Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2018-07-19
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 6:00 PM Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance _X__Lisa Holland _X__Steven Yearsley _O__Gregory Wilson _O__Ryan Fitzgerald _X__Jessica Perreault _O_Bill Cassinelli __X_Rhonda McCarvel - Chairperson Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Approved Item 3: Action Items Land Use Public Hearing Process: After the Public Hearing is opened the staff report will be presented by the assigned city planner. Following Staff's report the applicant has up to 15 minutes to present their application. Each member of the public may provide testimony up to 3 minutes or if they are representing a larger group, such as a Homeowners Association, they are allowed 10 minutes. The applicant is then allowed 10 additional minutes to respond to the public's comments. No additional public testimony is taken once the public hearing is closed. A. Public Hearing for Hammer Daycare (H-2018-0060) by Darla Hammer Located at 2208 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a group daycare (6-12 children) on 0.20 of an acre of land in the R-4 zoning district Approved as Presented B. Public Hearing for Bountiful Commons Subdivision (H-2018- 0067) by TMEG Properties, L.L.C. Located at 5960 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots on 6.15 acres of land in the C-C and L-O zoning districts Recommend Approval to Council with Modifications – Scheduled 08/21/18 C. Public Hearing for Tanner Creek (H-2018-0023) by Schultz Development Located at 505, 521, 615, 675 W. Waltman Ln. 1. Request: Replacement of the existing Development Agreement with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan; and 2. Request: Amendment to the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation on 37.87 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential; and 3. Request: Rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C-G to the R- 15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts; and 4. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 141 building lots and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land; and 5. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in the R-40 zoning district Recommend Approval to Council with Modifications – Scheduled 08/21/18 Meeting adjourned 8:11 PM Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting July 19, 2018. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 19, 2018, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Jessica Perreault and Commissioner Lisa Holland. Members Absent: Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald and Commissioner Gregory Wilson. Others Present: Chris Johnson, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland ___X___ Steven Yearsley ______ Gregory Wilson _______ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Jessica Perreault _______ Bill Cassinelli ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on July 19th. Let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. At this time we have no changes, so could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? Holland: So moved. Perreault: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. McCarvel: We have no Consent Agenda this evening, so we will move on and at this time I would like to briefly explain the hearing process for this evening. We will open each item individually and, then, start with the staff report. the staff will report their findings regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 2 of 41 Development Code with the staff's recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation, the applicant will come forward to present their case for approval and -- of their application and respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open to public testimony. There is a sign-up iPad in the back as you entered for anyone wishing to testify. Any person testifying will come forward and be allowed three minutes and there is a timer on the screen. So you will be able to monitor that and a bell at the end of the three minutes. If you're speaking for a larger group, like an HOA, and there is a show of hands to represent that group, it will be given up to ten minutes. After all testimony has been heard, the applicant will be given another ten minutes to have the opportunity to come back and respond if they desire. After that we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council. Item 3: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Hammer Daycare (H-2018-0060) by Darla Hammer Located at 2208 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a group daycare 6-12 children) on 0.20 of an acre of land in the R-4 zoning district McCarvel: So, at this time we would like to open Item H-2018-0060, Hammer Daycare, and we will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The first item on the agenda this evening is the Hammer Daycare. The application before you this evening is a conditional use permit to operate a family daycare. The site consists of zero point -- 0.20 acres of land, zoned R-4, and is located at twenty-two zero -- 2208 North Linder Road. Adjacent land uses are primarily single family residences, all zoned R-4 as well. History on this particular property -- and back in May of this year planning staff did issue an accessory use permit, so the current owner of the property could operate a daycare -- what we define as a family daycare which consists of six or fewer children. Also mentioned to the Commission that recently we also amended the UDC to allow daycare groups as a conditional use in the R-4 zones, so the applicant proceeded with that application with the city and, then, waited for the UDC amendment to go into effect before she applied for her conditional use permit to operate the daycare group that's before you this evening. So, as I mentioned to you, the current residence or the site is - - consists of -- developed with a single family home. The applicant is here to increase the number of children from six to 12, as allowed under the UDC. Main access to this particular property -- let's see if we have an aerial for you here -- is from Linder Road, but the applicant did provide some photos for you to take under consideration. So, you can see the front of the residence here. Linder Road is an arterial roadway and their garage and the driveway fronts on Linder Road, but the photo -- the photo in the lower left-hand corner shows that the applicant has provided additional drop-off area or Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 3 of 41 parking area along the southern portion of the home on a less intense road, which is Tana Drive, and that is a local street. One of the staff's commissions -- or conditions of approval in the staff report is that the applicant is to direct their parents to drop off the children on that road versus Linder Road for safety purposes. You can see here also in the photos that the applicant has constructed new fencing and meets all of the UDC specific use standards for the daycare traffic -- or daycare use. Excuse me. Staff did place a condition in the staff report that the applicant -- you can see also along the south boundary you can -- where that drop-off area is there is additional parking that could be provided on the site. So, staff has recommended that the applicant not repave the site, but just stripe it in accord with UDC standards. The proposed hours of operation for the daycare use is from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Currently the code allows the operator to operate from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. So, they are actually asking for less hours of operation than was allowed by code and we have also tied them to that in their conditional use permit. Staff has not received any public testimony on this application, nor have we received concurrence from the owner of the property. She is here in the audience this evening, so she will answer any questions you may have, but staff is recommending -- recommending approval with the conditions as stated in the staff report and I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward. And just, please, state your name and address for the record. Hammer: Darla Hammer. 2208 North Linder Road, Meridian. McCarvel: Okay. And did you have anything to add to Bill's narrative? Hammer: Not really. I mean I have had the six with the accessory use permit and I'm just excited to -- I was waiting for that other portion to get changed and then -- so, I have just kind of been waiting for that and getting everything ready for it. McCarvel: Okay. Hammer: So -- McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: The only question I have -- are you in agreement with the staff report and the -- and the conditions? Hammer: Yes. Absolutely. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 4 of 41 McCarvel: What's the square foot on the -- Hammer: Oh, I just had Kenny there this morning for the fire inspection. I think it's 1,380. McCarvel: I appreciate all these pictures. This is probably one of the better laid out presentations we have had on a daycare. Hammer: Oh, good. McCarvel: Any other questions? Okay. All right. Thank you. Hammer: Thank you. McCarvel: And, Chris, you said there is no public testimony? Johnson: There is no public testimony. McCarvel: Okay. We have no one signed up that would like to speak, but if there is anybody in the room that would like to speak on this application, please, raise your hand. Okay. Okay. At this time, then, could I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item H-2018-0060? Holland: So moved. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018- 0060, Hammer Daycare. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. McCarvel: I will jump out. I think at first glance it seemed like a small square footage for 12 kids, but I think it's a very well laid out and very well planned out daycare and I was pleased to see the parking. That was my first question when I first even started reading the staff report, I thought, okay, with Linder Road where -- where are we going to drop all these kids off at. So, I appreciate the pictures of the parking on the side. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: I agree. Looking at the pictures, which are very well done, it looks like they are -- do a pretty good job with safety with different fencing and -- and stuff like this for the kids, especially along Linder Road. So, I don't see any issues with this application. Holland: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 5 of 41 McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I would tend to agree. I think they have -- they have done a thoughtful job of thinking proactively about what they would need to do to make this a facility that would work with the new designation, so -- I don't want to cut anybody off, but I'm -- I'm happy to make a motion. McCarvel: Perfect. Holland: So, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2018-0060 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19th, 2018, with no modifications. Perreault: I second that motion. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2018-0060. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Congratulations. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Parsons: Madam Chair, just for clarification -- McCarvel: Okay. Parsons: -- the project folder is six seven, not six zero. McCarvel: Six seven. Okay. Parsons: I'm sorry. I'm looking at the wrong sheet. Never mind. Six zero. I will shut up now. B. Public Hearing for Bountiful Commons Subdivision (H-2018- 0067) by TMEG Properties, L.L.C. Located at 5960 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots on 6.15 acres of land in the C-C and L-O zoning districts McCarvel: And we thought the technology was the problem tonight. Okay. At this time we will open public hearing Item H-2018-0067, Bountiful Commons Subdivision and we will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. I'm on the same page as you are now. So, the next application before you this evening is the Bountiful Commons Subdivision. The particular property consists of 6.15 acres of land, currently Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 6 of 41 zoned C-C and L-O and located at 5960 North Linder Road. Adjacent land uses. To the north we have vacant property, zoned RUT in Ada county. If you recall, there is a -- a pending land use application on that particular property known as Linder Village. On the east we have single family properties in the Paramount Subdivision, zoned R-8. And, then, there is also the L-O zoned portion that backs up against an LDS church, zoned L-O. South we have rural residential property, vacant land in Paramount Village Center, zoned L-O. And to the west we have North Linder Road and single family properties in Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. The history on this property -- so, last year this -- the applicant brought forth an annexation called Linder Mixed Use project. As part of that property the applicant was required to enter into a development agreement where you guys looked at his concept plan and -- and approved some conceptual elevations and a lot of that is already somewhat reflected in the staff report that we wrote up for you this -- this time as well. So, a lot of the elevations are -- are those that were presented to you back with the mixed use project. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this particular property is mixed use community and mixed use neighborhood. So, the applicant is proposing a six lot sub -- commercial subdivision. Two of the lots will be -- or, excuse me, four of the lots will be zoned C-C and two of the lots will be zoned L-O. A vehicular access is provided from Linder Road through a shared commercial drive aisle that provides access to the properties to the south, to the north, and all of the internal lots proposed with the subdivision. Staff is also required that they provide access to this parcel that's labeled as not a part as well, so rather than no local -- or no public streets are proposed with this particular application, all of this will be done through shared access or cross-access agreement that's required as part of the subdivision and a condition of approval. The only required landscaping for the proposed subdivision is the 30 foot -- 35 foot wide landscape buffer that's required along North Linder Road. All other landscaping will be reviewed and approved with lot development. The applicant has shown a 25 foot buffer along the residential portion of the subdivision, but, again, that will be reviewed and approved with a future conditional use permit application or a certificate of zoning compliance application. As I mentioned to you previously, here are the elevations that are again tied to that development agreement that was required as part of annexation. Nothing new here. But I did want to let you know that the -- we did receive written testimony from the applicant. They are wanting to modify one condition of approval that's in the staff report this evening and that would be condition 1.1.5. Currently as written staff is requiring that they record a subdivision before they are allowed to get a building permit. The applicant would like the ability to at least pull one building permit prior to recordation of plat. The applicant does have two legal parcels in order to proceed with that process, so staff is amenable to modifying that condition to -- to allow the applicant to pull -- receive CZC and design review approval and pull -- submit for a building permit prior to the plat recording. And, then, just before the hearing they -- staff did receive some written testimony from one of the audience members that I presented to you and they would like -- they showed you a wall detail that they would like to address with the applicant and address -- have the Commission address as well. Other than that, staff has not received any other testimony on this application and we are recommending approval with the conditions as stated in the staff report and that minor modification that I spoke -- just spoke to you about. With that I conclude and stand for any questions. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 7 of 41 McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Gosser: Trevor Gosser. 74 East 500 South, Bountiful, Utah. 84010. Madam Chair and Commissioners, thanks for listening to this application today. Bill did a good job explaining, you know, what I'm trying to do here. I have been before you guys a couple times now and typically, you know, you don't want to take a pre-plat in when you go in for annexation and zoning, but I wasn't able to at that time, so I'm just coming in and pre-platting at this time with six lots and a drive through that and connecting to the surround -- the adjacent properties. At this time I just yield to see if you guys have any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Have you had a chance to look at the letter that came in about the -- the fence? Gosser: It was handed to me right when I got here and so -- I did take a look at that. I am selling that back portion to a buyer and I would ask that the residents come and ask when they come for a CZC for this particular item that they are requesting is what I would propose. I don't know if you guys know this, but there is no sewer connected to this property. I have to pull sewer all the way from Cayuse Creek up to this site, which is over 500 feet, because the adjacent property didn't pull sewer to and through and so now I'm left with it, which is a big burden on me and that, you know, a big dollar amount to pull sewer down Linder 500 feet to get to my property and so I would ask that that would be reviewed later on and not at this time. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: One follow-up question. Gosser: Yes. Holland: When you say you're selling part of the back parcel, how much of the property are you selling? Gosser: The two back parcels. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 8 of 41 Holland: Okay. Gosser: Yeah. So, it's to a dance studio. Someone's coming in and putting in a dance studio there. McCarvel: Bill, can you go back to that layout -- or Sonya. There you go. Thank you. Gosser: Lots 3 and 4. McCarvel: Lots 3 and 4? Gosser: Yeah. McCarvel: Okay. Gosser: And, you know, there is a -- a 25 foot buffer as is with -- you know, we are going to be planting a lot of trees, because there is a lot of trees on the property right now and because of the tree mitigation plan out there we will be, you know, putting a lot of those trees right there to fulfill that requirement. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Bill, can we make that condition -- or -- I'm just trying to figure out what -- what we have -- what we can do I guess per the code. Can we make that part of the -- that they put the fence as part of this CZC or is that not under the purview of the preliminary plat I guess is what I'm asking? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The code gives you flexibility as to how that buffer -- as I alluded to you that buffer typically happens at lot development. This is a subdivision, so really the only required landscaping is along the street. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: The code does allow -- there is a couple provisions in code for these particular buffers. The applicant has the ability -- or the Council has the ability to reduce the buffer through public hearing process. So, Council could reduce the buffer during the public hearing. The code requires a 25 foot buffer where all the trees have to touch at -- at maturity is the other option and, then, code also says if you put up a wall or a fence you can reduce the number of plantings. Yearsley: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 9 of 41 Parsons: And so there is currently a fence there. So, you -- code -- you can require a wall if you so choose, because the code says if -- to mitigate against residential uses you can require a wall to do that. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: I'm just letting you know there is other options, too, that could mitigate some of that as well under the section of the ordinance. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Yearsley: Not at this time. Gosser: Thank you. McCarvel: Chris, do we have anyone signed up to testify? Johnson: Madam Chair, you had four persons sign in -- and I apologize if I mispronounce the name -- Barbara Badigian is for, but does not wish to testify. McCarvel: Okay. Johnson: Leonard Badigian is for, does not wish to testify. Joe Marshall for and wished to testify. McCarvel: Okay. Marshall: Madam Chair, Commissioners, thank you for this opportunity. First, I want to commend -- McCarvel: Please state your name and address for the record. Marshall: Oh. Joe Marshall. 5937 North Arliss Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. 