteristics of the affected property make the amendment desirable. The Applicant further testified that it would be appropriate to follow the Mixed Use Designation at the intersections of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road and Ustick Road, and connect that designation all the way between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road, going out approximately 800' from Eagle Road. 10. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, and the Meridian Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted comments by and through a Memorandum dated January 8, 1999, and by and through testimony during the January 12, 1999, public hearing on this matter. Such report and comments are hereby incorporated herein, as follows: 10.1. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan currently designates this area as Single -Family Residential. The City will be contracting with a private consultant early in 1999 to begin the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. More detailed policies need to be adopted regarding the Mixed/Planned Use Development areas, as the designation has seemed to foster an "anything goes" sentiment among developers. These areas should be developed as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 3 0 true mixed/planned use development areas, and not in a manner that encourages strip development. 10.2. The South Slough Sewer Trunk line is proposed to be constructed through this area. Provision for a future easement for sewer extension needs to be made. Also, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan indicates that a school and park site are needed in this area. 10.3. Eagle Road is designated as a limited access corridor by the Idaho Transportation Department. Extensive coordination among agencies needs to occur to study appropriate accesses and uses. A proposed elementary school site is being annexed directly west of the proposed storage facility site, and no access is approved to Eagle Road as part of that development. 10.4. Sewer and water service Would need to be extended to any proposed development. At the present time, no City of Meridian services are available to the site, and use of Boise City services would not be permitted by the City of Meridian. Also, as Eagle Road has just recently been constructed, there is a moratorium on the cutting of any streets for utility extensions. 11. The Meridian City Water Department's recommendations are hereby incorporated as follows: 11.1 The City should have another water source on-line to the affected area prior to any more development. 12. The City of Meridian Fire Department's recommendations are hereby incorporated as follows: 12.1 All fire codes and requirements would have to be complied with. 12.2 A water system and hydrants would need to be installed in the affected area. 13. The proposed designation change within the subject application would, in fact, require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan as determined by City FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 4 policy. i , CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ,All the procedural requirements of the Land Use Planning Act and of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian were met including: notice of the time, place, and a summary of the proposed amendment to the Plan, the publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio, and television stations. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Section; Idaho Code § 67-6509(a)). 2. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975" hereinafter referred to for convenience as the "Land Use Planning Act" codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. § 67-6509). 3. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission may exercise all the powers required and authorized under the "Land Use Planning Act" except the power to adopt ordinances by the establishment of a Planning and Zoning Commission by ordinance pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-67504 which the City Council of the City of Meridian has established by the passage of the "City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance" at Title XI, Chapter I, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 4. The City Council or any group or person may petition the Planning and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 5 Zoning Commission for a plan amendment at any time. The following requirements, time tables, and procedures to amend Meridian's Comprehensive Plan must be I' satisfied: A. Application to amend the Comprehensive Plan may be filed with the°Planning and Zoning Commission at any time. B. r The Applicant will submit a letter- fora Plan amendment which will contain the following; 4.B.1 Specific definition of the change requested. 4.B.2 Specific information on any property involved. 4.B.3 The condition or situation which warrants a change being made in the Plan. C 4.B.4 The;public need for and benefit from such a change in the Plan. f 4 4.B.5 Documentation that no other solutions to the problem are i presented -by the current policy: of -the, Plan ,are possible or reasonable. i S 4.B.6 Development intentions for any land involved. 4.B.7 Any other data and information needed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in evaluating'the proposal, such as who does it help, who does it hurt, how much is it going E to cost and who is going to pay for it. C. No;application will be -considered until the required -information is complete. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan s I -q x , 1r . .. , Amendments Section). 5. The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend amendments to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 6 PINNACLE ElVCi1NEEtC11VG—,11VL., �E1l�L�-tcvtLu L vtctcz,�vri --i 0 0 the Comprehensive Plan to City Council not more frequently than every six (6) months. (Idaho Code § 67-6509(d); Meridian Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan Amendments Section) 6. Upon receipt of a complete application, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall conduct at least (1) public hearing in which interested persons shall have an opportunity to be heard. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place and a summary of the plan shall be published. The Commission shall also make available a notice to newspapers, radio, and television stations. (Idaho Code § 65-6509(a)) 7. At said hearing, the proposed amendment shall be presented to the Commission by the Applicant and the Commission shall accept testimony from the public. Within forty-five (45) days of the hearing, the Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council, supported by Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan Amendments Section). 8. An Applicant shall be notified of the Commission's decision by mail. Any Applicant whose application is denied may appeal to the City Council within thirty (30) days from the date of notification of the decision, by filing a written appeal stating the reasons for the appeal. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan Amendments Section) 9. To change a designation from Single Family Residential to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 7 0 0 7 Mixed/Planned Use Development requires approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission as provided under the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Implementation Chapter Comprehensive Plan Amendments Section. 10. Upon review of an amendment application relating to land use designations, the Commission should take the following objectives into account: 10.1 Mixed -planned uses along the I-84 corridor, which are attractive and compatible with high-volume traffic corridors. 10.2 Designating ample land for urban expansion and infill. 10.3 Quality residential neighborhoods, north, south, east, and west of Old Town. 10.4 Planned mixed uses along I-84, Franklin Road, U.P. Railroad, and Fairview Avenue corridors. 10.5 Buffers to the waste treatment plant. 10.6 Adequate school and park sites for quality living. 10.7 The importance of maintaining compatible land uses to ensure an optimum quality of life. 10.8 Respect for the responsibilities and rights of land ownership. 10.9 Reinforce the role of the City in regulating the use of land resources for the benefit of future generations. 10.10 Plan for multiple use of public facilities wherever feasible. 11. Upon review of an amendment application affecting residential designations, the Commission should take the following policies into account: 11.1 Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single- family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 8 • condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. 11.2 Support strategies for the development of neighborhood parks within all residential areas. 11.3 Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. 11.4 Encourage sidewalks and paved streets for all existing neighborhoods through joint ACHD/Local Improvement District programs. 11.5 Encourage compatible infill development which will improve existing neighborhoods. 12. Having made the afore stated Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby denies the proposed application to amend the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan as set forth herein. DECISION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission determines that upon review of the applicable standards, goals, policies and guidelines as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, the established record, and the applicable law, that amendment of the Comprehensive Plan is not warranted in the instant case. Given the foregoing, the subject application for a Plan amendment shall be denied. Absent a timely appeal, the foregoing decision and recommendation of denial will not be forwarded to the governing body (City Council) of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 9 • NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Please take notice the Applicant may appeal to City Council within thirty (30) days from the date of notification of the decision by filing a written appeal stating the reasons for the appeal. The City Council may direct the Commission to consider any application previously rejected which the City Council, by a majority vote, deems to warrant further study by the Commission or may uphold the denial of the application which shall be supported by adopting the Commission's findings of fact and conclusions or by making its own findings and conclusions based on the record. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - 10 } APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves this FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP COMMISSIONER SMITH COMMISSIONER DEWEERD COMMISSIONER NELSON CHAIRMAN MALCOLM MACCOY (TIE BREAKER) MOTION: APPROVED: ey/ZAWorkV*A\Meridian 15360M\Pinnade PZ.Fcs.wpd VOTED VOTED 465.�,�- VOTED�e�- VOTED-_ VOTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PINNACLE ENGINEERING, INC., - EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR - I I PLANNING ANDNING COMMISSION JANUARY 12,190' 2, 190 PAGE 16 De Weerd: I'd second the motion. MacCoy: It's been seconded, now the point is there is no more discussion I take it, if I'm right I'll call for a vote. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 'ITEM NO. 2: REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. — EAGLE ROAD CORRIDOR: MacCoy: At this time I would like to have a comment from our staff. Shari or Bruce, one of you. Stiles: Chairman MacCoy, commissioners we have received this application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment it involves the corridor roughly between Ustick and Fairview along the Eagle Road corridor. They are proposing that this be designated a mixed planned use development area. Because of the lack of implementing ordinances and some more clear guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan about what a mixed plan use development is and the fact that they are proposing this for a single use of a storage facility on Eagle Road, coupled with the fact that we are in the process of trying to get a consultant on line to update our Comprehensive Plan, even though this probably could be accomplished within six months and then it would be another six months before another Comprehensive Plan change would be made. Staff does not recommend that this be approved. We have a problem with the mixed planned use development designation as it has been interpreted as anything you want to do just go ahead and do it. Our problem was also with Ada County which they had that same interpretation. If it's orange on the map, they consider that to be wide open to any kind of development that anybody wants to do. I think that the issues as far as access on Eagle Road corridor is evidence by the letter we got from Ada County Highway District, those issues are too important to take so lightly as to go ahead and re -designate this area. I think we need some significant thought and planning into what happens along that Eagle Road corridor that is why we recommended that it be denied. MacCoy: Bruce do you have anything to say? Okay, thank you. We'll open the public hearing now, is someone here from Pinnacle Engineers? BOB UNGER. Unger: I'm with Pinnacle Engineers, we represent the Weiss Family on this application. Our address is 870 N. Linder Road, Suite B, Meridian, Idaho. I'm going to try to keep this brief because I know you have a lot of things going on and the first item ran rather long, but I think you need to know some of the history of why we are here before you today. The Weiss Family back in 94' and 95' PLANNING AND 20ING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 17 approached the county about the possibility of getting approval for a storage facility on the property. At that time, the county advised them that they would have to go to the City of Meridian and discuss that because the county was not in a position where they could support such an application for the storage units. At that time, they did come to the city, they did speak to the City Council. It was a rather extensive meeting on that and at that time, the City Council and this is June 6, 1995 issued a letter to myself, I was at the county at that time supporting their request to have storage units on the property. Consequently these folks preceded forward as quickly as they possibly could, which did take them a couple of years to get things in order to do it and contacted Pinnacle Engineers and this summer we came to the city staff and discussed this with them and we were informed that the letter of 1995 by the City Council would no longer be honored for their project. It was a bit to our surprise, and the Weiss family's surprise. We went to the county and said okay what do we do now? The county recommended that we submit an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that would allow a mixed use, or some sort of commercial use in this area. It's currently designated as single family residential. We also talked to the city staff and they also felt that was our only route was a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. So consequently we have submitted this request for the amendment. In our review of your Comprehensive Plan map, it shows a current designation of mixed use at the intersections of Eagle and Fairview and also Eagle and Ustick. We thought it would be appropriate to follow that designation and connect that designation all the way between Fairview and Ustick, going out approximately 800 feet from Eagle Road. We also realized and understood that any projects... (END OF TAPE) Unger: ...would have to be reviewed through the Planned Development process conditional use, which is very appropriate and gives you, this Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council, the highway district a much better handle on how development does occur along that corridor. Some of the comments that the highway district made, they were concerned that because of the limited access through their plan to Eagle Road that this would cause more problems than what they currently have. We don't feel that way about it, we feel that it would give them more control, more review. We fully understand that there has to be limited access, shared accesses and possibly frontage roads along Eagle Road. The Weiss Family currently has an access to Eagle Road, so we are not asking for an additional access, they have an access right now. They have provided this evening for me, I have two letters of support, one being from John Barnes of Property West Inc., a second one being from Mrs. Hart who owns the property directly south and west of their property. I would like to submit those if I could for evidence. We are a little bit surprised in the lack of support from the staff here based upon our discussions in the past. I think one of the things that the Weiss family have pursued and it did take them some time getting to this point was that they also through the county did a zoning ordinance amendment PLANNING AND 216ING COMMISSION JANUARY i2,1999 PAGE 18 to allow the use that they are proposing in a C-2 zone, which is a highway commercial zone in the county. Prior to that the county only allowed this type of storage units in an R-14 zoning. So they did go through with the zoning ordinance amendment with the county, which is somewhat in preparation of paving the way for their project and that was approved by the county. Boise City, just for some basis here, Boise City only allows this type of development within their commercial zones as does the City of Meridian and also, in Meridian, also industrial zones, of course those are all through conditional uses. If this commission does not feel that it is an appropriate Comprehensive Plan Amendment at this time, we would certainly welcome any advice that we could get from this commission as to how to accomplish what we want to accomplish. County Staff really hasn't been of additional help other than the recommendation for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, city staff we haven't been able to dig in to anything deeper than where we are right now. A couple of options that we certainly would consider would be instead of doing an entire corridor from Fairview to Ustick possibly extending the mixed use designation from Ustick down to and including the Weiss Property, or and strictly on the east side of Fairview, or coming up from Eagle or coming up from Fairview up to the south slough which would include these folks property also. We are just trying to get something through here that the city had made a commitment to us in 1995. We are just trying to follow through with it. We are following the instructions that everybody is giving us as to how to go about doing it and now it seems we are running into brick walls. So we are asking for some guidance and help, some recognition as to the dilemma these folks are in at this point. I think at this point that concludes our presentation, will staff (Inaudible). MacCoy: Any questions for Mr. Unger? Mr. Borup do you have anything to say? Borup: Not at this time. MacCoy: Mr. Smith. Smith: Not at this time. MacCoy: Thank you very much. We are at an open public hearing right now, is there anybody here who would like to get up and say something in favor of this project? Do you want to do this? STEVE WEISS, 2500 N. EAGLE ROAD. Weiss: I just wanted to speak to the commission this evening and basically state, restate what Mr. Unger said, we tried to do everything that we've been guided to do and we keep having the rules changed on us as we move along or at least that's the way it seems,and we are just trying to do what everybody would like. I have spoken to several of the landowners, not all of them, because I haven't been able to locate all of them, some live out of state, that surround my property PLANNING AND ZOING COMMISSION JANUARY i2,1999 PAGE 19 in the 300 foot area and they all support it to this point. There was an article written in the statesman that spoke about it last—a week ago last Saturday and Ada County Highway District had made a comment in that article that they felt that we would commit a traffic problem by putting in a storage unit facility. In my opinion and the opinion of the people that live around me, putting homes in there with two cars per house, 48 homes, moving in and out going to soccer practice, piano lessons, back and forth to work, to the grocery store, etc, etc, etc. is probably going to create more of a traffic problem than 50 or 60 cars a day moving in and out of a storage unit facility. We are also open to suggestions that may be having people enter going north on Eagle Road and exiting going North on Eagle Road, if that will satisfy any question about any traffic problem. We are