83646. First off I'd like to commend Trevor Gosser. He has been absolutely awesome to work with. I have a lifetime of working with a lot of different developers. He's very good. I'm impressed. Has really tried to work with us. I'm not asking him to build this fence and we do want a concrete wall and you can see everybody that backs up to that has signed that petition. I don't know if that got handed around, but we have talked about it long and hard. I was actually amenable to the apartments and I -- I worry about C-C. Yes, a dance studio sounds great and wonderful behind us, but in six months time I'm not -- I don't -- there is no guarantee they are still in business. A restaurant could go in there. We have absolutely -- anything approved in a C-C area could move in there. Now, I hope the dance studio goes in and stays 30 years plus. I hope I'm long gone, dead and buried by the time they run out of business. But we don't -- we don't have any Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 10 of 41 guarantees and if you have ever noticed, 25 feet is about over here. So, I'm standing about 25 feet back there. That's -- that's actually pretty close and anything could go in there that is approved in a C-C if they go out of business. So, that is a concern. A wood fence does not -- and I can show you a hundred studies -- show -- well, over a hundred -- I could show you a couple thousand, probably, that show a wood fence does not block any sound. To block sound you have to have mass and so that's why I'm asking for either a precast concrete -- I thought a CMU wall might be slightly more cost- effective. Split-face is attractive, used in a lot of places and you see it all over the valley, trying to delineate between commercial and residential and while I know we are in an R-8, we are actually built out at 4.15 units per acre, just barely over R-4, and we are backing up to C-C, the highest level being C-G. There is an awful lot allowable in a C-C and without guarantees. I'd kind of like to be able to enjoy my backyard and so I am requesting that this be attached to the plat that whoever buys it knows and is aware of the fact that we really want this and it is appropriate to place that between C-C and residential. I think when I retired from the Commission staff said that my -- my mantra no C-G next to residential would be called the Marshall Plan, so commercial and residential are not very compatible and we are trying to make it so in this case. So, if you have any questions for me. McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone else, Chris? Johnson: Madam Chair, Wendy McKinney. McKinney: Hello. My name is Wendy McKinney. I'm at 1225 Bacall Street and am very close to this subdivision that's going in and we have been working on the Linder Village Development as well and as residents we are just so grateful to be working with a developer like this one, who has worked with us, who sat down with us from the get go and said this is what we want. What do you want? And actually having a discussion with us, because other developers -- we have been trying to work with have not been at all the same and so I'm just here to say thank you for a great developer in this area. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room that wishes to testify on this application? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Gosser: Trevor Gosser. Do I just -- are you asking me to comment? McCarvel: Yes. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. Gosser: Okay. Trevor Gosser. 74 East 500 South, Bountiful, Utah. 84010. McCarvel: Any other comments to the public -- Gosser: I guess I would be interested to know what you guys think about that and, then, I could comment on -- on that, too. I mean -- I guess, Bill or Sonya, what is typical -- what -- what usually happens in -- in this situation? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 11 of 41 McCarvel: What does our code require, Sonya? Allen: Madam Chair, basically, what Bill already stated -- a buffer to residential uses. Part of that buffer can be a fence or a wall. It isn't a requirement. It is something that can certainly be requested by the applicant. It's up to the Commission and Council whether or not they require that. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Given that this is a C-C zone, I actually favor the option and I don't necessarily mean that you have to build it, but as part of the building permit that that's, you know, something that the builder would have to put up, would be my recommendation and so it's not tied to you, but I would be curious to see if you were amenable to that or if it's -- you know, I would imagine that would affect selling rights to the property as well and -- Gosser: We are under contract, you know, and so there is going to be push back, you know, obviously, and -- Yearsley: Right. Gosser: -- and a wall like this definitely isn't cheap to -- to build, you know, so I was -- I was trying to abide by code, you know, and I -- I appreciate where they are coming from. I do. I appreciate where they are coming from. I feel like we are going to have a lot of trees out there. There is a good buffer. There is already a fence there. But, again, I -- you know, it's got to come back before the Commission again when they come in for their -- their design review and the residents -- you know, I welcome them to come and -- and, you know, ask for it at that time when a building permit is actually going to be issued. Yearsley: Just clarify that, with this -- with this preliminary -- with this they don't have to come in for us -- before us before a building permit, do they? Gosser: Don't they need to come in and do a design review? Yearsley: They do with the Planning and Zoning, but not before the Commission. Gosser: Okay. It's Planning and Zoning. Yearsley: Yeah. Gosser: Yeah. Sorry. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 12 of 41 McCarvel: Because at that time we can say, okay, dance studio, fine, you don't need it. A restaurant, yeah, you do. Yearsley: Yeah. So -- Gosser: Okay. Yearsley: So, that's the concern is it does not come back before -- Gosser: I got you. Yearsley: -- the public -- Gosser: Okay. Yearsley: -- hearing type situation, so -- you know, I have -- well -- and I -- I will say one last thing and, then, I will -- I will concede to what the other Commissioners have said. Given that this is two narrow lots and, you know, you have the church to the -- to the south there, it's going to look kind of funny having a -- my guess is the church probably has a vinyl fence and, then, a small block fence and we don't know what's going to happen around the other corner. So, it could kind of stick out like a sore thumb as well. So, no, I -- at that point I will -- I would be interested to see what everybody else has to say. Perreault: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I agree with Commissioner Yearsley. I feel like that the zoning necessitates something more significant than what's there currently. Gosser: What about a berm? A landscape berm? Yearsley: So, can you help me understand how -- how high? What -- what's your -- Gosser: I guess that's -- that would be -- you know, if there was like a -- a four foot berm or five foot berm with trees on it, you know, that would, obviously, be a sound barrier. I guess I -- I don't know for sure what the cost difference is between a berm and -- and a CMU fence, but I know a CMU fence is going to be very expensive to -- I mean I think that back wall there is 350 feet or so, so it's a big stretch and we are going to be excavating and we can probably move dirt -- Yearsley: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 13 of 41 Gosser: -- you know, over to -- to the landscape area pretty easily when -- when they go to build, which would also -- you know, I think Joe was concerned about sound and I think, you know, a berm, you know, provides pretty good sound barrier as well. So, I -- you know, that -- that's another option I would look forward -- Yearsley: So, I'll speak since no one else -- I would be amenable to a berm, a four or five foot berm with what -- what's a medium size fence. You know, it doesn't have to be -- I don't want -- not be ten feet tall, but if you did like a four foot berm with a four foot fence, you know, something like that, with -- with landscaped I think would be an appropriate option I think. Kind of a compromise if that would be amenable to you. McCarvel: Yeah. And I guess especially -- you know, I don't know how we word it and I know this stuff is always hard to catch later on, but since it's not coming back again in front of us, but -- you know, I hate to have a horrible amount of expense if it is going to come through as a dance studio, but if it comes through something -- with more noise -- Gosser: Can you not attach that to the plat saying what type of a use? McCarvel: I think if it came in with, you know, a more active use or noisier use with trucks and everything, then, you need the CMU fence and if it comes through as a dance studio the berm and a fence is just fine. Yes? No? Holland: I agree. Perreault: I agree. Yearsley: So, I guess we look to legal and -- and staff to see if that's how we can condition that to make it work. Perreault: Madam Chair, one more. The -- this letter that we received right before we -- we met also discusses moving the location of the fencing. Do we want to have a -- want to talk about that? Is there any question or concern in that regard? McCarvel: I think a residential fence -- Gosser: I think what happened -- correct me if I'm wrong, Joe, is that the fence isn't on your property; right? I mean it's -- it's pushed further into your property; right? Gosser: Yeah. Yearsley: Yeah. So -- McCarvel: Yeah. That's what I'm seeing, it's the residence fence -- Yearsley: Yeah. We are not moving the residence fence, just have them put the fence on the property line. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 14 of 41 Perreault: Okay. I just want to make sure that was clear. Yearsley: Yeah. So, I guess direction. You know, can we condition based on the use, what type of -- Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, that would have been a development agreement requirement that came with annexation. We are at -- we are platting. We are only creating lots, we are not creating new -- McCarvel: Okay. Parsons: -- restricting uses on this particular property. Yearsley: That was my concern. Parsons: Your option could be is if you want to move this forward this evening with a recommendation is you can have Mr. Gosser work with the neighbors and, then, ten days prior of the Council hearing they can provide -- provide an exhibit on how they think they can mitigate the neighbors' concerns with a wall-berm combination, fence- berm combination and we can include that is part of the record with the plat. McCarvel: I like that. Okay. Yearsley: Okay. McCarvel: Thank you. Yearsley: I like that idea. McCarvel: Yeah. Yearsley: Thank you. McCarvel: All right. Thank you. All right. So, at this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for item H-2018-0067? Yearsley: So moved. Perreault: So moved. Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018- 0067. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 15 of 41 McCarvel: Well, I think we got most of it worked out with the applicant. I like where we ended up with that. Yearsley: Well, I -- Madam Chair, I agree. I think with -- we can come up with a fair compromise between the applicant and the -- and the residents and it sounds like they have done a very good job in the past, so I feel confident that they can come up with a resolution, so -- McCarvel: Okay. Holland: Madam Chair, I tend to agree. I think -- it sounds like this applicant has worked well with the neighbors and I'm sure that they can come up with a decision of how to move forward a recommend to City Council when the applicant comes forward. McCarvel: And they have the one request of being able to pull the one building permit before recording it. I think I'm okay with that. Yearsley: Yeah. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: So, Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: After considering -- after considering all staff and applicant -- applicant -- excuse me. Let me start over. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2018-0067 as presented in the staff -- staff report for the hearing date of July 19th -- 19th, 2018, with the following modifications: That Item 1.1.5 be modified to allow one building permit to be pulled at CZC approval and that -- recommend that the applicant and the adjacent homeowners work together to come up with a -- a landscaping-fencing recommendation prior to City Council. Perreault: Second that motion. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on H-2018-0067 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Tanner Creek ( H-2018-0023) by Schultz Development Located at 505, 521, 615, 675 W. Waltman Ln. 1. Request: Replacement of the existing Development Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 16 of 41 Agreement with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan; and 2. Request: Amendment to the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation on 37.87 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential; and 3. Request: Rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C-G to the R15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts; and 4. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 141 building lots and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land; and 5. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in the R-40 zoning district McCarvel: At this time we will open the public hearing for H-2018-0052, Fairbourne Development and we will begin with the staff report. Johnson: Madam Chair? Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the next application is actually called Tanner Creek. McCarvel: Oh, sorry. I still had my thing from last week. I'm sorry. 2018 -- H-2018- 0023, Tanner Creek. Allen: Thank you. McCarvel: No. Thank you. Allen: The following applications are before you. A request for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment, rezone, preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. There is also a request for a development agreement modification, but that is not before the Commission tonight. That's only a City Council decision. This site consist of 37.87 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and is located at 505, 521, 615 and 675 West Waltman Lane on the north side of I-84, west of South Meridian Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north is West Waltman Lane and rural residential property, zoned R-1 and RUT in Ada county. To the east are -- is vacant commercial land, zoned C-G and some single family residential properties. To the south is I-84 and across I-84 is Mountain View Equipment, Wahooz, and Roaring Springs, zoned on C-2 in Ada County and C-G respectively. To the west are single family residential properties in The Landing Subdivision, zoned R-4. This property was annexed back in 2006 with a Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 17 of 41 requirement of a development agreement. In 2008 a preliminary plat was approved for Browning Plaza Subdivision. Several time extensions were approved, but the plat expired on April 7th of 2018. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is commercial. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing development agreement with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan. The provisions of the existing agreement are included in Exhibit A-9 of the staff report. The existing development agreement recorded in 2008 is for a 400,000 square foot commercial development consisting of professional offices, a hotel, big box retail store, and smaller retail spaces distributed among 21 separate buildings that was previously planned to develop on this site. Since many of these provisions no longer apply to the proposed residential development, the applicant wishes to replace the agreement with a new development agreement based on the proposed development plan. Staff has reviewed the existing provisions that are still applicable to the development of this property and have included them in the new development agreement. This application does not require Commission action, only City Council, but the other applications associated with this project are contingent upon the development agreement modification. Amendment to the future land use map is proposed to change the land use designation on 39.25 acres of land from commercial to medium high density residential as shown there on the map on your right. The applicant's narrative states that because the site is located between a quarter and a half mile west of South Meridian Road, a principal arterial street, on a local street, West Waltman Lane, commercial development is not viable. Therefore, the applicant requests an amendment to the future land use map in order to develop residential uses on the site. There are two parcels located at 737 and 755 West Waltman Lane and those -- if you can see my pointer here -- are right there. They are included in the map amendment request, but they are not part of the proposed development plan. Staff requested the applicant include those parcels as leaving the two properties with a commercial designation would not be compatible with existing abutting residential uses and future residential development if the proposed map amendment is approved. The applicant did send letters -- letters to those property owners. Geronimo Martinez at 737 West Waltman Lane and Steven Cooper at 755 West Waltman Lane, notifying them of the intent to include their properties in this application and included a request for them to indicate their preference of maintaining the current commercial designation or agreement with the amendment to medium high density residential, but received no response from either property owner. The requested future land use map amendment and proposed single family detached townhomes and multi-family housing would provide a transition in uses and zoning between the single family residential subdivision, zoned R-4 to the west, and the commercial designated properties, zoned C-G, to the east. Additionally, the Ten Mile Creek will provide a natural one hundred foot wide transition and buffer area along the east boundary of the site between the proposed residential and future commercial development. You can see this kind of blue line right here, that's the location of the Ten Mile Creek and it runs right down along the east boundary of the site. A rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C-G to the R-15 zoning district and the R-15 would be the west 22.59 acres and the R-40 district, which would be the east 15.89 acres, is proposed consistent with the proposed map designation of medium high density residential. So, basically, the R-15 portion would be all of this area Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 18 of 41 where the single family residential development is and, then, the R-15 -- R-40, excuse me, would be all of this where the multi-family as proposed. The applicant has submitted a site plan, which depicts single family detached dwellings along the perimeter boundary of the single family portion of the site with townhomes internal to the development and multi-family on the eastern portion of the site. A large central common area is proposed within the single family portion of the site and a common area is proposed within the multi-family as well, linear as well as an area where there is a -- a swimming pool proposed. Amenities for the multi-family development are separate from that of the single family development. Conceptual building elevations, photos and renderings, were submitted that depict the general style of development proposed for the subdivision. All structures, except single family residential detached homes, are required to comply with the design standards. Additionally, because the rear and/or sides of structures on Lots 2 through 9 and 38 -- excuse me -- 33 through 48, Block 3, and lots 2, 7, 9 and 14, Block 10, that face Waltman Lane and I-84 are highly visible. These elevations should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: Modulation, projections, recesses, setbacks, popouts, base, banding, porches, balconies, material types or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall plains and roof lines that are visible from the subject public streets and that are -- that would be these lots right along here where my pointer is at and, then, these lots right along here at the north boundary of the site. To ensure this site develops as proposed and recommended by staff with this application and in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends a development agreement is required with the rezone contain the provisions included in Exhibit B of the staff report. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown that consists of 141 building lots, consisting of 126 single family residential and 15 multi-family residential lots and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land. A phasing plan is proposed as shown that proposes four phases of development. Access is proposed via two accesses from Waltman Lane, one for the proposed single-family portion of the site and one for the multi-family portion. This one right here where my pointer is at is the multi-family access and over here further to the west is the single family access. An existing stub street West Ruddy Drive -- and that is right here at the west boundary of the site -- is proposed to be extended to Waltman Lane with development. A stub street is proposed to the out parcel at the northwest corner of the site for future access and that would be right here. A concept plan was submitted that depicts how those two properties could redevelop in the future. That is as shown. At the request of emergency services, staff is recommending private streets are provided within the multi-family portion of the site for addressing purposes. Waltman Lane is required to be improved as half of a 36 foot wide collector street section, plus 12 feet of additional pavement, for a total of 30 feet with curb, gutter, sidewalk and a gravel shoulder. Improvements to Waltman Lane will require the construction -- reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek. As part of this application the applicant proposes to enter into a cooperative development agreement with ACHD to construct the extension of Corporate Drive north of this site, from its current terminus north of the Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Lane. I don't know if you can seen that up here, but if you follow this -- there it is right there. Corporate Drive currently dead ends right here where my pointer is at and with this development it -- they will construct a bridge and extend Corporate down to Waltman there. This will take Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 19 of 41 place as part of the first phase of development and will provide additional access to the site and the area and provide for access while the Ten Mile Creek Bridge on Waltman Lane is reconstructed. Street buffers are required to be provided along West Waltman Lane and I-84 in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends the entire street buffer and sidewalk along Waltman Lane and the entire street buffer, including the berm and wall along I-84 is constructed with the first phase of development. Qualified open space and site amenities are proposed in accord with UDC standards. A total of 6.87 acres of common open space and eight site amenities are proposed. Site amenities for the overall development consist of a clubhouse, swimming pool, two playground areas, park area, Pergola shade structure, fire pit and a ten foot wide multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek and a pedestrian bridge over the creek for connectivity to the east. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek and along with the bridge I mentioned to the east for future interconnectivity. Noise abatement is required for residential developments adjacent to state and federal highways. The applicant is proposing a nine foot tall berm and a four foot tall SimTek granite wall adjacent to I-84. That diagram here in the lower right-hand corner is a cross-section of the berm and wall and this is a detail of the wall here at the bottom. A conditional use permit is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in 14 structures on 15.89 acres of land in the R-40 zoning districts in accord with UDC table 11-2A-2. The units will be housed in a mix of eight, 16, and 24-plex two and three story structures ranging in size from 779 to 1,258 square feet. A mix of one bedroom -- there will be 70 of those. Two bedroom, 136 of those. And three bedroom, 66 units are proposed. A minimum of 509 parking spaces are required with 272 of those being in covered carport or garages. A total of 537 spaces are proposed with 272 being carport spaces, for a total of 28 spaces above and beyond UDC standards. There has been no written testimony received on this application that staff is aware of. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report and a new development agreement also with the conditions in the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Schultz: Good evening, Madam Chair and Commissioners. Matt Schultz. 8421 South Ten Mile in Meridian. Happy to be here. We have been working on this project for about a year now getting it designed and planned with all of our consultants and working with staff and we realize it's a high profile project right at the Meridian interchange and there is a high hurdle to jump in changing a comp plan. You know, that's not something we do just randomly. We realize that it's a high hurdle to jump, but however in this particular case we believe it's -- it's warranted and we believe we have a good application for this site that adds a lot and brings a lot with it to improve a lot of the amenities and the transportation issues, as well as just a good land use for this particular site is my goal to -- to present that to you, so -- so, with that I will jump right into the comp plan amendment, which changes commercial -- back in 2006 an application was submitted, took them two years to get some commercial approved, several hearings -- at Planning Commission, several hearing at City Council, MDC, they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 20 of 41 negotiated a three million dollar transportation funding tax credit deal. At the time, if we remember, none of the -- none of the split corridor was done. The Meridian interchange was not redone. The Ten Mile Interchange was not there. I think the only commercial going on at the time in Meridian was Portico -- our almost Governor Ahlquist was working on that, putting together an assemblage and did -- did the Portico and somebody came along and said, hey, this would be a great place to do some commercial. I think at 50,000 foot it probably was. When you get down to lower level and look at its location and its access and its frontage, it's not good. It's not good at all. If you look at all the commercial in town that's within, you know, 500 feet of a main access, this is a dead end, a local road, and for a site this size, 38 acres, if you look at the site next to us of being 31 acres, it's really a 69 acre site if you will with multiple owners under it. It's really a mixed use site. What we are saying is the east 31 is commercial, especially since this -- that time ten years ago ITD is no longer ITD on the corner, that's privately held, under commercial ownership now, so it's a little bit of a misnomer on the comp plan where it says green and ITD that's -- that's -- red is commercial or it really should be in the next comp plan. So, really, this 31 acres to the east of us that's for sure commercial. So, what do we do with this 38 that's in the back? It's a quarter mile away from its main access. In my experience in 20 years in the business for being commercial size you need exceptional, outstanding, fantastic -- all the superlatives -- frontage access. This does not have it. This has highway frontage as you go by in about ten seconds at 65 miles an hour, but it does not have any frontage access, it's -- it's -- it's a -- it's a ten -- tenth layer commercial site. It will never get developed commercial if we leave it. It was a speculative throw in a time of a lot of speculation and it was a bad bet that it was going to go commercial. At the time they had Target lined up at first, they fell out, and, then, it comes back as some options and it just -- it's just never going to work there, so -- and we have -- we have asked a lot of different consultants about this. It's -- so, what we have is some -- some existing residential that really needs to be transitioned. We have got some buffering along the interstate all the way through the valley that's -- if you -- if you have driven as much -- we have all driven it a lot, there is not a really good example of a really good buffer on the freeway, except for maybe Touchmark by the hospital, it's -- it's all landscaping, nice fountain, and some big trees -- no offense, but at least looks good. The rest of it is a hodgepodge -- not good. You know, somehow the fence and -- and no landscaping or dead landscaping or -- or whatever, it's just -- there is just not a good example. So, we want to present something that -- that looks good as we come in from the west into town, finishes off at least that first quarter mile before we get to the hard corner with an nice berm transition into downtown and from the last application you heard we don't have a problem building a berm, we don't have a problem building a wall and that nine feet is a great sound buffer. So, let's move on from our comp plan change arguments, okay? It's just not going to work commercial, so let's show it for residential. So, what do we do? So, we have a good -- a good transition of the Ten Mile Creek on the east side. We wanted to line up some multi-family there and, then, the rest of it transitions to mixed product, single family residential on the rest of it and this was how it laid out. One of the considerations was that Ruddy had to connect. We tried to say, hey, ACHD do we really have to connect to this? Yes, you do. Okay. You know, we realized traffic is to change out here between the existing residents -- it's just -- it's just going to Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 21 of 41 change. There is no way around it. ACHD wants it to change. Connectivity is good. And from a planning standpoint it may be bad for a few residences short term, but in the long term it's better for the whole area to have interconnectivity, especially this close to the Meridian interchange only a half mile away. It's really going to promote I think more rideable, drivable -- all those things into downtown more so from residential and I think in that regard it's good in that -- in that respect and to that end we are going to put a pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. We are proposing a pedestrian bridge. Nampa- Meridian Irrigation has bought off on this, putting in a pedestrian bridge, which will happen, so we think that we have got that handled. We agree with all staff's comments and conditions, except this one, which is pretty amazing. They usually do a pretty good job. And this has to do with phasing, you know, what improvements are due with phasing. Like staff said, we are going to do Corporate bridge extension with our phase one and they would like us to also do the full frontage of Waltman landscaping and improvements in phase one. That's okay. With phase two, which we are stating is the - - the northern portion of the department, they said do the full length of the pathway and the bridge. That's okay, too. The berm -- I would rather put that off onto phase three and four, only because I need a lot of dirt to build it. I would rather -- I would rather have some flexibility. We are not up against the freeway, we would like to put the berm on -- on the highway out and we are not -- it's not because of money and -- it's about maintenance, too. It gives us a mass of people to contribute to the maintenance as well. So, that's our only request. And that ended up being condition -- it shows up in two spots, 1.1(j) and 1.2.3. It's the same condition in two spots. We just think it's the right thing, at the right place. We realize it's high profile, but we want to do everything nice out there and -- and -- and do the heavy lifting of -- of replacing both bridges. The Walmart bridge is substandard today. Before we even touch it needs to get replaced. Our responsibility is technically widening it on our side and that's how the split came about is I think 70/30 or 70 -- 80/20 or something with ACHD. And it's about the same split on Corporate and we are happy that ACHD has stepped up. We have stepped up. We know it's important to the city that we do Corporate, even though our traffic study says it's not required, because the -- the commercial development that was approved ten years ago had three times as much traffic as this one does. Three times. Which is amazing. I knew it was going to be a lot more, but I didn't know it would be that much more. So, with the improvements that have been done since that commercial site was approved at the -- you know, the one way couplets been done, there is multiple lanes going out from here with the Corporate, it just works -- it works okay on the traffic. That's what ACHD says, that's what our traffic consultant says and so we are just happy to participate in adding that loop, so it's not a -- it's not really a dead end if you connect to Ruddy, but we really don't want Ruddy to be only secondary access, you know, being a half mile to Linder still and so winding -- winding through a neighborhood. So, Corporate would be a good secondary loop. The right of way already is there. ACHD purchased that a few years ago or I don't know how many years ago, but they purchased this, so the right of way is there, which is good, we just need to build it, and the city also wants us to extend a water line down that to have a good loop and, then, we are also going to put the water line that's currently on the top of the bridge on Waltman, we are going to put that under the creek. So, the reason for the phasing is we are going to build Corporate first and the traffic will go over that way and, then, we will Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 22 of 41 just have to take the whole bridge out and have it shut down while we rebuild it, redo the utilities. In the meantime you will have two connections, Ruddy and Corporate, and, then, once you get Waltman rebuilt you will have everything good. So, like I said, we agree with staff's conditions of approval. I don't know if staff had that -- did you have that 3D flyover? Would it be okay in part of my time if we show that 3D visualization we had our Breckon Consultants do to the kind of visualize this. McCarvel: Yeah. I think you're good on time, Matt. Schultz: I think it's about four minutes or something, so I will just let you guys watch and I might comment a little bit as we drop down from a thousand feet or so. I don't know what that elevation is, but -- there is actually some kind of corny music in the background, you can't hear it probably. So, we are turning -- going left looking back down to Waltman Lane. Looking to the south now over the apartments. Going down Waltman, looking down over the berm on Waltman. There is that music. So, Waltman Lane has got a good buffer. And, then, we come into -- I think they were looking south when we passed Corporate, now we are going in on the residential portion. It's a residential collector. No on front housing. Tree lined. Detach sidewalks. It connects to Ruddy. Now we are looking at the park there at the curve. It curves into Ruddy. That's our central open space. A couple acres. Plenty big. As you can see the scale, it's good to see the people in there for the scale of it. I'm kind of excited -- I'm excited on these plans. Now we are heading kind of to the southeast over the -- over the apartments. To kind of give you -- there is two stories along the -- the residential -- single family residential, those are twos we are looking at right now. The two stories. It's a row of two stories. And, then, it switches to three stories next to the Ten Mile Creek, next to the commercial. It's -- two stories are really subtle in their height. They are just -- there is just no height to them at all. Even the threes don't look that high. Of course this is going to go through design review. These aren't the exact colors, exact everything, so it's artist conception at this point. This is a 5,000 -- or, yeah, excuse me, 5,000 square foot clubhouse, pool and a fire pit and exercise room and all the things to go with that. Here he's backing up to the Ten Mile city pathway, which there is a city sewer line underneath there right now, so it doubles as their access road. The flowers are nice when you get spring bloom there. But those are the three stories. Even those don't seem too -- too tall. You know, there is some four stories around town. And there is good interconnectivity between the apartments -- the apartments to that pathway, as well as the parking lot to that pathway and, then, I wanted to show you the berm going down the freeway, doing a little slalom here I think, coming down I-84, just to kind of show you the apartments, the nine foot -- the nine to ten foot berm. There is a wall on top and as we transition to the single family we are -- we want to limit those -- I don't know if staff mentioned it, but we want to limit those a single story. You know, those -- that's how these were drawn. As you can see, we are not having two stories over it. So, that's kind of it. They are set further back than the existing homes are to the west of us. That's all there is. Hey, Sonya, I think we are done. Thanks. We don't need Breckon's little advertisement on here anyways. Beckon Design did a good job. Yeah. But -- but we did -- our berm is further back than the existing one, but it's -- at least it's higher. It is wider. The homes are further back from the highway and, then, the existing Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 23 of 41 homes and we want to limit them to single stories and I don't think that got put in there, but that's what we want to do. And, in fact, the articulation that's kind of a little bit of a waste on -- on those, because they are hidden behind the berm, but, you know, whatever. It's okay, you know, as long as they are single story I think that takes care of it. So, we want to do that to get a visualization on that berm primarily, but also do the flyover so you get -- how does that berm look, what's -- how do the house as you're going down the freeway, going down that way, and that was important for us to depict and it's showing -- it's all drawn to scale and -- I didn't tell them how to draw it, they just drew it and that's how it came out, so -- with that we just think we have -- we have got a good replacement. It does some heavy lifting over this -- heavy lifting on the city pathway. Good berm. Good wall. Good mix of density to give us some -- I think some good residential mass and even COMPASS talks about how this is going to promote, you know, walkable, bicycle, you know, to downtown. This is on the edge of downtown, but it's included in the downtown area map, so -- so, we think it's a good -- a good match for this location. I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Matt, on the exception that you're asking for, do you want those in phase three -- the berm in phase three and four? When are you anticipating three and four? Schultz: As far as years out? McCarvel: Yeah. Schultz: It could be in a couple years, but I think phase one and two won't be all the way built out by the time we are starting phase three and building phase three. It's kind of a work in progress. I just want to use all the dirt coming out of the whole site to build this berm, which will probably 15, 20 thousand yards of dirt, you know, and we kind of need it to develop the whole site to -- I hate to open up the whole site just to get that berm built with phase one and leave -- leave a big dirt -- open dirt sore up there, since we are not up against the highway with phase one and two. If Council and you say no, no, no, we went phase one, so be it. It's just something I asked for to kind of spread out the phasing a little bit. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Any questions? Commissioner Holland. Holland: In phase three, those three properties that are the south side of apartment complexes, are those going to be two story on those ones to match with the berm? Schultz: Yeah. Holland: That's going to be two story? Schultz: Madam Commissioner and Commissioner Holland, we did make -- in fact, this one down here we -- this used to be -- you know, it used to be a regular size building -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 24 of 41 oh, man, I just screwed it up. How do I go back? Sorry about that. I hit a button. We put an extra parking lot in there, because we know that extra parking is important. We have been through this. So, we got extra parking with that, you know, so we eliminated -- we did eliminate that and we made that two stories, because as you -- that's kind of the critical area right there. So, we wanted to make sure that was, too, and we pushed it back in that first building parallel to the freeway we did make it two story as well. The rest of them north of that are the threes. So, we -- we tried to be cognizant of that view - - tried to wrap the berm around a little bit on an angle right there with that parking lot, instead of just -- originally we had a straight berm and a building, you know, right up against the freeway -- eh, that feels a little too close. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Matt, a couple comments -- questions. So, in your photo you have showed beautiful landscaping against the interstate. How is that to be maintained? Because, you know, there is a couple of things that I have seen before is -- is a -- they put it back there, but they give no access back there to maintain it, so it becomes a weed mess and the trees die and stuff. So, where you are going to be back there or having an access kind of road back -- to get back in there to maintain that? Are you planning to mow it? What -- what is your thinking on that? Schultz: Yeah. Madam Commissioner, Commissioner Yearsley, great point, because that's exactly the problem with the berms along the freeway, they don't get maintained. You know, they die over time, weed patches, trees dying, you know, you name it we got it on the I-84 corridor. So, this is highly important to me and it is something -- that we had fescue in there. We didn't do the xeriscape, but we -- we -- we may -- we may propose that as an alternate later, but for now we are doing the fescue like -- like we have seen at the Ten Mile interchange, you know, irrigated. Some rock and boulders and some trees and, then, maintained with an access from the -- from the apartment side for sure. It's the obvious spot that you would be able to get down there and can get into it. What we have is a situation -- it's kind of -- is this is a 50 foot wide berm, but it's peaked in the middle. So, what do you do on the part that's behind the wall. Yearsley: Right. Schultz: Right? What do you do behind that. And so what we have suggested is that there is a -- there is a -- and we have done this in some other instances where it's a maintenance access easement for you to do a lot that over that wall, even though it is part of the -- the distance buffer, you know, it's part of their lot up to the wall to maintain and, then, behind the wall -- one of the comments of staff in the conditions that it be maintained by one HOA company, the apartments and the residential portion, so it's all maintained by one and we are agreeing with that and I think that's very important that we do that. I want to be here for a long time. I want to be proud of this. I don't know if that holds any weight or not, but, you know, we are going to do all we can to keep this Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 25 of 41 thing maintained and looking good as an entryway to our city and so we do want to keep that wall maintained and landscaped and I think we have like one and half times the required trees along there. You know, we didn't go with the minimum. We wanted to kind of do some extra, too, along that corridor, so we -- we wanted to jazz it up beyond the minimums. And your staff -- if they are dying they have the right to go in and say fix those, replace -- and they have done it before. I have been on the receiving end of taking over some for the last downturn that we had to go in and clean up some that way. So, I know you guys still have some enforcement powers to do that. Yearsley: And, then, just -- so, the south alley-loaded homes, are -- is that an attached product? Is that like a townhome? Schultz: Yeah. Yeah. Madam McCarvel and Commissioner Yearsley, I have never built them yet, but CBH Homes has an attached five and -- four, five and six-plex and these end up being fives and sixes -- are all attached 12, 13 hundred square feet. Alley loaded. Can you -- is there a picture of the attached -- we kind of rolled by it pretty quick in the last go around. Right there on your left. Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: I believe that's a six -- no, that's just a four right there. There is just four -- four sidewalks going up to the front doors and, then, the garage would be in the back. Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: And as you know in Meridian, the valley, you have an alley and you have a 20 foot driveway and, then, your building starts and Boise doesn't make you do a driveway. We have had off street -- off valley parking. Yearsley: Yeah. Schultz: Which is good. We need parking, so -- Yearsley: And, then, I think one last question. The bridge over the creek -- so, this is going to be a -- yeah. It's -- right now it's a bridge to nowhere, but it's future for -- do you have agreements for them to allow you to put that bridge in from the property owners or how is that to be -- Schultz: Yeah. So, Commissioner McCarvel and Commissioner Yearsley, we don't have them in place yet. We do own the entire right of way. The entire Ten Mile Creek right of way is -- is on our property. Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: It's not like it normally is. So, at least we have control over the full right of way. Now, as far as getting in there and setting the abutments and things like that, we haven't Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 26 of 41 went to them yet until we get passed some of this process and say, hey, and, then, if we get in a bad spot and so thank you for mentioning that, because I was thinking about having a caveat that, yes, we would like to do a pedestrian bridge or to do a pedestrian bridge, but we don't want to get caught in a pickle if somebody says you can't get on my property to build that pedestrian bridge and, therefore, your project can't get signed off. You know, I just don't want to -- Yearsley: Right. Schultz: -- get in a situation. Yearsley: Right. Schultz: But Nampa-Meridian Irrigation is okay with it and they are okay with it over drains. They don't like them over canals. They don't like them over their delivery canals, so this is considered a natural drain, so they are okay with it in this case. Yearsley: Thank you. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Schultz: Thanks. Thanks for the water. Allen: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Sonya. Allen: Excuse me. Madam Chair, if I may clarify something I said earlier regarding written testimony. There actually were a couple letters submitted of written testimony. One from Bill Kissinger and one from Casper Larsen and also some other comments submitted by a Jerry P, we don't have a last name, from NextDoor. So, I just wanted to clarify that on the record. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Do we have anyone signed up, Chris? Johnson: Yes, Madam Chair. Four people signed in. One is the applicant. The first is Bill Kissinger. Kissinger: Yes. My name is Bill Kissinger. My address is 420 Waltman Lane, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. With respect to the application H-2018-0023, Schultz Development, for the replacement of existing development agreement, I believe there appears to be a gross issue regarding the traffic impact and the associated study. I am glad that we made that clarification. I was a little disappointed when I heard that my original testimony was not provided, but I would read a couple excerpts out of that just so that -- that we can do that. From -- from what I can discern from the information available online, the traffic impact study sites a significant increase in traffic volumes, especially Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 27 of 41 on Waltman Lane. However, it has minimal road improvements required. Per the traffic impact study -- I don't know if you had the pleasure of leafing through all 74 pages, but what I could glean out of it, there was going to be an additional 2,900 additional trips per day with 90 percent of those concentrated on Waltman Lane. In addition, the project will connect the existing subdivision to West -- West Waltman Lane with the plan to use the route through to Linder Road and that's -- again, I was trying to discern that from the traffic impact study, but when you add in Linder Road and now what looks to -- appears to be Corporate, there is even more traffic than what the -- the development itself will produce. Currently Waltman Lane accommodates very little traffic and you can refer to the study for that, which with the current type of dwellings is understandable and reasonable. I would ask that anyone who has not traveled down Waltman Lane to do so. I hope you get that opportunity. Most of the route has no curbs, gutters, sidewalks and, for that matter, designated bike lanes. Although all of these provisions were included as part of the main intersection at Meridian Road, they were only included in a small portion. They have -- in fact, the Meridian intersection includes two left turn lanes, one through lane, and one right turn lane. This was supposedly to accommodate the future traffic volumes, which this project will provide. I would have brought pictures if I knew they were so effective. Compare Waltman Lane to Linder Road, as well as any to add additional traffic from Linder Road, which already has curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, makes little sense to me. To accommodate any development in this area -- the project based on its own traffic study will provide a shorter route to destinations, such as retail shopping, restaurants and other services. I think I -- some others were Wahooz, Roaring Springs, very close by to this development -- that would increase the pedestrian availability and I know what was read was they were going to put it in -- widen the Waltman Lane with sidewalks down what is, essentially, the south side. I would conclude that it should be down both sides, maybe even with bike lanes, and it -- which would, then, better connect to the existing Meridian Road intersection. McCarvel: Okay. Kissinger: So, my time is up. McCarvel: Thank you. Kissinger: Questions? Thank you. Johnson: Madam Chair, Kerry Manning and Clair Manning, both signed in, but did not indicate they wished to testify. McCarvel: Okay. And that's it? Johnson: That's it for the sign-ins. McCarvel: Okay. So, is there anyone in the room now who does wish to testify? Sure. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 28 of 41 Lorcher: Joe Lorcher. 740 Waltman Lane. I live across the street from this. I'm the property that's eight and a half acres and I just want to know why we are switching from commercial to such a dense residential, instead of doing R-4 that's already next to it. Is there a reason why we are going so high density, instead of the R-4 that the subdivision to the west is? McCarvel: We will have the applicant address your question. Lorcher: Okay. And, then, also I'm interested in Corporate Drive, they are going to put the bridge in, but the street that -- on his development does not match up to Corporate Drive, instead it's like 200 feet to the east or to the west, so people are going to come out of Ruddy Drive, turn onto whatever his name is -- his street is and, then, hit Waltman Lane and have to turn again to go up Corporate Drive -- why can't his development loop and connect right up to Corporate Drive, so that four or five hundred cars coming from the Ruddy subdivision can have a straight access, instead of turning up on Waltman Lane and I agree with the previous person that just talked -- Waltman Lane is going to have to be improved on both sides with this kind of traffic. I didn't read the -- the traffic study. I know there was one out there already. But just fixing one side is going to -- would be hazardous. We have no traffic on that lane now. We are talking probably less than 20 trips a day and to go from that to over a thousand trips a days is -- is going to completely change that road and the road is not built to handle that kind of traffic and so it kind of needs to be rebuilt all the way around. And that's all I had. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. And sir. Manning: So, my name is Clair Manning and I live at 650 West Waltman Lane. I just jotted down some notes as we were going through here. So, first off, I am very much against any multi-family units. If I have to live next to a subdivision I really do prefer to live next to a subdivision with single family homes where people are interested in being established there and keeping everything nice. So, I do like what he has going on now. Now it's like cows. Cows are my favorite neighbors. So, one thing I would like to do -- can you bring up the landscape plan. So, the road connecting to Corporate, that goes along the side of my property, so I was wondering what the plans are in order to -- like for noise abatement along there, if there is a -- you know, a fence planned or something like that and what the noise abatement plans are across the street from me and I know there is like a -- in front of my house there is like a lot of ditches and things like that and I'd like to understand what the plans are for the irrigation that's going to be, you know, watering our -- for the land. And I do have a shop that does kind of like -- got up to like where the -- where the commercial will go through and I don't know how to work with the developer to get connection to like going to like the garage there and, you know, I -- you know, I am, as I said, against the -- the multi-use -- or the multi-family homes, but if it does I -- if you do have to do it, I -- I would kind of ask that you like respect the neighbors and residential that is there already and maybe it makes more sense to put those more towards the freeway, instead of like right kind of in front and I don't recall -- or remember mentioning -- asking what the noise abatement was between like the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 29 of 41 buffer between like that subdivision and the other side of the street and I think that's all I have. McCarvel: Okay. Manning: Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone else in the room that wishes to testify? Sir. Swenson: Michael C. Swenson. 815 Waltman Lane. So, we are right before the dead end type of thing and I want to reiterate one of my neighbors comments that -- if you go out there it's kind of like country in the city. I mean we have chickens. We have had goats and we have survived quite nicely there and the thing that kind of bothers us is, one, there is no infrastructure there at all as in -- there is one grocery store. There is one gas station. That's it. There is not much on that end of town. And, especially, if you're saying there is a connection to Linder coming through there, I mean we had traffic routed down Waltman Lane from the subdivision that's there now and it was a disaster. I mean it was -- or Waltman Lane is about a half a mile long and it was bumper-to-bumper traffic on Waltman Lane and it didn't work. So, I'm worried about infrastructure. I'm worried about schools, so -- I mean the closest elementary is on Linder. I mean that's a long ways away. You know, they are not going to walk over there. I mean there is issues here. Oh. And the last thing is, you know, we want to make sure we can get on our street when it's all done. I mean everybody says, oh, put this someplace else. Well, that's not going to happen. I mean they are going to say the same thing. But we need like stop signs or something, so we can get out, you know, onto Waltman Lane and not be waylaid by a thousand cars coming the other way. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone else that wishes to testify? Okay. Martinez: Good evening. Geronimo -- Geronimo Martinez. 737 West Waltman Lane, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. I just moved to the house a couple months ago. I haven't -- nobody say something, you know, about this project. I know because there is a sign of Waltman Lane about this and I -- I receive these by the mail. So, these -- it came very surprise to me. The reason why I move to there because it is very nice, quiet. I planning to do -- remodel the house that I buy, putting all my savings with my wife and live in quiet -- quiet on the -- on that street. Now, this is -- you know, it is not good for the plans that I have, basically. Now I see it run the street down into the -- to my property, very -- very -- the road -- I believe there is some cars going through there. My point is I moved to this house because of quiet. The quiet and -- and I don't know -- there is a lot of houses planning to build on the future if the project does move forward, so, you know, this is surprise for me when I -- when I came to the house and see this all going on, so I save money to buy this house and going to remodel and live in for a lot of years, because the area is very quiet, very nice, but now -- so, I don't know. Thank you and -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 30 of 41 McCarvel: Okay. Martinez: -- for listening. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? One more? Cooper: Steven Cooper. 755 Waltman Lane. Could you put up the landscape that -- his plot plan if you could. So, I guess I'm the guy -- and Mr. Martinez -- we are this corner right here. Okay? There is a future street going in there. So, obviously, some day or something we are not going to be there. But everybody has said that me and Mr. Martinez are commercial. We are in Ada county. We are residential. Mr. Schultz and I have talked. He said, you know, he hasn't contacted anybody. He was standing on my front doorstep. This is how the conversation went. The one thing we talked about -- he wanting me to come in and sign whatever you guys have that I'm in agreement with this project. Well, I'm not commercial. Never been commercial. He was standing on my doorstep and we were talking and asking about my next door neighbor Mr. Martinez. Well, he just moved in. He wasn't around. So, I did get a letter from him. I have talked to him about this project before. One thing that was said to me -- and I don't think he's really taking in consideration this road. I mean he hasn't talked -- no meetings with any of the neighbors. I have made a suggestion that he have a lunch date with me and him and Mr. Corey Barton that I have known since 1983. I mean it -- it's got some history. As you look -- what Mr. Swenson was talking about, Skyline development, back whenever The Landing was done, they proposed to put the street down Waltman. Well, there was one problem, it was -- I think it was with the federal government, that they were -- they were never going to turn Waltman Lane into an artery or a collector or anything, because it would put too much traffic in a situation right close to the freeway. It sounds to me like he's got a -- an apartment complex and it's got 1.5 car spaces per unit. I want you guys to take a look at the apartment complex on Lake Hazel and Maple Grove, they missed that by a mile. They are figuring at least 2.5 to 3.5 cars. So, what are you going to do? It's a safety issue. There is going to be cars parked up and down Waltman Lane, because he is not going to fit the cars inside the project. McCarvel: Okay. Cooper: Thank you. McCarvel: Anyone else here wish to testify tonight? Ma'am. N.Swenson: Nancy Swenson. 815 Waltman Lane. We are at the tail end of the lane. I don't know where you're getting the ideas that you can put so many people on our lane. The road needs help. I don't know where you're getting the idea -- I know schools are a separate entity, but if you're putting in a lot of people, they are going to have kids. The schools every time we turn around are asking for more money, because they are over full. The subdivision that came in, that was R-4. We live with that. They are all around our property. When they were putting that in they did channel the people down. They were allowed to come down through Waltman, while the -- that subdivision was being Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 31 of 41 built up. The traffic -- nobody went up Linder. They came down Waltman. You're going to have a whole lot more people coming down that road, spilling out, not letting -- I don't see where you're going to put that many people. You're just cramming them in there and it doesn't fit with the rest of what has been there. So, I'm concerned about this. I'm concerned about the schools. I'm concerned about the people -- just the numbers of people that you're going to be putting in to fill in these schools. I am a little concerned that there is not a wide enough vision here. McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. Anyone else? I think we have got everybody now. Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward again. Schultz: Matt Schultz. 8421 South Ten Mile. Thank you. And thank you, neighbors, for coming and expressing your comments and concerns. I love the participation that we have. We did have a neighborhood meeting to begin this process, as is required. We did notice everybody and had one here and some showed up and some didn't and we have done everything with the notices and -- McCarvel: Matt, can you -- Schultz: -- told everybody exactly what we were doing all along the way. The big concern is traffic. ACHD has approved this. Actually, they have not yet. The staff has approved it. It's on a Consent Agenda next week. The timing is such that it is on the consent agenda next week. It doesn't mean it will be approved, but there is a high chance it will be approved. Like I said, this is a 70 percent reduction from and what was approved ten years ago in the traffic. That's huge. That's a huge reduction. That came in as over 10,000 trips a day, now we are down I think in the, you know, three -- three thousand. It's a lot of people. I mean I'm not going to kid you. But we are doing our share on the traffic of improving our frontage to a collector status. We are doing our improvements. We are replacing two bridges in conjunction with -- with ACHD. That's - - that's not ignoring the traffic issue. That's hitting it head on. And that's what we are doing. Now, is there a section still between the Ten Mile Creek or our boundary out to Meridian Road that needs a little help? Yes. County properties. County properties to the north of us. Some of the people that talked are from the county, some aren't. Maybe they all are. I don't know. But I know the three that are in -- Geronimo and Cooper and Swenson live -- Geronimo, Cooper, Swenson, they will still be on a dead- end road. You know, they will still have a dead-end road. If they want to develop it or don't want move, they don't have to. We are going to put a fence around them, a landscape buffer around them. That road is not going to -- that will be fenced off and they are going to be better than they are now in terms of at least their fence and the landscaping around them. But, of course, they won't have cows for neighbors, but in that regard it's going to be a nice, new fence at our expense that we are going to build on the property line and also fill in some gaps that are in some fences on the -- on the -- on our west property line, too, and along the -- the Waltman frontage we will have a landscape buffer, a berm, and a fence there as well as far as -- as a visual buffer or a sound buffer and a distance buffer and so we were providing all those things on our perimeters and boundaries everywhere we can. But the traffic will be improved by Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 32 of 41 ACHD. It has not yet, so if you look at a continuance until it does, that's yours, but it is on a consent agenda next week and I'm going to go and make sure that we don't get pulled off the consent agenda and talk about it. But that's where we are at. And the traffic study has been done and I know it's going to be a change. It will be a change. If you drive back there, he's right, it is nice and quiet as it can be being a quarter mile from the freeway, but it's nice and quiet back in there in terms of the trees and the cows and all that. It is. But, like I said, we asked ACHD do we have to connect that back there? Can't we just, you know, come and do ours and come out and, no, we got to connect it. You have to connect it for the greater good to connect it. In fact, they are making us -- if you look at the staff report that ACHD put in there, they are making us set aside 18,000 in a trust fund for them to use for future studies, traffic calming potentially in The Landing, just not knowing what's -- how the traffic is really going to flow and knowing traffic is going to change. It's just going to change. It's been like that for 20 or so years. It is going to change, but interconnectivity changes. This has been 20 years. The Landing was done 20 years ago and it's been like that for 20 years. So, it is going to change, but interconnectivity changes things and -- and, unfortunately, I always seem to be the guy that wants to do it. That nobody likes me. But with that said, density -- we have -- we are not -- I know it seems super dense. It really does. It looks like we are super super dense, but in -- in the -- in the realm of planning and things like that we are not. Even though we are asking for an R-15, our gross density is 5.7 on -- on our portion. Even though we are asking for R-40, our density of 17.4, which is kind of the low end for the departments and with the parking, which is -- you know, we have plenty of parking, so our average is 10.55. So, in the whole scheme of things I know it sounds like a lot per acre, it really isn't in terms of what it could be in terms of density. I know that doesn't sound right, but that's just how the numbers work out. It's just not as dense as people think it is on paper. The numbers kind of tell the story in that regard. Sorry, my notes are on the back of my presentation here. So, yeah, traffic. ACHD. The density, we have addressed that. Corporate Drive we kind of come in and kind of had a split and those are -- like I said, that's all approved by ACHD in terms of the offsets. Going straight through we didn't feel like was the best way to do it, you might have to have a traffic signal with the four-way intersection and I like to break them up with T intersections myself in my designs. Four ways. You're looking for a signal -- you look for wrecks and that's why you need a signal to prevent the wrecks with the four ways. So, that's why we kind of offset them and have two separate ones and we are rebuilding Waltman, our section, and the bridge on our section of Waltman, because we -- we control the full width of that bridge on our side of the road. As far as the irrigation and the drainage and the exact designs, we deal with that in the next step of engineering and we will -- I will get to know my neighbors if this passes, as we get into the next step of how does your drainage go and we will make sure it all gets incorporated in the design of this road and that road and everybody at least maintains the same service or better. I mean our goal is to at least maintain or improve their current situation out there with regard to utilities. On our fence and all -- Geronimo and Mr. Cooper, they are on a -- they are going to be on a private dead end run still. We are not changing that and that whole concept we show on there was just -- staff wanted to see how it could lay out if they wanted to come in, but they don't have to do anything, you know, but that's just one way it could -- it could work that I provided for them. As far as parking spaces for Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 33 of 41 multi-family, as you all know, we -- we do one and a half for a -- for a single bedroom and two stalls for every two and three bedroom. We have excess -- we have 20 something access in that regard, plus we have spaces for our clubhouse and so we have -- we have exceeded the city requirements on parking. So, you know, with that we really think we are doing some heavy lifting to improve the traffic situation. I understand it's going to change it, but that bridge is substandard today and if we weren't coming along and -- it probably wouldn't get it fixed as soon as it will now, but I guess with that I will ask for your approval with staff conditions, except for that one minor modification to the phasing. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Yearsley: I do. McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Madam Chair. So -- so I know you haven't got into the full detail design of Corporate. Corporate will be built out curb and gutter both sides; correct? Or just one side or -- how is Corporate going to -- Schultz: Madam Chairman and Commissioner Yearsley, ACHD has told us it will be 30 foot of paving -- pavement with -- Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: This is off site to us, but within that 50 foot of right of way, which is what they have, that particular right of way, the curbs out to the creek, that they have acquired, that's the section they want to see go in there. Until those two properties develop and, then, they will provide the curb, gutter and sidewalk. Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: And that's the process they do. These are county properties -- Yearsley: Oh, absolutely. Schultz: They are in the county. Yearsley: Okay. So, you are actually putting curb, gutter, and sidewalk on your side of the street and you will improve -- you will actually widen your side within your frontage -- Schultz: Correct. Yearsley: -- and you can improve your half street. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 34 of 41 Schultz: Yeah. We are taking the existing right of way, expanding it by 12 feet and, then, doing the full improvement for the full width and -- and that will be done with -- with phase -- phase one. Yearsley: So -- so just so I understand. So, you're repaving the entire road along -- on Waltman along your property or just your half? Schultz: We will see how it looks on that side, if we can match in, because it depends on grade so that blends in -- Yearsley: Right. Schultz: -- and if the pavement looks okay we will just match in and leave that section and have plenty of room on our side -- Yearsley: Okay. Schultz: -- but we will have to replace that if we can't match in vertically -- Yearsley: Right. Schultz: -- with our design with drainage and things like that. Yearsley: I understand that. Okay. But you're only required to fix your half of the road per city code and ACHD is what I'm trying to allude to; correct? Schultz: Yeah. Commissioner Yearsley, ACHD, as you know, collects a lot of impact fees and things like that, so we are providing a ton of money with our impact fees that if they so chose they can go -- you know, they spend it over impact fee areas and things like that and it will -- it will go in some long list of things to do at some point. It's unfortunate that there is a county storage area to the northeast of us that has the grader wire on top and a little hill -- dirt shoulder and, then, the road there, instead of improvements and who knows when that is going to get done. Yearsley: Right. Schultz: But if somebody said, hey, Matt, you guys really you are required to do it, you know, and it was fair that we do it, we would do it, but we -- as far as a precedent I think we are doing what is required typically of the development community as we come in and ACHD will do the rest if they need to. Yearsley: And I'm not asking you to do more, I'm just wanting to make sure we are all understanding what you're -- what you're doing. Schultz: Yeah. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 35 of 41 Yearsley: So, the question was asked why not just all R-4? I think you kind of alluded to that. Could you just kind of talk about the reasons why not to do R-4 all the way across. Schultz: Yeah. It's not a good spot for R-4 anymore I don't think. I think in terms of efficient land use planning where you have services, where you had existing sewer, where you have existing water, where you have existing access is this is close to commercial and things like that, this is an excellent location to do a transitional density and we presented -- it could be something else. This is what we presented. R-4 we think is -- at this location would be a huge waste of land in terms of the opportunity to create some -- you know, some density if you will and density is a good thing sometimes in certain locations and this isn't that dense, like I said, but we think this is appropriate given its location in proximity to downtown. McCarvel: Yeah. That was going to be my comment as well, because I realize you asked for her -- it's R-15, but you're really just a hair over the R-4. The R-15 is more for your setbacks and all that kind of stuff. Schultz: Attached. McCarvel: Yeah. To be able to get those in there and, then, the same with -- as apartment complexes go, that's not as dense -- I mean it's just a hair over the R-15, even though it is going to be considered an R-40 designation. But, yeah, it -- it is a transitional leading up to what is probably going to be next to it, which would be commercial and no R-4 wants to be near -- right up against the commercial, so -- any other questions or comments from the applicant? Thanks, Matt. Schultz: Thank you. McCarvel: At this time -- if we have no more questions for staff or the applicant, could I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item H-2018-0023, Tanner Creek? Holland: So moved. Perreault: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2018- 0023. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. McCarvel: Yeah. First glance I was really -- you know, I was -- I have always been hoping this spot would be some spectacular thing and I realize the access to it's not great, but I know there is a lot of companies I can -- you know, I think of that have beautiful landscaping around them that just want visibility -- Scentsy -- I mean, you know, that don't need a whole lot of retail type access that would have been a lovely Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 36 of 41 access and entrance into Meridian, but I think -- and what I was also afraid of when I first started reading this was, okay, we have got apartments along, now we will have apartments just lining I-84, but with -- I do appreciate the 3-D and all the diagrams that have come up with the berms and everything. I think it will make a nice addition to the entryway into Meridian. I am -- I would be concerned and I don't know what kind of teeth we can put into maintaining that berm, though. I agree with your comments earlier, they just turn to dirt and dead trees along the interstate. So, I'm hoping that the HOA fees taken to consideration that they need to provide the maintenance for that. Overall I think it will be a nice transition to, hopefully, some sort of beautiful commercial and something fabulous being on that entrance to Meridian, but I am also concerned -- I mean at some point where do we say with the schools that we need to hold back? But that's where we open for discussion here. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: You know, this is -- this is a tough situation, especially for the residents nearby. You have had, essentially, pretty much urban living -- or rural living in an urban area and, unfortunately, urban is catching up and there are pains associated with that. I do like the fact that they have tried to -- yeah, for the most part tried to transition from the R-4s to -- because it's already zoned for a higher density or use on the other side and -- and as you heard earlier from one of the residents is they don't like R-4 against commercial and -- and so that's why we try to do a transition plan and not have everything R-4. This is in the heart of downtown Meridian. Unfortunately, this area is -- is very rural, but it is the heart of downtown Meridian and this is where you want the density is people can, you know, walk to McDonald's or, you know, get to the grocery store and life will change. You will not have your 20 cars a day and it's unfortunate, but the developer had an option to go commercial, which he could have built 400,000 square feet of floor space. They chose to go a different route to do a little bit less busy I guess if you want -- if you want 400,000 square feet of floor space, that's a lot of buildings. So, it's -- it will be a lot less busy -- my guess is a lot less noisy than a commercial development. So, I think it's a -- it's a -- it's a fairly good mix. I personally think it's a better transition than what was planned to the residents. It may not be what - - to their liking, so -- but I do think it works well. They do have a lot of good open space. We are noticing now that a lot of the residents want a bigger house, no yard, and open space and so that's kind of what they are trying to provide. So, personally I think with that I -- I think it looks good. I think they have tried to look out for the neighbors, especially with the apartments going to only two stories around the perimeter and, then, three stories on the edges are just to the commercial. The development pressures are there and -- and I think that this area will have a push to -- to redevelop in the future, so -- so I think I would be in support of this project. McCarvel: I was -- before you guys jump in I just want to add to your -- I mean it's hard to believe with the amount of apartment buildings that are going in that we are still underserved as far as the numbers go with -- versus the population of multi-family Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 37 of 41 dwellings. I just -- I still can't believe it, but the numbers show it and even the COMPASS report shows in the -- especially in this area jobs versus people, that there is need -- there is still more need for residential in this corner. Yearsley: And there was one other thing that I wanted to bring up. With regards to the schools, one of my biggest bone of contention with the school is Meridian High School is actually underserved right now and so this actually provides actually students for the Meridian High School. My wife has been on the boundary committee a couple of times for Meridian School District and Meridian School District has a capacity to handle 3,000 students and it's only got 1,800 students right now and so there is capacity. I don't know about that elementary or the junior high, but there is some capacity in this area because of the declining population. So, it does provide a boost for this area, so -- McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I think Commissioner Yearsley's made some fantastic points. There is a huge need for walkability near the downtown area and this is -- this is as good a location as -- as we are going to get at the moment to do that and I was in a Smart Growth planning meeting this morning and we were just having conversation about valley wide that that need for affordable locations near areas where people are working -- near the commercial areas where people are working and that helps with our transportation. That helps with -- there is just a whole interconnected group of growth issues that -- that can be helped by these kinds of transitional projects. So, I think that -- that the developer has done a really great job trying to think through everything that they possibly can to address the concerns and I think they have tried to think through all the things we might bring up as well, which we appreciate. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Last, but not least -- McCarvel: Never least. Holland: So, you know, I was on the fence about this property as well. Coming from an economic development background I always have a hard time saying goodbye to commercial properties, because I know there is a lot of businesses looking at the area, there is a lot of people moving to the area, and making sure that we have got a good balance of -- of places for people to work, as well as places for people to live, I tend to side with your first comment, Madam Chair, that even though you would love to see something like a Scentsy campus or someone that really wants that visibility to be here, because it's great frontage on the freeway for people to be driving by, people tend to like having that frontage. Some of the challenges and concerns I see with this project -- I don't have any opposition of the way that -- that it's laid out, I think it makes a nice transition from an R-4 density towards a commercial. I think I agree with all of you on Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 38 of 41 that. A couple of my biggest concerns is some of the comments made about Ruddy Drive connecting in. If you look at that neighborhood to the west, really, they don't have access to that neighborhood from the east right now. They have to enter through Linder and so I think that the -- that the traffic could become a challenge coming from that neighborhood, because a lot of people will use that to get on I-84 to go downtown Boise, so I think traffic concerns will be intensified a little bit more than maybe what was expected out of this and, you know, the -- road Waltman I don't think is designed right now to handle that capacity yet, so -- I mean this developer might need to go back and take a look at how that would align with ACHD and what we need to do to make sure that that road is going to meet the capacities of what's required coming forward. You know, reading through some of what COMPASS had submitted, they had said in their recommendations that the proposal exceeds growth forecasted for the area. Transportation infrastructure may not be able to support the new transportation demands and it's not currently served by public transportation. So, again, transportation probably is my biggest concern with this project. The only other concern I have is that it sounds like some of the neighbors haven't had a chance to really walk through some of the issues with the developer as much as they probably should have at this point. I'm -- I'm tempted to -- to look at continuing it just so that they can work out some of those issues, especially those two houses that are in that -- that corner of the parcel. Those are my thoughts. McCarvel: Okay. Any other thoughts? Any additional new thoughts? Perreault: Madam Chair, I'm -- I'm not in opposition to Commissioner Holland's suggestion regarding postponing until after ACHD has had their meeting. I don't -- that's not far away. I don't think that would be harmful it doesn't sound like to the applicant and if that -- if that's -- if that's going to ease up some concerns and give some additional time and allow the -- the neighbors to go to that hearing and -- and share their thoughts I think that -- McCarvel: I don't think -- you guys help me out. Perreault: Is it public? McCarvel: Well, it's already -- it's just on the consent agenda. It's already -- Perreault: Oh. Okay. McCarvel: It's already been -- Perreault: I misunderstood that. McCarvel: Yeah. I just -- I think they had -- you know, there was a neighborhood meeting and such already, because I'm not sure what going forward he would be able to fix, because the land on the other side is not his to fix. I mean -- and it's ACHD's -- I mean at this point I think Waltman Road would be -- they would -- it would need to be Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 39 of 41 worked with ACHD. It's not necessarily the developer, because the developer and ACHD have already -- have worked their site and I think there is more work that ACHD would need to do with those property owners in the county to get access to -- to work out those right of ways, so I don't know that continuing it does -- does much. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I have a tendency to agree. There are issues with traffic and I will be the first to admit it. However, the -- the developer has done what ACHD has asked for them to do to extend Corporate, to replace -- they talked about replacing the bridge. Going farther to the east it -- it becomes an off -- it -- it's off-site improvements, which don't typically tend to fall upon the developer per se, especially where it's already annexed into the city and so I think it becomes more of an ACHD issue as well and, typically, what happens as those properties redevelop or develop, that's when they make the improvements, because my guess is a lot of those properties haven't given the right away to ACHD to do those improvements that are necessary. So, my guess is there is not the right of way there to do those improvements and so, you know -- you know, ACHD may consider coming in and paving Waltman just within the area that they have. It's hard to say what they would want to do. I would recommend that you reach out to ACHD and express your concerns with that, since the -- the traffic is related to ACHD and not to the city. We have to -- we have to look at it and address it, but ACHD has made their recommendations. They are giving two locations to come out of the -- that area, you know, so you have got access to -- to Waltman and also to Corporate to get out onto Meridian Road. So, I think it becomes a fairly decent access and, yes, I think you will have a lot of residents from the R-4 accessing through the subdivision, because it is a faster way out of that area, so -- but, you know, we -- we -- we have approved bigger subdivisions than this with huger impacts that -- that I don't think 3,000 cars a day, even 4,000 cars a day that these two roads couldn't handle adequately. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: The only other concern I really had was those two properties, Mr. Martinez and Mr. Cooper's sites, and how it abuts next to this development, because they -- they have shown us a couple of -- how it could integrate and if -- if those properties were to work with the project or just how it transitions against them, because it looks like right now it's just kind of an open road into their property. So, I guess that would be my one concern is that the applicant would have the time to work with them on that. McCarvel: I think it's just -- at this point it's just going to be -- it's going to be a dead end road that says this to be open in the future, so whatever future development might -- might happen there, there is somewhat of a plan for -- for that road to go out to Waltman. It's -- it's nothing -- I don't think that impacts them now, except they are Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 40 of 41 surrounded by stuff and it's just a plan of how that could be integrated roadwise in the future. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I -- I agree. They are talking Waltman to be a collector street. They don't typically like driveways on collector streets, so what the city is probably asking is can we integrate -- if those two lots wanted to redevelop, they would lose their access to -- to Waltman and so they would actually have to come through the subdivision. That's why the developer had to provide access and so -- and they wanted to at least make sure that if the property wanted to redevelop in the future he had ability to redevelop. Doesn't mean he had to, he is -- they are going to fence around, you know, try to -- try to be amenable to them and so I think that was the only reason for that roadway is to provide access to them in the future if something had to develop. McCarvel: Yeah. And I think Mr. Martinez can stay in his beautiful little property in the middle of the city and, you know, it's probably going to be a little gem back there, you know, a little hidden gem amongst this other residential. Yearsley: Yeah. Or my guess if he wanted to sell it he could -- McCarvel: Or if he wanted to sell it he could probably make a lot of money. Yearsley: Not that he had to, but -- McCarvel: Yeah. Not that you have to. It's totally up to you. Yearsley: So, I'm going to make a motion. Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2018-0023, as presented in the staff -- am I on the right one? McCarvel: Yeah. Are we -- we didn't discuss the berm -- or the berm -- Yearsley: Oh. McCarvel: -- the berm and the phase. Yearsley: So, I guess my recommendation would be to install it as part of phase three. McCarvel: Yeah. Yearsley: I understand that he needs the dirt to do that. We -- it's -- it's been a pile of weeds out there for the last -- well, 20 years since I have been in this -- in this -- in the valley. Having it be open another five, ten years or less -- I don't know if I see an issue with that. McCarvel: Yeah. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 41 of 41 Yearsley: So, if -- if everybody is amenable -- McCarvel: I'm open to letting them have that dirt to be used right there. Yearsley: So, my only thought is with phase three he has to do the whole thing, because, you know, if he's going to start it, finish, in my opinion. McCarvel: Yeah. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the other item that Sonya and I had -- we were discussing here is the applicant offered up doing single story homes up along -- against the interstate. Is that something that you want to entertain as part of your motion as well to restrict those lots to single story? Yearsley: That's a good thought. McCarvel: I think it's -- yeah. If he's willing to do that I think that's fabulous and not to have -- just a nice clean line back there. Yearsley: Okay. So, I will try it again. Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend file -- recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2018-0023 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19th, 2018, with the following modifications: That the berm along the interstate to be constructed as part of phase three in its entirety and that the homes along the interstate to be single story only and I'm just going to throw this one in here -- not require the articulation as dictated in staff. With the berm being there they won't be able to see it, so -- Perreault: Madam Chair, second that motion. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve file number H-2018-0023 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Holland: Nay. McCarvel: Okay. Motion carries, but, Chris, could we get a roll call. Roll call: Holland, nay; Yearsley, yea; Perreault, yea; McCarvel, yea; Wilson, absent; Fitzgerald, absent; Cassinelli, absent. McCarvel: Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 19, 2018 Page 42 of 41 McCarvel: Thank you, Commissioner Yearsley. Would anybody like to second that motion? Perreault: I will second that motion. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:11 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED '�&� 'C' F*HbNDA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED 4JA0=LE—S fl��eoAU srj. 0 - CITY CLERK i "" of �E IDAHO - 4. SEAL Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting July 19, 2018 Item #3A: Hammer Daycare Vicinity/Zoning Map & Future Land Use Map Tully Park Site Photos Linder Rd. Item #3B: Bountiful Commons – Vicinity/Zoning Map Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan Conceptual Building Elevations Item #3C: Tanner Creek Vicinity/Zoning Map Preliminary Plat & Phasing Plan Landscape Plan Cross-Section of Berm/Wall along I-84 Commercial Concept Plans 8 units 16 units 24 units clubhouse Concept Plan for Outparcels at Northwest Corner of Site Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meeting Date: JUIy 19th, 2018 Agenda Item Number: 3A Project/File Number: H-2018-0060 Item Title Hammer Daycare Public Hearing for Hammer Daycare (H-2018-0060) by Darla Hammer Located at 2208 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a group daycare (6-12 children) on 0.20 of an acre of land in the R-4 zoning district Meeting Notes 9 APPROVED City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 7/19/2018 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 3-A Project Name: Hammer Daycare Project No.: H-2018-0060 Active: ❑./ Signature Name For Against Neutral I Wish To Testify Sign In Date/Time Darla Hammer X 7/19/2018 5:54:28 PM Go Back To List I Export To Excel © 2018 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http:Hintemalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFoimDetails?id=24 7/19/2018 Changes to Agenda: Item #3A: Hammer Daycare - CUP (H-2018.0060) Application(s): ➢ Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 0.20 of an acre of land, zoned R-4, located at 2208 N. Linder Rd. at the NEC of N. Linder Rd. and W. Tana Dr. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: This property is surrounded by single-family residential properties, zoned R-4. History: An accessory use permit was approved in March of this year for an in-home daycare for up to 6 children. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR (3-8 units/acre) Summary of Request: The applicant requests a CUP to operate a group daycare facility for up to 12 children in an existing 1,380 s.f. residence in an R-4 zoning district. The main access for the dwelling is via N. Linder Road. There is a 2 -car garage and parking pad in front of the home that fronts on Linder Rd. as well as on -street parking on Linder Rd., which will accommodate parking for the residential use. A parking & drop-off area for the daycare is proposed via Tana Dr., a local street, which has less traffic & will be safer for clients. A portion of the customer parking area is paved and a portion is recycled asphalt. This area can accommodate parking for up to 5 vehicles at a time. Staff recommends this area be striped in accord with the dimensional standards for parking spaces in the UDC. The proposed hours of operation are 7:00 am to 6:00 pm; staff recommends the hours be restricted accordingly. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2018-0060, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0060, as presented during the hearing on July 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons fordenial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0060 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: July 19, 2018 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Hammer Daycare – H-2018-0060 I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant, Darla Hammer, has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a group daycare for up to 12 children in the R-4 zoning district on 0.20 of an acre. NOTE: A recent UDC code amendment was approved to allow a Group Daycare as a conditional use in the R-4 zoning district. See Section IX Analysis for more information. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit C of the Staff Report. III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2018- 0060 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny H-2018-0060 as presented during the hearing on July 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial.) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0060 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: 2208 N. Linder Rd., in the SW ¼ of Section 1, Township 3N., Range 1W. (Parcel: R5647200155) B. Applicant(s)/Owner: Darla Hammer 2208 N. Linder Rd. Meridian, ID 83646 C. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is for a conditional use permit. A public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 4 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: June 29, 2018 C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 22, 2018 D. Applicant posted notice on site by: July 9, 2018 VI. LAND USE A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The property is developed with a single family detached home, zoned R-4. B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: This site is surrounded by existing residential properties, zoned R-4. C. History of Previous Actions: In March 2018, the property was granted Accessory Use Permit approval (A-2018-0081) for an in-home daycare for up to 6 children. D. Utilities: 1. Public Works: a. Location of sewer: Currently connected from N. Linder Rd. b. Location of water: Currently connected from W. Tana Dr. c. Issues or concerns: None E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: None 2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 3. Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the floodplain or floodway. VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates this site as Medium Density Residential (MDR). MDR designated areas allow smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre (d.u./acre). Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): “Plan for and encourage services like healthcare, daycare, grocery stores, and recreational areas to be built within walking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) The subject property is currently operating with a family daycare with an approved accessory use permit. The applicant would like to expand the current operations to include up to 12 children consistent with the recently approved UDC text amendment. The proposed daycare group is surrounded by residences, which makes it a good candidate to provide services to neighboring properties. For the above-stated reason, staff is of the opinion the proposed use is consistent with the applicable comprehensive plan policies and is appropriate in this location. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 5 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE A. Purpose Statement of Zone: Per UDC 11-2A-1, the purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian comprehensive plan. Residential districts are distinguished by the dimensional standards of the corresponding zone and housing types that can be accommodated. B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2A-2 lists the permitted, accessory, conditional, and prohibited uses in the R-4 zoning district. The proposed daycare facility is classified as a group daycare and is a conditional use in the R-4 zoning district, subject to specific use standards set forth in UDC 11-4-3-9. C. Dimensional Standards: The dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-4 zoning district apply to this site. D. Off-Street Parking: Per UDC Table 11-3C-6, the applicant is required to provide a minimum of 4 parking spaces; at least 2 in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum of 10’ x 20’ parking pad. In addition to the parking requirements for the dwelling, on-site (i.e. off- street) vehicle pick-up, parking and turnaround areas are required to be provided for the daycare facility to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. IX. ANALYSIS A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Conditional Use Permit: The applicant requests a conditional use permit to operate a group daycare facility for up to 12 children, in a 1,380 square foot home in an R-4 zoning district as required by UDC Table 11-2A-2. The UDC allows for up to 6 children in a family daycare with an accessory use permit in the R-4 zoning district; up to12 children are allowed in a group daycare but require conditional use permit approval in the R-4 zoning district. One of the main reasons for this requirement is the increased number of vehicle trips for the group daycare. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9, Daycare Facility. A. General standards for all child daycare and adult care uses, including the classifications of daycare center; daycare, family; and daycare, group: 1. In determining the type of daycare facility, the total number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator's children, is the determining factor. The applicant proposes to care for up to 12 children at any one time and therefore is classified as a group daycare in accord with UDC 11-1A-1. 2. On site vehicle pick up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. The home is on the corner of N. Linder Rd. and W. Tana Dr. and has a two car garage and a concrete parking pad in front of the garage that fronts on Linder Rd. The garage and parking pad will accommodate parking for the owner of the residence and will not be allowed for customer use. The dedicated discharge area is provided along the south side of the property adjacent to W. Tana Dr. as shown in Exhibit A.3, even though on-street parking is allowed in front of the residence and the main driveway access is on Linder Road. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 6 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 However, a portion of the customer parking is paved, a portion is recycled asphalt. The dedicated discharge area could accommodate up to five standard parking spaces but is currently striped with two spaces. To guarantee safe discharge and pick-up of clients, the applicant shall stripe and dimension the parking area in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-5. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to inspect the parking spaces upon completion. 3. The decision making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours of operation as conditions of approval. A maximum number of 12 children are allowed to be cared for at one time. The proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. However, the specific use standards allow the facility to operate between the hours of 6:00 am to 11:00 pm, unless otherwise restricted by the Commission. 4. Upon tentative approval of the application by the Director or commission for a daycare center facility, the applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code. Said proof shall be provided prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. The applicant shall submit a copy of her background check and complete an inspection with the Fire Department prior to continue operating the daycare. 5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence, the hours of operation shall be between six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. This standard may be modified through approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant only proposes to operate the facility between the hours of 7:00 am and 6:00 pm; at no time should the hours extend beyond 6:00 am to 11:00 pm. 6. Prior to submittal of an application for an accessory daycare facility in a residential district, the applicant or owner shall hold a neighborhood meeting in accord with subsection 11-5A-6C of this title. Notice of the neighborhood meeting shall be provided to all property owners of record within one hundred feet (100') of the exterior boundary of the subject property. This standard is not applicable to this application. However, the applicant previously obtained an accessory use permit for a family daycare and complied. The applicant shall not exceed the maximum number of clients as stated in the approved permit or as stated in this title, whichever is more restrictive. The applicant shall not provide care for more than 12 children at any one time. B. Additional standards for daycare facilities that serve children: 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot (6') non- scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The play area in the rear yard is enclosed with a six-foot non-scalable vinyl fence (see photos in Exhibit A.3). Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is typically required to be submitted to the Planning Division for staff level review and approval of the proposed use as set Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 7 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 forth in UDC 11-5B-1B after the conditional use permit is approved by the Commission to ensure the applicant complies with the aforementioned specific use standards. However, because staff has already determined that the applicant is in compliance with those standards, a CZC is not required to be submitted. Once the findings are approved for the subject CUP application, the applicant is allowed to commence the approved use. Although a CZC is not required, the applicant shall be required to stripe the customer parking area per the standards in UDC 11-3C-5. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division for an inspection upon completion to ensure parking spaces have been installed in accord with the dimensional requirements set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-5. NOTE: The City has adopted a local amendment to the international building code (IBC) that does not require a change in occupancy of the home if it is to operate as a daycare facilities for twelve or fewer children. Because the occupancy of the home is not changing from residential to non-residential, the parking for non-residential uses does not apply. Because the arrival of the children will likely be staggered, the provided parking along W. Tana Dr. should be sufficient. Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B. X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Aerial Map & Floor Plan 3. Building Elevation & Rear Yard Fence Photos B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Division 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Republic Services Company 6. Parks Department 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Central District Health Department 9. Nampa Meridian Irrigation District 10. Idaho Transportation Department C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 8 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Exhibit A.1: Vicinity/Zoning Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 9 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Exhibit A.2: Aerial Map & Floor Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 10 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Exhibit A.3: Building Elevation & Rear Yard Fence Photos Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 11 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 12 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 13 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DIVISION 1.1 The applicant shall continue to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9, Daycare Facility, including but not limited to, the following: a. The maximum number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator’s children, shall be twelve (12). b. Onsite vehicle pick-up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. Customers shall be required to drop children off using the parking area on the south boundary adjacent to W. Tana Dr. to avoid congestion on Linder Rd. c. The hours of operation for the daycare shall not exceed the hours between 7:00 am and 6:00 pm, as proposed. d. Outdoor play areas shall not be used after dusk. e. Outdoor play equipment over 6 feet in height shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard (i.e. setback area adjacent to property lines). f. The applicant shall submit a copy of her background check and complete an inspection with the Fire Department prior to continuing operating the daycare. 1.2 The applicant shall stripe the customer parking area on the south boundary adjacent to W. Tana Dr. per standards in UDC Table 11-3C-5. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division for an inspection upon completion of the striping. 1.3 The conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of 2 years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period, a time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6. 