open to all kinds of suggestions. This is something that we've been considering for some time and pursuing for sometime and we are just basically looking for some guidance on what we can do to get this accomplished. MacCoy: Okay, any questions? Thank you very much. KATHLEEN LAWRENCE, 889 N. (Inaudible) - Lawrence: I live in the Crossroad Subdivisions which is right off of Eagle Road. My husband and I currently have a storage unit a little bit ways down Fairview down by Fred Meyers and I do support the storage unit going in there, we have a storage unit that is about 8 X 8 and we pay about $50 a month for it, which I think is outrageous. We probably visit our storage unit maybe every other month and I do think it would be a good idea to put the storage units in there rather than residential because just like the Crossroad Subdivision now, we are surrounded by commercial development and I think that granted they could put a residential subdivision in there, but I don't know how pleased the homeowners are going to be when that whole area gets developed. As far as the traffic goes, every time my husband and I went to visit our storage unit up Fairview, we are like the only ones there. Storage units don't get visited that often. Thank you. MacCoy: Any questions for her by the way? All right, thank you. Is there anybody else in favor of the storage unit who wants to speak at this time? LAVONE WEISS, 2500 N. EAGLE ROAD L. Weiss: I would just like to say that I've lived on this property since 1972. My husband and I bought it, it's a small acreage. We have ran a dairy off of their, we have had of course milk cows, beef cows and right now we have nothing because Eagle Road is getting so busy that we can't run it as a farm any longer and we need to be able to use our land for something and Steven and I, that's my son, have thought about this long and hard, for a long time about what we could put in there that would be beneficial to us and not impact the school system or the roadway in Meridian. This is what we thought would be the best. We would still be paying taxes, more taxes on the land, and we PLANNING AND 2SING COMMISSION If JANUARY 12, 199 PAGE 20 wouldn't have a traffic jam there trying to get out. Even at this point when I go to work in the morning at 7:30 it's kind of a struggle to even get out on that road as I would have to see a small subdivision go in there because it would make just that much more people trying to get out there. I think we won't impact the school systems any more either which we are having struggles with in Meridian and this was our decision to help Meridian in this respect and to also help us so that we could get the best use of our land, thank you. MacCoy: Anyone else that would like to speak for the project? Let's turn the table the other way. Anyone here who would like to speak in denial of the project? Anyone here (Inaudible) step up? LARRY SALE, ACRD. Sale: Those of you who know me know that I don't enjoy being in a negative situation, but unfortunately I find myself in that situation tonight. As I've told the commission before and I want to make sure that we all understand this, highway district doesn't have any concern nor authority nor business in Meridian's land use plan. However, as we find more and more, there is a very fine line between your land use and transportation issues and that's my purpose here tonight. I would like to comprise the commission of a study that the highway district conducted in 1997 about Eagle Road, I want to present you with copies of that study and then ask to come back to the commission some time in the future when it is convenient for you to present that study to you and all of it's ramifications. I have to convey to you that as this was presented to the Ada County Highway District commission, the commission asked staff to come and as personally as possible represent the districts lack of support for the request. We don't care if the property owners develop their property for a storage shed. A storage shed is of no concern to us, storage units, I beg your pardon. A large area wide revision of your Comprehensive Plan to the requested designation is as Ms. Stiles pointed out of late has seemed to be a wide open invitation for a wide range of commercial and business uses, which depend to a large extent on direct access from the abutting roadway for their support. Eagle Road, state highway 55 is, probably will become the busiest highway in the state of Idaho, at least the most busy north/south route. It's been demonstrated that a roadway can handle the same traffic with four lanes without direct partial access as it would with six lanes if driveways are permitted to the roadway. Sure you can see the obvious cost savings to the tax payer and the improvement of safety if we reduce the number of direct driveways. The study that I'm going to give you proposes a long term increase of protection of the Eagle Road Corridor beginning with the current situation restricting driveways to the extent possible. Obviously every parcel has to have access to a public road, we can't deny that, but we will be working to allow only public road intersections to Eagle Road, in the future those will be restricted to every half mile, longer in the future of those may be restricted to one mile with as Mr. Unger indicated with frontage roads connecting the section east west section line roads. Eventually some of you may PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY i.2,1999 PAGE 21 see the day when we have what are called urban interchanges at the section line interchanges of intersections of Franklin Road, Fairview, Ustick Road and Chinden Boulevard. This study presents drawings of those potential interchanges and the amount of (Inaudible) that would be required. So I—if the city elects to approve the requested Comprehensive Plan change, the highway district would request that you add a section to the text of the plan and we've taken the liberty of numbering it, 5.20 and we would ask that that text read "access to Eagle Road will be severely restricted and frontage roads will be required to consolidate access points. Primary access will be provided to Ustick Road or Fairview Avenue for those corner parcels that have frontage on Ustick Road or Fairview Avenue." With that Mr. Chairman I'll end my remarks, I'll distribute these documents and I'll stand for questions if you have any. MacCoy: Do you have any questions? Borup: I have a couple Mr. Chairman. This may—Mr. Sale does this address the access point question in here. You made reference about—I wasn't sure, first you said one every half mile, then you said one every mile, so that means that in this case somewhere in the middle of the mile, is what you anticipate if you are talking one every mile. Sales: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Borup if you want to take just a moment and open that booklet to page 13, it's a chart actually that looks like this. Borup: We had that—that was in your packet that just came a few hours ago. Sales: This describes a hierarchy of access control that would begin with—to the status today and increase over four or five stages and might take 40 or 50 years to move to stage five, which is the most restrictive stage, but the—if you look at the first column which is titled approaches, they would be temporarily allowed as full access driveways on a 660 foot spacing. As you go to level two which would be as the intersection meets accident delay or volume signal (Inaudible) the driveway or intersection would be regulated to a right in, right out driveway, or intersection. Then if you move on to level three it would—level four would continue to be restricted as right in/right out and eventually close—history of high accident levels and a level of lower service on the arterial warrant such regulation. It's a fairly comprehensive look at Eagle Road, it looks at it—it's not entirety, but it looks at it from the interstate highway to state highway 44 in Eagle. So we would like you to take the time to look at it and then if you would invite us back at a future time for a presentation and we could, when you have more time, we would appreciate it. MacCoy: Okay, thank you, thank you very much. Any questions now? Commissioner Borup? PLANNING AND ZOING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 22 Borup: Sounds like ACHD's main concern is what the access is going to be when this whole corridor reaches full development, is that essentially correct? Not necessarily what the impact of this single application is going to be, but what the whole corridor implication would be. Sales: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Borup, that is absolutely correct. Our concern is not with the traffic that this proposed development would generate. It really isn't even with a driveway that his proposed development might have, now or in the near term future. It is—we have a concern over this area wide revision of your plan that would result in a request for many, many more driveways and our—the potential of spenditure of public funds to purchase the rights of access from the people in the future. That will eventually come, we would like to defer it as long as possible. Borup: How much area is needed for an access road, frontage area. Sales: An access road, or frontage road? Borup: What—explain the difference. What did I say the first time, I meant a frontage road, yes, a frontage road. Sales: A frontage road could handle all the traffic that it needed to in two lanes. So that would be 40 feet wide, 40-50 feet wide. Borup: Okay, thank you De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I guess I have a question for the lucky property owners along Eagle Road, how—what is ACHD's solution for accessing whatever develops there? Sales: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, as you read the study you will learn that we hope to access—we plan to provide access to the property from the section line roads, from the east -west section line roads. There will be some public streets connected with Eagle Road that will also go back in and access the property as it develops, but the development of the property would be preferable if it backed up to Eagle Road, rather than fronted on Eagle Road, so that the access to the public road system would be actually away from Eagle Road and then north and south parallel to Eagle Road to get through in this case Fairview Avenue or Ustick Road, then to Eagle Road or a greater arterial. De Weerd: Where would that be at in relationship to this property having access to an east -west road? Sales: It could either be Fairview Avenue or Ustick, or a new public road midway between the two. PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY .12, 1999 PAGE 23 De Weerd: But I assume they don't have access to either of those roads at this point. Sales: Those will be constructed as the land is developed for whatever purpose. De Weerd: So there is no time line on that. Sales: Absolutely. De Weerd: What was ACHD's position on this application in 1995, did they have one? Sales: The commissioners voted to not support the application. They were very concerned that that be presented personally to the city, that we try to express our appreciation of the job that you people have in determining the land use of your community without us getting involved. We want you to be aware of the transportation impacts of your land use decisions and (Inaudible) and that's why we'd like you to get knowledgeable about the Eagle Road Corridor Study and then hopefully adopt it as a part of your Comprehensive Plan. De Weerd: Well, I understand that—I guess if they were still operating their dairy, they would still have the same access and the same problems on having the alternative routes or the alternative streets, so that they did not have to access onto Eagle. Sales: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, they will continue to have their access to Eagle Road as long as there is no other public road access. We can't take it away from them, unless we buy the farm, which we would rather not do right now. De Weerd: Okay thank you. Sales: Thank you. MacCoy: Mr. Smith do you have anything? Smith: No sir. MacCoy: Mr. Nelson? Nelson: No. MacCoy: Anybody else who would like to come forward now and speak at the podium? Okay, after having heard from the public before we close anything, I want to go back to the staff, is there any comments from you at this present moment based on what you heard? PLANNING AND 21PING COMMISSION . JANUARY12, 199 PAGE 24 Stiles: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, I would just like you to note in the letter from City of Meridian, which I signed in 1995, it—the council at that time did vote to recommend a favor—to have a favorable recommendation on this storage facility. I don't however believe that an approval from 3 Y2 years ago is valid at this time. You'll not that in the final sentence of the first paragraph on my letter of June 6, 1995 that the approval does not include hookup to any Boise City services. A condition of this application and any construction at that site would require extension of city services to the site. City services are not available at this time there would be a considerable extension 'of sewer and water is not on that side of Eagle Road and they have a five year moratorium on the road as they have just constructed it. So I don't see how it's even possible that they would be able to construct anything. De Weerd: Then what was the thinking at the time they approved it. What's different now, then it was then? Stiles: Part of it was that our Comprehensive Plan hadn't been fully adopted by Ada County. At that time, they also had staff that didn't seem to care what happened within our area of impact. The council at that time was probably more than happy that they even considered the City of Meridian to ask a question. At this time, unless an application is submitted, council would not even give this consideration. A request like that would not even be considered by the council because until an application is submitted, it's not a valid request. So really what happened back in 1995 was inappropriate. De Weerd: I guess that is what I didn't understand was that the application went through Ada County then and not through the city? Stiles: No application was ever submitted. They went to the county asking what did they think and the only thing that came to us was a representation by an attorney requesting their favorable recommendation to the county to be included in some future application, I don't know what application was ever submitted, but the city never acted on a valid application that was submitted. MacCoy: Thank you Shari. Is there any other questions you want to have of the staff? Borup: I guess I was still looking for clarification on why you felt the letter was not valid. You mentioned sewer and water, maybe we need to get clarification from the applicant, but I don't think they were asking for sewer and water. Most storage units don't have a lot of bathrooms in them, unless you are looking at an office site. Stiles: Uniform Fire Code would require the sewer—water be extended to the site. PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION • JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 25 t. Borup: But that wasn't mentioned in 1995? ., Stiles: It said the approval did not include hookup to any Boise City services. They never made any proposal as to how they were going to extend services to the site. This was prior to Eagle Road being constructed. Borup: So they are looking at water for fire? Stiles: Yes. Maybe legal counsel wants to advise on this, but I don't' believe that a letter written 3 Y2 years ago under a council that doesn't even exists anymore can be valid for anything. Borup: Did they put any time frame on it? Stiles: It's not based on a valid application. It's not—I think it's a mute point. No application was submitted—the methods that were undertaken to get this letter were not appropriate, it didn't follow state code requirements, it didn't follow zoning ordinance requirements, it didn't follow the Comprehensive Plan. The letter I guess I don't know if council would have anything to say, about it, I don't consider it to be valid and then if legal counsel wants to comment on that, I would appreciate any input that he would have. Rossman: Well, that's what happens when City Council addresses matters without an appropriate application and having it run through the system. Obviously City Council's comments in 1995 are appropriate and should be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, however there was not a formal application filed, it was not—a letter is merely advisory in nature and it does not constitute formal action by the city. So it's certainly not binding upon this commission or the City Council, but certainly prior actions of the city should be taken into account and considered by the commission and council making this determination. Any other questions? MacCoy: Thank you counsel. Smith: This anti -application process in 1995 was a request for a storage unit, not a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, so it doesn't even—the letter doesn't even address, start to address the issues. The only issue that is before us is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, not a storage facility, although that's what they intend to do. I can't support amending the Comprehensive Plan so somebody can build a storage facility. I don't think it's a proper location for it. I sure as hell don't think that that area, the busiest property adjacent to the busiest north -south corridor is appropriate for single family residential development either. I don't want to see that particular area that Eagle Road Corridor and start going into more of an extension of a light industrial area that we have between Fairview and Franklin. PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 26 Borup: What should go there then? Smith: I think that the kinds of things that you are going to see that will support that heavy vehicular use between the north and south part of the state, commercial development, restaurants, service types of facilities and not strip mall development by any means, but there is going to be people traveling, they are going to need to eat, sleep, they are going to need to get gas, services. I just don't—I can't see it being single family, I wouldn't want to live next to 55... MacCoy: You've got a good point, but I think the things you have to look at is the fact that we are coming into a Comprehensive Plan and Revision and the entire picture of what we do for Meridian is going to take in the ideas that you are mentioning right here. What do we want to do with it now that it's a major north - south artery. Smith: I guess that's probably a main reason why I would be in favor of not approving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment at this time given the fact that our Comprehensive Plan is being updated at this time. De Weerd: But the thing is—they are trying this approach because they haven't really been given a direction on what they should do. You know—I think if your opinion is to deny this, we have to give them some direction on what they should be doing. You know they are property owners, they have a home on there. You say they shouldn't be there, but they are. They were there before the road got so big. Smith: I didn't say that they shouldn't be there. I've lived here since the mid 60's, I remember Eagle Road before it was five lanes. De Weerd: We need to give them some direction and that is my point. Nelson: Mr. Chairman before this goes any further. Personally as much as we want to support the traffic going down Eagle, we also need to support the subdivisions that we've already approved, so I do feel that storage units may be appropriate. I do also think that it's appropriate that they work with ACHD and the Comprehensive Plan and accessing it in a manner that is more conducive to the other development that we have planned there. So I don't support changing the Comprehensive Plan and I think as far as direction for the applicant would be that they become a very active member in the new Comprehensive Plan so they can work with ACHD, the city and find potentially a better way to develop that property, while addressing the other properties. That way, storage units are not the issue. MacCoy: We are getting a little ahead of our selves here in the discussion situation. We've got an open public hearing here and want to know since you 4e PLANNING' AND 2&ING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 27 have heard everybody who wants to speak—we've got a, alright we'll get back to you in a moment. Once we finish this, then I'm waiting for a motion for closing. At this point, since you... Borup: Mr. Chairman, maybe Mr. Unger can answer this when he comes up, I was curious how many property owners there were along this stretch of road? The map that we've got, I'm specifically looking at the one from ACHD and the corridor study packet shows a bare piece of property through half a mile. The north quarter seems to be a bare piece of property. So that middle section seems to be the only—seems to be where most of the parcels are. So I would be curious to know—to know how many pieces of property, or how many property owners there are on there. Thank you. MacCoy: I would like Mr. Unger to come back forward here and have a chance to do a rebuttal. Unger: Just as a quick count, it looks to me approximately 17 properties would be involved in this. Borup: Okay, the map that we have seems to indicate four houses. Is that about correct? Unger: I'm looking at the entire corridor that we are discussing and it would be 15-17 properties. Borup: I'm just looking at the east side of the road Unger: Six tops. Borup: (Inaudible) more on that too. Unger: Very quickly here, I'll just point of clarification here. As far as what happened in 1995, the folks never submitted an application and the reason that they were directed to the city was because the county felt it was the city's Comprehensive Plan and the city should make a decision as to whether they thought it was an appropriate use on this property or not. That's exactly what happened, that's why it happened. ACHD did not even review it, so I think there was a little confusion there when you asked Mr. Sales about that. There wasn't an application I don't believe that the highway district even reviewed it back in 1995 their. proposal. I kind of see where this is going and I understand your confusion, concerns, and I understand the highway district's concerns. So while I'm sitting here listening to this, one thought occurred to me. Would this commission, if we go through the appropriate process, would this commission consider a zoning ordinance amendment to allow storage units within residential zones through the conditional use process? I know that is something that the county does. I know the city does it, or Boise City does it. Excuse me, wrong r PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 28 cities and that is a possibility. That could accomplish what these folks wish to accomplish; it would provide you folks a situation here where instead of doing a massive change to your Comprehensive Plan and opening up this entire corridor, where you could look at these on an individual basis. These storage facilities are becoming more and more appropriate in locations where the subdivisions are instead of cross town. I think that Mr. Sales would even agree with me that it would cut down on trips, I think. He might, or might not. That would be an alternative that we certainly would entertain if you folks felt that would be something appropriate and we would pursue that through your staff and I through the hearing process. Like I said, we are looking for some direction at this point in time, because we don't seem to be getting any support from the outside agencies at all. MacCoy: Okay, any questions Mr. Unger? Borup: Do you know the frontage of the Weiss property, approximately? Unger: It is approximately 300 feet. Borup: Okay, thank you. MacCoy: Anybody else? Okay, thank you Mr. Unger. Commissioners what you have before you is the present open public hearing, what do you want to do with it? De Weerd: I move to close the public hearing. Smith: Second. MacCoy: Any discussion about it, if not, all in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: I need a motion as to what we go do next. If you want to discuss that among you, you have that chance now. Smith: I think everybody knows how I feel. De Weerd: I think we all well, I can also say that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is—I'm not in favor of it either, but I am in favor of giving them some idea of what direction they need to pursue to bring this back with the plan that they intend to do and I don't have the answer to that, or I would give it right now. Borup: I think I've got some—they preceded ahead from 1995 thinking they had the okay from the city. That concerns me. Reading the minutes of the City Council meeting, the City Council didn't seem to have a problem at all. A lot of PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 29 that has changed, but we still have some of the same people around. I don't know that I have—well I do some. I don't' know that we need to change a Comprehensive Plan and create a whole new corridor there and maybe it needs to be commercial zoning, but I don't think it's going to effect what is going to develop there a lot one way or another. I think what Commissioner Smith Said is the type of development that needs to happen there. The first half, the south half of that whole mile is all open. I think the other thing that concerns me is what Mr. Sales said about the access points. I think that is where we need to be careful on what development happens here. I think provision probably does need to be made for frontage road, whether it's in right-of-way preservation or whatever needs to be. On these large parcels that's definitely not a problem, down here close to the Weiss Property there seems to be some small lots. Maybe a couple of acres in size or something that seems to have houses on there now, whether there is room for—some type of right-of-way preservation to allow future frontage roads along there I think would answer some future concerns on the access. They are proposing a couple different things, but they already proposing six access points along that mile, based on the one sheet here. I don't know the solution to—I think again they've preceded ahead thinking they had the city approval, I'm not sure what it is that we need to do to allow that. Besides the zoning issue, I guess the water is definitely another issue and how long it's going to be before we have water service to that area, I don't know. Anybody else have any other comments? MacCoy: How about a motion? De Weerd: Shari, a suggestion was made by the applicant on a possible way that it could be done, was that feasible? Borup: Not unless it's in the city limits, is it? Stiles: You mean proposing a zoning ordinance amendment to allow it or? De Weerd: Yeah. Stiles: We do allow with conditional use in the R-8 and R-15 zones, which R-8 is a single family residential zone, but the county is not going to consider that as part of their review of any application. The only way they could do that is if they were annexed into the City of Meridian and even with that storage facilities, they would have to do a conditional use permit in the city. I guess my advice to them would be to look at more of the surrounding area and if they are proposing to do a mixed plan use area, make it a mixed plan use area. Not a single use that they are proposing at this time and maybe have some residential, maybe have you know a true mixed development—a general development. I know that... Borup: You are saying maybe (Inaudible) commercial area up front perhaps or something? PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 30 Stiles: Not zone it commercial, but they cavi zone it to the R-8, have some residential development in there and include storage facilities as part of an overall plan, I just hate to see these properties come in one piece at a time. Borup: Well, that's why a comp change would handle that, wouldn't it? Stiles: No, because Ada County, like I say Ada County is going to interpret that as okay it's mixed planned use development whatever you want to do go for it. Borup: Wouldn't they still have to come here? Stiles: No, it would comply with the Comprehensive Plan. They would refer it to us, but they don't give us any control over a conditional use. Borup: So we couldn't deny it. Stiles: No, the city has no authority to deny it. Borup: Maybe we need to annex it. Stiles: That would be the best way. Borup: Then we could control, it's not contiguous yet is it? Stiles: I want to let you know that I informed the applicant or the applicant's representative before he ever submitted it, let him know full well that staff was not in favor of the change. So I don't want—he made a statement earlier that he was surprised by our comments and it shouldn't have been a surprise, because... Borup: How close is this parcel to being contiguous to city limits? Stiles: It's about... Borup: It's not close in other words? Stiles: Just under half a mile. Carol Subdivision is in between. Borup: We've got the school site that we just annexed, wasn't it? Stiles: It's not annexed yet. Borup: Is working on it. Stiles: That would put it closer to 1/8 of a mile, probably (Inaudible)... PLANNING AND ZING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 31 Borup: Is that site—if that school site extended forward to eagle road, is that right across from this property? Stiles: The school site won't extend. Borup: No, I mean the property east of the school site looks like it would extend over to this property. Stiles: Yes, (Inaudible) I have a meeting with the transportation department here in the next week about the remainder of that property, which also concerns the access and it's a big concern. Borup: So if that was annexed, then this would be a contiguous site. Stiles: Yes, Borup: Which may not be too far down the road. Stiles: But it still wouldn't allow storage facility. (END OF TAPE) Borup: ... and zone change that would handle that. Stiles: Not if it didn't comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Borup: Because of the designation of that area? Stiles: Yes. Borup: Is that a problem? I think most of us agree that is not a good site for residential development. I don't know what happens when you are limited to the size of the parcels of what can be done. Storage units are minimum city service utility type of usage. Looks like water is the main. I've testified earlier I've looked at a lot of storage units and there is very little traffic in and out. The ones I've visited, driving by them—when I've been some—maybe one other car, and that's in some pretty good sized ones. I don't know that traffic is a big concern. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, it doesn't look like we are going to be able to give some specific direction tonight. Perhaps we've opened up some ideas of perhaps what can be pursued. Certainly involvement in the Comprehensive Plan update is a very good idea. You know, I think we need to move on, we have more agenda items and I guess that I would move denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Smith: Second. PLANNING AND 26ING COMMISSION JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 32 MacCoy: Any discussion? Mr. Borup do you have anything that you want to discuss before we move on?' Borup: I've probably said it all. MacCoy: Call for a vote. All in favor for the motion that was given? Smith: Aye. De Weerd: Aye. Nelson: Aye. De Weerd: Ask for those opposed though. I don't think Mr. Borup (Inaudible). MacCoy: Here again I'm going to call for, which I have the option to do, a roll call vote. ROLL CALL: Borup — nay, De Weerd — aye, Smith --- Smith: What are we voting on? MacCoy: What the motion was. Smith: The last motion? De Weerd: To deny the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. ROLL CALL: Smith — aye, Nelson — aye. MacCoy: All right, three ayes, and one nay to be recorded. Thank you very much. ITEM NO. 3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, 1 TRI-PLEX, AND 4 FOUR-PLEX UNITS FOR PROPOSED SEABURY SUBDIVISION BY WEST PINE DEVELOPMENT — BETWEEN W. PINE ST. & W. BROADWAY AVE., EAST OF W. FOURTH ST: MacCoy: Are you ready Shari? Stiles: Chairman MacCoy, commissioners this is basically an infill project. It's located south of Pine and it's surrounded mostly by development of some apartments. There are some parcels that have been split off. We don't have the history of when those were split off, so we know if they are valid lot splits or not, HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live (208)884-4264 Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 887-2211 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD jzE cF�D DEPARTMENT `" -�'.� (208) 884-5533 JAN 0 8 1999 MEMORANDUM: City of Meridian January 8, 1.909 City Clerk Office To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor & City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator Re: Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Change Designation of 2,900' x 800' Corridor Along Eagle Road from Single-family Residential to Mixed/Planned Use Development by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. 1. Although several properties would be affected by this proposed amendment, the applicant only has interest in one property, on which they propose to place an indoor -outdoor storage facility. The prior owner of the property had approached the City Council in 1995 requesting support for the development, which the City Council at that time granted. However, the current applicant has been informed that consent from 3-1/2 years ago is not valid at this time, and that the request for storage facilities on the property is inconsistent with the current Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan currently designates this area as single-family residential. Although changes are occurring in the area that may make other uses desirable in this location, staff feels the request for a comprehensive plan amendment should not be granted at this time. The City will be contracting with a private consultant early in 1999 to begin the process of updating the comprehensive plan. More detailed policies need to be adopted regarding the mixed/planned use development areas, as the designation has seemed to foster an "anything goes" sentiment among developers. These areas should be developed as true mixed/planned use development areas, and not in a manner that encourages strip development. 3. The South Slough Sewer Trunk line is proposed to be constructed through this area. Provision for a future easement for sewer extension needs to be made. Also, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan indicates that a school and park site are needed in this area. 4. Eagle Road is designated as a limited access corridor by the Idaho Transportation Department. Extensive coordination among agencies needs to occur to study appropriate accesses and uses. A proposed elementary school site is being annexed directly west of the proposed storage facility site, and no access is approved to Eagle Road as part of that development. PinnacteEngrs.CPA To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November, 30. 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12,1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY TAMMY DE WEERD, P/Z I: MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z . HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • T Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT BYRON SMITH, PIZ 884-4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Member PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY 8722II MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 887-2211 KON ANDERSON J21 BONING Phone (208) 888-4433 •Fax (208) 887-4RECEN" KEITH BIRD DEPARTIvD GLENN BENTLEY, C/C (?08)884-5533 WATER DEPARTMENT DEC 14 1998 SEWER DEPARTMENT City of Meridian BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE City Clerk Office TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: / V WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November, 30. 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12,1996 FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS. INC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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, PIZ 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 (PR ELI M & FINAL SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE / A/ ,Q �' DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: / V POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY 4L);L LNpy e CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER S q ,✓ L' ,4,vy 2 CITY FILES 0 � ); LL J%q y — Z`o /11 p -e A- 4-L IVJ-LaCQ Attij� j7 'co'/s Loi4c— ?4(D i3.Q- Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE Council Members . CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN'BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD �• HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY tom, 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 (208)887-2211 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 & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: January 5, 1999 1 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 30. 1998 HEARING DATE: January 12,199/q q FILE NUMBER: CPA -98-100 REQUEST: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY: PINNACLE ENGINEERSLINC. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: MERIDIAN CITY 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 CITY FILES 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 RECEYVED D E C - 3 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN ,_ M. CENTRAL CEN AL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR ENT •• DISTRICT Environmental Health Division 1WHEALTH Return Boise DEPARTMENT F-FICE�jD ❑Eagle Rezone # DEC 1 1 1998 ❑ Garden City Meri Conditional Use # CITY OF MR'RTnrn�r [:1.dian Meri Preliminary / Final / Short Plat ❑ ACZ" eD �c e�sidC /�h e� e�7' //%17 ?,, --Ie' '�/� /i✓���f Q I. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ❑ 2. We recommend Denial of.this Proposal. i ❑ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be `provided before we can—comment on this Proposal: ❑ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ❑ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth'of: ❑ high seasonal groundwater ❑ waste flow characteristics ❑ or bedrock from original grade ❑ other ❑ 6. This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. ❑, 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. F ❑ 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 i ❑ sewage dry lines ❑ central water ❑ 10. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 11. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 13. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store` ❑ 14. Date:/ / Y 6 Reviewed By: 0111)10/91 rc6, rev. 7/97 Review Sheet 4 GGin-C SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, President GARY E. RICHARDSON, Vice President SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary JAN 12 1999 MMUID; Ikota ANG City of Meridian City Clerk of g: /u�~ Own January 4, 1999 TO: City of Meridian R.rCEI\TED Shari Stiles ` JAN 12 1999 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 City of 117eridian City Clerk Office FROM: Karen Gallagher, Development Coordinato Planning & Development Division 0 SUBJECT: MCPA98-100 Meridian Com sive Plan Amendment Meridian Area The above referenced application was acted on by the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District on December 30, 1998. The attached staff report lists conditions of approval which are required. Please notify me of the City of Meridian hearing date for the above referenced project. At that meeting we can provide a full explanation of the ACHD Commissioner's concerns regarding the traffic issues on Eagle Road. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 387-6170. KG cc: Plan&Dev Svcs-chron/file John Edney Chuck Rinaldi Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6418 Phone (208) 387-6100 • FAX (208) 345-7650 • E-mail: tellus@achd.ada.id.us i 1 • ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Planning and Development Division Development Application Report MCPA-98-100 Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Eagle Road Corridor The proposal requests amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Map to provide a designation of Mixed/Planned Use Development within the Eagle Road Corridor between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road. The current Comprehensive Plan Map shows a circle of commercial development slightly north of the Fairview/Eagle Road intersection straddling Eagle Road and another centered on the Ustick/Eagle Road intersection. Surrounding these commercial circles are areas designated for mixed/planned use on both sides of Eagle Road for approximately 1/3 mile north of Fairview Avenue and approximately 800 -feet south of Ustick Road (see attached copy of the Comprehensive Plan). The applicant is requesting a Plan amendment to extend the mixed/planned use designation to make it continuous from Fairview Avenue to Ustick Road, a length of approximately %2 mile. The existing land use designation for this %2 mile stretch is single family residential. The ACHD Commission is not supportive of this proposed amendment. Meridian's Zoning Ordinance does not specify what defines a mixed use development. The higher the intensity of land use, the more frequent the requests for access. In this case, Eagle Road which is also State Highway 55 is designated as an access -restricted corridor. The Destination 2015 Regional Transportation Plan identifies Eagle Road as a limited access facility (see Table 8-1 on page 8-1, Table 8-2 on page 8-9, Figure 8-10 on page 8-13, Table 8-3 on page 8-16, and Figure 8-13 on page 8-17). The District completed an access control plan for the entire Eagle Road corridor in 1997, called the Eagle Road Access Control Study. Under the Eagle Road Access Control Study, access to Eagle Road would be restricted through a phasing plan (see attached flow chart). The initial phases would regulate access with a limited number of traffic signals (with adequate spacing between successive signals), turn channelization and restrictions at unsignalized intersections and raised medians between channelized turns. Grade -separated interchanges. would be anticipated at arterial/arterial intersections with frontage roads replacing direct access to Eagle Road for the final phase. The ACHD Commission accepted the Eagle Road Access Control Study in September of 1997, and directed staff to implement the study as developments occur. ACHD will be contacting the City in the future to recommend that this study be adopted by reference in the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant makes the following statements in response to questions #3 and 4 on the application: 3. The condition or situation which warrants a change being made in the Plan. With the current Comprehensive Plan designation of Single Family Residential on these properties adjacent to Eagle Road, the development of these properties will be severely limited due to the traffic volumes creating noise and safety issues. 0 • This statement does not hold true for other large scale single family developments to the north on Eagle Road, such as Bristol Heights, Hobble Creek, and Island Woods. Some of the requested area is currently developed as an upper scale single family development, Carol's Subdivision. Staff questions the applicant's comment about safety issues, since mixed use developments or different land uses abutting each other typically result in one development opposing connectivity for traffic circulation, making it difficult for ACHD and the City of Meridian to support a reduction and consolidation of access points to Eagle Road. What are the safety issues that would apply to a residential development but not a mixed use development that generates more traffic? 4. The public need for and benefit from such a change in the Plan. The proposed change to the Mixed/PUD designation would allow a variety of development within this area through the Planned Development process requiring approval of a conditional use. As defined within Section 2-407 D17 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance the Mixed Use Review (MUR) areas are those areas which, because of their unique location and varied potential need to be planned as a whole, have been designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as MUR areas. These areas shall be developed as Planned Development General, and must be approved as a conditional use. By granting this amendment, development in this corridor and in the general area will provide general commercial services along Eagle Road including the extension of public utilities such as sewer and water at no cost to the local taxpayers. The applicant speaks of their "unique location," but does not explain what is "unique" about this area. The District is concerned about the applicant's statement about, "providing general commercial services along Eagle Road." General commercial conjures up visions of strip commercial and heavy demands for left turn movements at access points on Eagle Road. Listed below are the trips per dayep r acre for different land uses: Land use (per acre) Vehicle trips per day per acre Single family residential - 3.5 dwellings 35 Multi -family residential - 12 units 80 Office 100 Commercial shopping center 500 The trip generation for single family residential (existing land use designation) is significantly lower than office or commercial uses generate. The District disagrees with the applicant's statement that, "This proposed amendment is a natural progression in the updating of the Comprehensive Plan in that the mixed use designation currently exists at the intersections of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road and Ustick Road and Eagle Road" (underline added). Mcpa98100.cm Page 2 9 Recommendation: • As stated above, the ACED Commission does not .support the proposed amendment. If the City of Meridian approves the proposed amendment, the District recommends that the addition of one item: 5.20 Access to Eagle Road will be severely restricted and frontage roads will be required to consolidate access points. Primary access will be provided to Ustick Road or Fairview Avenue for those corner parcels that have frontage on Ustick Road or Fairview Avenue. Standard Requirements: 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. The request shall specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of why such a requirement would result in a substantial hardship or inequity. The written request 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 ACED Commission action, any request for reconsideration of the Commission's action shall be made in writing to the Planning and Development Supervisor within two weeks of the action and shall include a minimum fee of $110.00. The request for reconsideration shall specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include 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. 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. Conclusion of Law: Mcpa98100.cm Page 3 0 • 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 impacted by the proposed development. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Development Division at 387-6170. Submitted by: Date of Commission Action: Karen Gallagher December 30, 1998 Mcpa98100.cm Page 4 � 9LL-LHOWOZ) :XV -1 09LL-L99 *OZ) : Hd Zt M OHVG l `NVI(M 19W 9 911ns `OVMJ 2:13aNI 'N OL9 'ONI `S2J33NIJN9 310VNNId of It CD CO �� 0� � fit— � M 4 ccn mc: N U) U) CO • In• - • I• LFQFHn. NOTES. CONTROL U—TURN CAPABILITY MUST BE PROVIDED AT SIGNALIZED TYPE INTERSECITONS PRIOR TO RIGHT—IWRIGHT—OUT CONTROL. ALTERNATIVE ACCESS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PROPERTIES WARRANTS PRIOR TO CLOSURE OF ACCESS. EAGLE ROAD ACCESS STUDY ACCESS CONTROL PHASING APPROACH LOCAL ST. COLLECTOR ST. ARTERIAL ST. (660' SPACING) (1320' SPACING) Ctrl MILE SPACING) (1 MILE SPACING) FULL FULL SIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LEVEL 7 INTERSECTION INTERSECTION ACCESS ACCESS F WARRANTS INTERSECTION MEETS ACCIDENT, DELAY OR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANTS RIGHT -4N / FULL SIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LEVEL 2 ACCESS INTERSECTION INTERSECTION RIGHT -OUT F WARRANTS INTERSECTION MEETS ACCIDENT. DELAY OR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANTS LEVEL 3 HT—IN / IRIGHT—Ot.rr 4RIGHT—OffDr SIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION INTERSECTION F WARRANTS ACCIDENT HISTORY. LEVEL OF SERVICE (SUBURBAN ARTERIAL) ACCESS ACCESS SIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LEVEL 4 CLOSED INTERSECTION INTERSECTION CLOSED F WARRANTE INSUFFICIENT GREEN TIME FOR EAGLE ROAD, NO REASONABLE WAY TO PROVIDE CAPACITY OF AT GRADE INTERSECTION, SUBURBAN ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE, ACCIDENT HISTORY GRADE LEVEL 5 ACCESS SEPARATED CLOSED ...'eocueunc LFQFHn. NOTES. CONTROL U—TURN CAPABILITY MUST BE PROVIDED AT SIGNALIZED TYPE INTERSECITONS PRIOR TO RIGHT—IWRIGHT—OUT CONTROL. ALTERNATIVE ACCESS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PROPERTIES WARRANTS PRIOR TO CLOSURE OF ACCESS. EAGLE ROAD ACCESS STUDY ACCESS CONTROL PHASING rNi cLEj Engineers . , Inc. a RE°ESD N 0 d 13 1998 CITY O.F NIER,IDIAN P"NNU G & ZONING To: City of Meridian CPa' qg" loo 'Planning and Zoning Cortimission 200 E. Carlton, Suite 201 Meridian, Idaho '93642- 'RECEIVED RECEIVED Date: October 19, 1998'= ,' �j 2 1998 J , Re: Application to Amend the Meridian Com rehensive:Plan'and"aMCity l \Meridian pp p p Ci"ty Clerk Office w Enc: Proposed Text Amendment Proposed Map Amendment— Eagle Road Corridor Dear Commissioners: We are requesting a Coinprehensi'e Plan 'and Map amendment to provide foFmixedtPlanried Use Development designation`within the Eagle Road Corridor between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road. Based upon the current Comprehensive Plan Map, this corridor would be a 2,900 feet by 800 feet area on either side �of Eagle Road from the existing Mixed/Planned Unit Development (PUD) designation at the intersections of Fairview'Avenue and Eagle Road and Ustick Road `and Eagle Road In accordance with`theNe'ridian Comprehensive Plan, Implementation Chapter, Comprehensive Plan Amendments Section, we offer the following analysis: 1. Specific definition,of the change requested. As stated above; we afe requesting a Comprehensive Plan and'Map,amendmeni to extend the current Miked/PUD designation along a corridor approximately 800 -feet on either side of Eagle Road between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road. 2. Specific information on any property involved. With the exception -of Carol's Subdivision to the west (one acre lot subdivision), the majority of the property located within the proposed corridor is vacant, larger acreage parcels with an existing Single Family Residential designation. 870 NORTH LINDER SUITE B • MERIDIAN. IDAHO 83642 • (208) 887-7760 • FAX (208) 887-7781 • 3. The condition or situation which warrants a change being made in the Plan. With the current Comprehensive Plan designation of Single Family Residential on these properties adjacent to Eagle Road, the development of these properties will be severely limited due to the traffic volumes creating noise and safety issues. 4. The public need for and benefit from such a change in the Plan. The proposed change to the Mixed/PUD designation would allow a variety of development within this area through the Planned Development process requiring approval of a conditional use. As defined within Section 2-407 D17 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance the (MUR) Mixed Use Review Areas are those areas which, because of their unique location and varied potential need to be planned as a whole, have been designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as Mixed Use Review Areas. These areas shall be developed as Planned Development General (PDG), and must be approved as a conditional use. By granting this amendment, development in this corridor and in the general area will provide general commercial services along Eagle Road including the extension of public utilities such as sewer and water at no cost to the local taxpayers. 5. Documentation that no other solutions to the problem are presented by the current policy of the Plan are possible or reasonable. The current policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Map allow for single family residential only in this area. Any proposed mixed use within this area would not be permitted due to non-compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Development intentions for any land involved. We are contemplating the installation of a private indoor and outdoor storage facility on the east side of Eagle Road approximately 1/2 mile north of Fairview Avenue. The Meridian City Council supported this project in June 1995. We have initiated an Ada County Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow such a facility within the C2 zone of the County but are now being told that a zone change to C-2 would not be in compliance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 7. Any other data and information needed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in evaluating the proposal, such as who does it help, who does it hurt, how much is it going to cost and who is going to pay for it. This amendment will allow controlled development that is public service oriented along the Eagle corridor. In addition, a mix of affordable housing and limited offices could be provided through the PUD process. Since the property along this corridor is primarily vacant land, development in this area would not adversely effect the property owners. The cost of services within and extensions to the corridor would be born by the developers and not by the taxpayers. 0 0 Based upon the information provided above, we believe that this amendment is of benefit to the public as well as the property owners directly effected in the area. A mixed use designation in the Eagle corridor will provide services and an excellent buffer zone between the increasing traffic on Eagle Road and the residential development occurring within the area. Any development realized by this amendment would solely be at the expense of the developer and not of the public, including the extension of services to the area. This proposed amendment is a natural progression in the updating of the Comprehensive Plan in that the mixed use designation currently exists at the intersections of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road and Ustick Road and Eagle Road. We understand that the City is currently anticipating a substantial Comprehensive Plan amendment in the fall of 1999. Idaho Code allows the Planning and Zoning Commission to recommend amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council not more frequently than every six months. If we are allowed to proceed with this amendment, the Commission's recommendation could occur in sufficient time to allow future recommendations in conjunction with the anticipated Comprehensive Plan amendment in the fall of 1999. We look forward to your favorable recommendation on this amendment. If you have any questions or concerns on this proposal, please feel free to contact me at (208) 887-7760. Sincerely, Robert C. Unger Project Manager cc: File # 98760 • 0 PROPOSED MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT The Comprehensive Plan identifies the following Mixed -Planned Use Development: Old Town: As the original townsite of the City of Meridian, it includes the area south of Carlton Avenue, north of Franklin Road, and the areas that are immediately contiguous to Meridian and East First Street, as defined by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Old Town should continue to serve as a shopping, as well as a governmental and public activity center. In recognition that its shape and character will increase with additional population growth and development, the Comprehensive Plan sets the stage for the re -development of Old Town to reflect market and economic trends. Probable mixed - uses for Old Town include specialty commercial, higher density residential, offices, medical facilities and public and semi-public facilities. OLD TOWN POLICIES 5.1 The City of Meridian shall encourage existing business and commercial enterprises to remain in Old Town. 5.2 Detailed market studies should be undertaken to explore and clarify issues related to mixed-use development within Old Town. 5.3 The development of a variety of compatible land uses should be provided in plans and proposals for the future development of Old Town. 5.4 Special analysis should be undertaken concerning existing uses within Old Town so that specific recommendations can be made for the development of transitional uses which will enhance the area and prevent future deterioration. 5.5 Public parking development is a priority in Old Town. Mixed -Use Areas Adiacent to I-84, Overland Road and Franklin Road These areas are unique in that they are surrounded by arterials, immediately adjacent to the freeway (I-84), are relatively level in topography, have a distinct linear shape, and are greatly affected by contiguous industrial, residential and commercial land uses. In order that compatible land uses and efficient use of the land might occur, this corridor is anticipated for a variety of planned, compatible mixed uses. Probable mixed uses for the areas could be commercial, combined medium -to -high density residential, open space uses (as a means to buffer highway noise), tourist lodging, industrial, office, medical, and related land uses. ' Franklin, Overland/I-84 Mixed Use Policies 5.6 ' The developmenf of a variety of compatible land uses should be provided in specific plans and proposals for future development. 5 5.7 Detailed market studies should be undertaken to explore and clarify the issues that are related to mixed-use development in these areas. 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The integrity and,identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. 5.10 Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed. 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of development should be harmonized with previously -developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential area, including noise and traffic reduction. 5. 12 m Strip development within this mixed-use area is not in compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be required. 5.14 Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. 5.15 The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/Eagle Road/I-84 interchange is a priority development area. v Mixed -Use Area at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue plus the Eagle Road Corridor North of Fairview -Avenue` These areas are within Ada County, but are rapidly becoming contiguous to the City Limits of the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots, and sparse 0 development pattern. In order that compatible land uses and efficient use of the land mi occur, this corridor is anticipated for a variety of planned, compatible mixed uses. Probable mixed uses for the areas could be highway commercial, combined low -to -high density residential, open space uses, office, medical, and related land uses. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: 5.16 All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. 5.17 A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desirable for this area, including low -to -high density residential, office, and commercial land uses. 5.18 Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land -use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. 5.19 A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. Mixed -Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue plus areas North of Fairview Avenue These areas are within Ada County but nearly surrounded by the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots and a sparse development pattern. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: 5465.20 All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. 6-1-;5.21 A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desirable for this area, including low -to -high density residential, office, light industrial and commercial land uses. 4445.22 Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land -use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. 5,4-95.23 A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. "5.24 Pine Street will connect to Emerald Road and serve as a collector to this neighborhood. XU5.25 Any development in this area must be compatible with the Idaho Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) and related industrial/commercial development associated with the FTZ. Residential uses adjoining the FTZ will incorporate screening buffers and open space. in . . . . .......... JAN.2,1999 Merdia Qt�vCOfel cit, rk Office fIm p-�-�operzt.es vvesz, L»c. 1401 Shoreline Dr. • P.O. Box 2797 Boise, Idaho 83701 • (208)345-7523 REcE1VE]) JAN 12 1999 CztY of Afe.ridian Cit- Clerlf Office January 12, 1999 Chairman Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee 200 E. Carlton Meridian, ID 83642 RE: Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Weiss Seven Acre Mini Storage Dear Chairman and Commissioners: This letter is written to encourage your recommendation for approval of the comprehensive land use plan amendment for the seven acre mini storage project submitted by Steve Weiss located on Eagle Road between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road. I have reviewed Mr. Weiss's site plan and feel he has done an attractive front elevation with the 20 foot landscaped berm and fence. With all the residential development west and north of the proposed mini storage there is a strong demand for what he is proposing. So, I would encourage your support in the approval of this mini storage project. Si cerel , Jo . Barnes resident JLB/af