1.4 Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Public works has no issues with this application. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 All daycares must pass an inspection using the criteria of the Idaho State Fire Marshal as set forth in Idaho Statute Title 39-1109. Prior to scheduling an inspection, the applicant must pay a fee of $20 for the cost of the inspection. The applicant has committed to scheduling an inspection with the Fire Department. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The Police Department had no comments on this application. 5. REPUBLIC SERVICES 5.1 Republic Services did not provide comments on this application. 6. PARKS DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 14 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 6.1 The Parks Department had no comments on this application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 ACHD has no site specific conditions of approval for this application at this time. ACHD did note that they do have concerns about the proposed parking locations. The stalls bordering the house to the west along N. Linder Rd. shall be required to remain outside of public right-of-way. The applicant has dedicated parking along the south boundary of the property along W. Tana Dr. for customer parking to ensure traffic resulting from daycare patronage remains out of right-of-way. 8. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 8.1 CDHD will require plans be submitted for plan review for any child care center. 9. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 9.1 NMID had no comments on this application. 10. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 10.1 ITD had no comments on this application as this project does not abut the State highway system. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 15 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-4 district (see Analysis, Section IX for more information). b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of MDR and is listed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2A-2 in the R-4 zoning district. Further, staff finds the proposed use of the site is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed daycare group will contribute to the variety of uses and educational opportunities available to the surrounding area. c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed daycare group should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently provided to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the Meridian Fire Department, Police Department, Parks Department, Republic Services and ACHD in Exhibit B. Based on comments from other agencies and departments, Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 16 of 101 Hammer Daycare – CUP H-2018-0060 f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff recognizes that traffic will likely increase with the approval of a daycare group in this location; however, Staff does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Staff does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. h. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use that should be brought to the Commission’s attention. Staff finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 17 of 101 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meeting Date: July 19th, 2018 Agenda Item Number: 313 Project/File Number: H-2018-0067 Item Title Bountiful Commons Subdivision Public Hearing for Bountiful Commons Subdivision (H-2018-0067) by TMEG Properties, L.L.C. Located at 5960 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots on 6.15 acres of land in the C -C and L -O zoning districts Meeting Notes ��� �Comlhe�d t/d�'flow 5 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 7/19/2018 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 3-B Project Name: Bountiful Commons Subdivision Project No.: H-2018-0067 Active: F,/� Signature Name For Against Neutral I Wish To Testify Sign In Date/Time Barbara badigian X 7/19/2018 5:52:23 PM Leonard badigian X 7/19/2018 5:52:46 PM Joe Marshall X X 7/19/2018 6:00:23 PM Wendy McKinney X X 7/19/2018 6:03:42 PM Go Back To List I Export To Excel © 2018 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=22 7/19/2018 Item #3B: Bountiful Commons Subdivision (H-2018.0067) Application(s): Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 6.15 acres of land, zoned C -C & L-0 zoning districts, located at 5960 N. Linder Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Vacant property, zoned RUT in Ada County. East: SFR properties in the Paramount Subdivision, zoned R-8. South: Rural residential property, vacant land & Paramount Village Center, zoned L-0. West: N. Linder Road & SFR properties in Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. History: This property was annexed earlier this year as part of the Linder Mixed Use project; a DA was required as a provision of annexation. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU -C & MU -N Summary of Request: The proposed plat consists of six (6) commercial building lots on 6.15 acres of land in the C -C and L-0 zoning districts. Vehicular access is proposed for this site to/from N. Linder Road at the south boundary of the site and this shared drive -aisle serves as a frontage road to N. Linder Road and provides access to the north, south and west properties in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The only required landscaping for the proposed development is the 35 -foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to N. Linder Road. Staff has reviewed the buffer for conformance with the UDC and finds the landscape buffer generally meets the requirements of UDC 11 -3B -7C. Further, the preliminary plat for this project depicts a landscape buffer along the residential use to the east, but is not required until lot development. The applicant has submitted conceptual sample building elevations for future commercial buildings in this development, included in Exhibit A.4. Building materials appear to consist of a mix of variety of stucco, cultured stone and/or masonry with architectural shingles. CZC and DES approval is required prior to issuance of a building permit. Written Testimony: Trevor Gasser, Applicant — In agreement w/staff report except for condition #1.1.5 which requires the plat to be recorded prior to applying for building permits; the applicant requests they be allowed one building permit prior to plat recordation. Because there are 2 existing legal parcels, staff is amenable to the applicant's request. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions in Exhibit B; and the applicant's requested change to condition #1.1.5 to allow one building permit prior to plat recordation. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2018-0067, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2018- 0067, as presented during the hearing on July 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0067 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #[#]: [Project name] ([file #]) Application(s): Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of [#] acres of land, zoned [district], located at [address/general location]. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: History: [if applicable] Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: [details] Summary of Request: [details] Written Testimony: [name(s)] - [issue(s)] Staff Recommendation: [Approval/Denial] Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number [#], as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of [date], with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number [#], as presented during the hearing on [date], for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number [#] to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) �ece�v-�' -7- 0-1 r Dear Planning and Zoning Commissioners, Those of us that are contiguous to the property being platted as the Bountiful Commons Subdivision by TMEG Properties, do wholly support the plat as proposed. We commend TMEG for wor ing with us to make this development a welcomed, integrated part of our community. That being said, we are making one request. We would appreciate a fence between our properties and the "CC" area being platted. The existing wood fence is located approximately 40 inches inside our property line. Multiple studies show wood fences do not block sound. A concrete or CMU fence reflects sound. Since this property is to be "CC" that abuts residential, we feel that it would be appropriate to request a concrete or CMU fence with a mix of evergreen (conifers) and deciduous trees planted on the "CC" side of the property. We are also asking that the fence be built on a three foot tall berm as measured by the existing ground at the property line. The reason is that the existing ground drops dramatically from the back of the existing fence to the property line (variably from 2 to 3 feet). We feel the fence height should be the same height or slightly higher than the existing fence. Each property owner would be responsible for removing their existing fence and extending their side fences to the new concrete fence should they choose to do so. P&Z as well as City Counsel have often required a similar buffer for sound and light between commercial and residential properties. Construction of this type of buffer is often required at the beginning of the development of the property, we would appreciate that it be built at the beginning of a>6construction on the property to block at least some of the construction sounds and then continue to do so once businesses move in. While we understand that currently we are only platting the property tonight, we feel that it would be appropriate to somehow attach this requirement to the plat so that there is no questions about what would be required of anyone choosing to purchase and build on the property. We would not want anyone purchasing the property to be surprised by this request. This is not an inexpensive request and anyone looking at the property would need to factor it into their budget. EXISTINGWOOD FENCE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY PROPERTY BOUNDARY I CONCRETE CAP SLOPED —FOR DRAINAGE 72• I DOUBLE SIDED SPLIT 72" FACE CMU FENCEPROPOSED BERM 11 •.Olww N�wi s2iw� �7wi c CONCRETE FOOTING WI #4 Q24- OC. EXISTRIG GROUND We are excited that this will probably initially develop as a dance studio. We hope that they have a long tenure at this location. By nature though, much of their work (traffic flow etc.) will happen when kids are not in school, at the same time most of us are trying to enjoy our back yards. We are also not guaranteed that it will even develop into a dance studio or guaranteed that the studio will remain in business or outgrow the facility. Anything permitted within "CC" could end up there. An appropriate sound and light buffer between the properties will minimize any potential issues between such significantly different land uses. We the undersigned ask that you recommend to city council approval of the plat with the stipulation that the fence as shown above be built at the beginning of development of the lot abutting the existing residential. rinn.eu rvarne: Address: Signature: Printed Name: Marshall Address: E V a-7 Ve 1 aY o !i Signature: Printed Name: r Address: Signature: Printed Nam � ` 17 P. 0— f-) Ai�- P,�'6 R r3 f G I I`ar- vk Address: i M &I [ t1j GLS Signature: Printed Name: Address: Address: d _ U Il,-� Signature: Printed Name: Address: • Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 1 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: July 19, 2018 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Bountiful Commons Subdivision – H-2018-0067 I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant, Trevor Gasser, TMEG Properties, LLC, has submitted an application for a preliminary plat (PP) consisting of six (6) buildable lots in the C-C and L-O zoning districts for Bountiful Commons Subdivision. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed PP application with the conditions listed in Exhibit B, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit C. III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-2018-0067, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July, 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications). Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2018-0067, as presented during the hearing on July, 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (Add any proposed modifications). Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0067 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: The site is located at 5960 North Linder Road, in a portion of the SW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 24, Township 4N., Range 1W. B. Owner/Applicant: Archie Douglas Stewart Trevor Gasser, TMEG Properties Kellie Watkins 74 E 500 South, Suite 200 5960 N. Linder Road Bountiful, UT 84010 Meridian, ID 83646 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 19 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 2 C. Representative: Alyssa Yensen, KM Engineering 9233 W. State Street Boise, ID 83714 D. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is a preliminary plat. A public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: June 29, 2018 (Commission); C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 22, 2018 (Commission); D. Applicant posted notice on site(s) on: July 5, 2018 (Commission); VI. LAND USE A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The property consists of property zoned C-C and L-O. B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Vacant property, zoned RUT in Ada County. 2. East: Single-family residential property in the Paramount Subdivision, zoned R-8. 3. South: Rural residential property, vacant land and Paramount Village Center, zoned L-O. 4. West: N. Linder Road and single-family residential property in the Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. C. History of Previous Actions: 1. In 2018, the property was annexed and zoned from RUT to C-C as part of the Linder Mixed Use project (H-2017-0095, DA Instrument # 2018-052340). In 2018, the Director approved a PBA (A-2018-0138) to reconfigure the L-O zoned properties. D. Utilities: 1. Location of sewer: A sanitary sewer main intended to provide service to the subject site currently exists in S. Linder Road, approximately 575-feet south of the southwest corner of the subject site. 2. Location of water: A water main intended to provide service to the subject site currently exists in S. Linder Road. 3. Issues or concerns: None. E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities. 2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 3. Flood Plain: This project does not lie within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 20 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 3 VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject properties are designated Mixed Use - Community (MU-C) and Mixed Use - Neighborhood (MU-N) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The MU-C and MU-N designations allow for a variety of uses to allocate areas where community- serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to, but also walk or bike to (up to 3 or 4 miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood area encouraged. The applicant proposes to develop the property with 6 commercial lots. As part of the annexation, approval a concept plan was tied to the property through the approval of a development agreement to ensure the development of the site complies with the aforementioned mixed-use standards. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): 1. “Require screening and landscape buffers on all development requests that are more intense than adjacent residential properties.” (3.06.01G) The subject property will have a 25 foot landscape buffer between the existing residential neighborhood to the east, providing adequate separation between R-8 and the proposed C-C zoned uses. The L-O portion of the site does not abut a residential district or use. 2. “Cluster new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement adjoining residential areas.” (3.06.02B) The subject property will provide office and retail lots adjacent to N. Linder Rd. and will provide community services to the adjoining neighborhoods. 3. “Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross-access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads.” (3.03.02N) A commercial driveway is proposed to provide for cross-access to the north, south and west to reduce access points on Linder Road. 4. “Develop pathways to connect Meridian with Boise, Nampa, Kuna and Eagle.” (6.01.02C) The City’s multi-use pathway system, a segment of which is proposed along the frontage of this site on N. Linder Road, will eventually connect Meridian with adjacent cities. 5. “Require landscape street buffers for new development along all entryway corridors.” (2.01.02E) A 35-foot wide landscaped street buffer is required along N. Linder Road, an entryway corridor, with development of the site. Based on the above analysis, staff finds that the proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval. VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC) A. Purpose Statement of Zoning District: Commercial: The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accordance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Six districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 21 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 4 district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to streets and highways (UDC 11-2B-1). Allowed uses in the C-C and L-O districts consist of a larger scale and broader mix of retail, office, and service uses and typically have access to arterial streets or non-residential collector streets. B. Schedule of Use: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists the principal permitted (P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the C-C and L-O zoning districts. Any use not explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use is prohibited. C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2B-3 for the C-C and L-O zoning districts. D. Landscaping: Landscaping is required within parking areas in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C; within street buffers in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C; and within common areas and along street-facing elevations in accord with UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-4-3-27-F. Street buffers and buffers to residential uses are required as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3. A 25-foot landscape buffer is proposed along N. Linder Rd. and the abutting residential use to the east. E. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC 11-3C-6B for non- residential uses. IX. ANALYSIS A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Preliminary Plat: The proposed plat consists of six (6) commercial building lots on 6.145 acres of land in the C-C and L-O zoning districts (see Exhibit A.2). Existing Structures: There is one existing structure on the site that will be demolished as part of this project. Dimensional Standards: Development of this site is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 for the C-C and L-O districts. There are no minimum dimensional requirements in the C-C and L-O districts, staff has reviewed the proposed plat and found it to be in compliance. Dimensional requirements and setbacks will apply upon development of sites. Access: Vehicular access is proposed for this site via one access via N. Linder Road at the south boundary of the site and a north/south drive-aisle that serves as a frontage road to N. Linder Road that stubs to the north and south property lines for interconnectivity with adjacent developments in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The applicant should provide cross access to all of the properties with the subdivision and parcels north (parcel #S0425223010), west (parcel #S0425233830) and south (parcel #S0425233810) so all of the lots have access to Linder Road until the adjacent parcel to the north develops (Linder Village). Streets: There are no public streets proposed with this development. Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required along all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. The applicant proposes to construct 10-foot wide detached sidewalk (multi-use pathway) with this project. A recreational pathway may need to be recorded if ACHD does not require a separate pedestrian easement. Landscaping: The only required landscaping for the proposed development is the 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to N. Linder Road. Staff has reviewed the buffer for conformance with the UDC and finds the landscape buffer generally meets the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 22 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 5 requirements of UDC 11-3B-7C. Further, the preliminary plat for this project depicts a landscape buffer along the residential use to the east, but is not required until lot development. Tree Mitigation: If there are any existing trees on the site that are proposed to be removed, the applicant should contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, at 888-3579 to schedule an appointment to confirm mitigation requirements prior to removal of any trees on the site. Fencing: Any existing and proposed fencing for the development shall be included on either a site plan or landscape plan and shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6B and 11- 3A-7. Pressurized Irrigation (PI): An underground PI system is required to be provided to each lot in the subdivision as proposed in accord with UDC 11-3A-15. The applicant is proposing to use City’s domestic water as irrigation, however as noted in UDC 11-3A-15.C, the applicant has not provided a waiver of requirements from the irrigation district of proof that they do not have water rights. Use of the City’s domestic water as irrigation shall be a last option in providing irrigation water to a proposed development. Building Elevations: The applicant is proposing to construct a mix of retail and office buildings. The applicant has submitted conceptual sample building elevations for future retail and restaurant spaces and office buildings in this development, included in Exhibit A.4. Building materials appear to consist of a mix of variety of stucco, cultured stone and/or masonry with architectural shingles. CZC and DES approval is required prior to issuance of building permit. In accord with the Findings contained in Exhibit C, Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat request for this site. Staff has included comments and recommended conditions from other City departments in Exhibit B of this report. X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings/Other 1. Vicinity Map 2. Proposed Preliminary Plat (dated: June 8, 2018) 3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: June 8, 2018) 4. Conceptual Building Elevations B. Agency & Department Comments/Conditions C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 23 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 9 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 24 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 10 2. Proposed Preliminary Plat (dated: June 8, 2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 25 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 13 3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: June 8, 2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 26 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 14 4. Conceptual Building Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 27 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 28 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 29 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 17 B. EXHIBIT B - AGENCY & DEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS 1. PLANNING DIVISION 1.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1.1 Applicant shall meet all terms of the approved annexation (H-2017-0095, DA Instrument # 2018- 052340). 1.1.2 The preliminary plat included in Exhibit A.2, dated June 8, 2018, shall be revised as follows: a. Other than the shared access to N. Linder Road on the south boundary of the plat, include a note on the plat indicating that direct lot access to N. Linder Rd. is prohibited in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. b. The developer shall grant a cross-access/ingress-egress easement to all of the properties within the boundary of the plat and those parcels located to the north (parcel #S0425223010), west (parcel #S0425233830) and south (parcel #S0425233810) in accord with UDC 11-3A- 3. A recorded copy of the easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the development. 1.1.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A.3, dated June 8, 2018, shall be revised as follows: a. There are existing trees on the site that are going to be removed, the applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, at 888-3579 to schedule an appointment to confirm mitigation requirements prior to removal of any trees on the site. Any existing trees proposed to be retained on-site shall be noted on the landscape plan submitted with a final plat application. b. Applicant shall construct a 35-foot wide landscape buffer abutting N. Linder Road in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C. c. Applicant shall coordinate with ACHD and construct a 10-foot multi-use pathway along N. Linder Road. The applicant shall submit and record a pedestrian easement over the pathway unless a pedestrian easement is required by ACHD. 1.1.4 Comply with ACHD conditions of approval. 1.1.5 Applicant shall record final plat prior to applying for building permit. 1.1.6 The applicant shall obtain approval of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application from the Planning Division prior to applying for building permit. 1.2 General Conditions of Approval 1.2.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the C-C and L-O zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3. 1.2.2 Comply with all provisions of 11-3A-3 with regard to access to streets. 1.2.3 Comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches, laterals, canals and/or drainage courses, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. 1.2.4 Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11 -3A- 15, UDC 11-3B-6. 1.2.5 Comply with the sidewalk standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. 1.2.6 Install all utilities consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-21 and 11-3B-5J. 1.2.7 Construct the required landscape buffers consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B- 7C. 1.2.8 Construct storm water integration facilities that meet the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B- 11C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 30 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 18 1.2.9 Comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to cul-de-sacs, driveways, common driveways, easements, blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 1.2.10 Comply with all provisions of UDC 11-3A-3 with regard to maintaining the clear vision triangle. 1.3 Ongoing Conditions of Approval 1.3.1 The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5, UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-3B-14. 1.3.2 The street buffer shall be maintained by an owner or the business association as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C-2b and 11-3B-13. 1.3.3 The project is subject to all current City of Meridian ordinances. 1.3.4 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to prune all trees to a minimum height of six feet above the ground or sidewalk surface to afford greater visibility of the area. 1.3.6 The applicant has a continuing obligation to comply with the outdoor lighting provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.7 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to maintain all landscaping and constructed features within the clear vision triangle consistent with the standards in UDC 11- 3A-3. 1.4 Process Conditions of Approval 1.4.1 No signs are approved with this application. Prior to installing any signs on the property, the applicant shall submit a sign permit application consistent with the standards in UDC Chapter 3 Article D and receive approval for such signs. 1.4.2 The applicant shall complete all improvements related to public life, safety, and health as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. A surety agreement may be accepted for other improvements in accord with UDC 11-5C-3C. 1.4.3 The final plat, and any phase thereof, shall substantially comply with the approved preliminary plat as set forth in UDC 11-6B-3C2. 1.4.4 The applicant shall obtain approval for all successive phases of the preliminary plat within two years of the signature of the City Engineer on the previous final plat as set forth in UDC 11 -6B- 7B (if applicable). 1.4.5 The preliminary plat approval shall be null and void if the applicant fails to either 1) obtain the City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years; or, 2) gain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 1.4.6 Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Division staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2.1.1 Applicant shall be required to extend the 8-inch diameter water main to north property boundary for future tie-in. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 31 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 19 2.1.3 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.1.4 A future installation agreement for streetlights on N. Linder Road may be considered due to upcoming construction by ACHD on N. Linder Road. Contact the Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator for additional information. 2.2 General Conditions of Approval 2.2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 32 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 20 2.2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 33 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 21 2.2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-221. 3. POLICE DEPARTMENT 3.1 The Police Department did not provide comments on this application. 4. FIRE DEPARTMENT 4.1 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department in accordance with International Fire Code Section (IFC) 508.5.4 as follows: a. Fire hydrants shall have a Storz LDH connection in place of the the 4 ½” outlet. The Storz connection may be integrated into the hydrant or an approved adapter may be used on the 4 1/2" outlet. b. Fire hydrants shall have the Storz outlet face the main street or parking lot drive aisle. c. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. d. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10’. e. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18” above finished grade to the center of the Storz outlet. f. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the Meridian Water Dept. Standards. g. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 4.2 In accordance with International Fire Code Section 503.2.5 and Appendix D, any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. Cul-D-Sacs shall be 96’ in diameter minimum and shall be signed “No Parking – Fire Lane” per International Fire Code Sections 503.3 & D103.6. 4.3 All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles, and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4. 4.3.1 Requirements for dead-end fire apparatus access roads that are between 500’-750’ in length are as follows: 1) Roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway District cross section standards and have a clear driving surface of 26-feet in width available at all times and shall have no parking; 2) Streets less than 32-feet in width shall have no parking on one side; and 3) Streets more than 39- feet in width shall be allowed to have parking on both sides. These measurements shall be based on the drivable surface dimension. Special approval is required for access roads over 750’ in length per International Fire Code Section D103.6.1. and D103.6.2. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 80,000 GVW. 4.4 Provide signage (“No Parking Fire Lane”) for all fire lanes in accordance with International Fire Code Sections 503.4 & D103.6. 4.5 Ensure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation as set forth in International Fire Code Section 304.1.2. 4.6 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs, and access roads with an all- weather surface are required to be installed before combustible construction material is brought onto the site, as set forth in International Fire Code Section (IFC) 501.4 and Meridian amendment to IFC 10-4-2J. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 34 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 22 4.7 Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with International Fire Code Appendix B to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix C. 4.8 The applicant shall work with Public Works and Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance and is placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property, as set forth in International Fire Code Section 505.1 and Meridian Amendment 104-4-1. 4.9 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150’ of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.1.1. 4.10 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100’ of all fire department connections as set forth in local amendment to the International Fire Code 10-4-1. 4.11 The Fire Department will require Fire Department locking Connection caps on all FDC inlets. IFC 102.9. 4.12 Buildings over 30’ in height are required to have access roads in accordance with the International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 4.13 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL - Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144mm) or three stories in height shall have at least two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. The access roads shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line as set forth in International Fire Code Appendix D104.1. 4.14 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL - Buildings or facilities having a gross building area of more than 62,000 square feet (5760 m2) shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads separated by one half of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses as set forth in International Fire Code Appendix D104.2. 4.14.1 Exception: Projects having a gross building area of up to 124,000 square feet (11520 m2) that have a single approved fire apparatus access road and all buildings are equipped throughout with approved automatic sprinkler systems. (Remoteness Required) 5. REPUBLIC SERVICES 5.1 Republic Services did not provide comments on this application 6. PARKS DEPARTMENT 6.1 Parks Department has no comments 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 7.1.1 Provide a road trust deposit in the amount of $16,750.00 to pay for 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk to be constructed abutting the site, as part of ACHD’s Linder Road widening project. 7.1.2 Construct one temporary full access driveway onto Linder Road located at the site’s south property line. The driveway is restricted to a maximum width of 36-feet. Construct the driveway as a curb return type driveway. Pave the driveway, its full width at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of Linder Road. The driveway may be restricted in the future as traffic conditions warrant; as determined by ACHD. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 35 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 23 7.1.3 Payment of impact fees is due prior to issuance of a building permit. 7.1.4 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 All proposed irrigation facilities shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right -of-way (including all easements). 7.2.2 Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACHD right-of-way. 7.2.3 In accordance with District policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing non-compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant’s engineer should provide documentation of ADA compliance to District Development Review staff for review. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 A license agreement and compliance with the District’s Tree Planter policy is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. 7.2.6 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.7 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.8 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District’s Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.9 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACHD Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Standards unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.10 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.11 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 ACHD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from ACHD. 7.2.12 If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACHD Planning Review will review the site plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time unless a waiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 36 of 101 Bountiful Commons H-2018-0067 PAGE 24 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted and proposed Comprehensive Plan in regard to design and circulation. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section VII, of the Staff Report for more information. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property upon development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council consider comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property that should be brought to the Council or Commission’s attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider any public testimony that may be presented to them when determining whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which Staff is unaware. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. The Commission and Council may consider any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which staff is unaware. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 37 of 101 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meeting Date: JUIy 19th, 2018 Agenda Item Number: 3C Project/File Number: H-2018-0023 Item Title Tanner Creek Public Hearing for Tanner Creek (H-2018-0023) by Schultz De elopment Located at 505, 521, 615, 675 W. Waltman Ln. 1. equest: Replacement of the existing Development Agreement 00 ith a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan; and 2. Request: Amendment to the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation on 37.87 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential; and 3. Request: Rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C -G to the R-15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts; and 4. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 141 building lots and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land; and 5. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi -family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in the R-40 zoning district Meetina Notes City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 7/19/2018 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 3-C Project Name: Tanner Creek Project No.: H-2018-0023 Active: ❑./ Signature Name For Against Neutral I Wish To Testify Sign In Date/Time Bill Kissinger X X 7/19/2018 5:45:10 PM Matt schultz X X 7/19/2018 5:46:59 PM Carrie Manning X 7/19/2018 5:50:45 PM Clair manning X 7/19/2018 5:50:53 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2018 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=23 7/19/2018 Item #3C: Tanner Creek (H-2018.0023) Application(s): ➢ Development Agreement Modification ➢ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ➢ Rezone ➢ Preliminary Plat ➢ Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 37.87 acres of land, zoned C -G, located at 505, 521, 615 & 675 W. Waltman Ln. on the north side of 1-84, west of S. Meridian Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: W. Waltman Ln. & rural residential properties, zoned R1 and RUT in Ada County East: SFR properties, zoned C -G South: 1-84; Mountain View Equipment, Wahooz and Roaring Springs, zoned C2 in Ada County and C -G respectively West: SFR properties in The Landing Subdivision, zoned R-4 History: This property was annexed in 2006 with the requirement of a DA. In 2008, a preliminary plat was approved for Browning Plaza subdivision; several time extensions were approved but the plat expired on April 7, 2018. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The applicant proposes to replace the existing DA with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan. The provisions of the existing DA are included in Exhibit A.9 of the staff report. The existing DA, recorded in 2008, is for a 400,000 square foot commercial development consisting of professional offices, a hotel, big box retail store & smaller retail spaces distributed among 21 separate buildings that was previously planned to develop on this site. Since many of these provisions do not apply to the proposed residential development, the applicant wishes to replace the agreement with a new DA based on the proposed development plan. Staff has reviewed the existing provisions that are still applicable to development of this property and have included them in the new DA.This application does not require Commission action, only City Council but the other applications associated with this project are contingent upon the DA modification. An amendment to the FLUM is proposed to change the land use designation on 39.25 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential. The applicant's narrative states that because the site is located between'/4 and11/2 mile west of S. Meridian Rd, a principal arterial street, on a local street (i.e. W. Waltman Ln.), commercial development is not viable. Therefore, the applicant requests an amendment to the FLUM in order to develop residential uses on the site. There are two (2) parcels located at 737 and 755 W. Waltman Ln. in Ada County that are included in the CPAM request that are not part of the proposed development plan. Staff requested the applicant include these parcels as leaving the two properties with a Commercial designation would not be compatible with existing abutting residential uses and future residential development if the proposed CPAM is approved. The applicant sent letters to those property owners (Geronimo Martinez — 737 W. Waltman Ln.; and Steven Cooper— 755 W. Waltman Ln.) notifying them of the intent to include their properties in this application and included a request for them to indicate their preference of maintaining the current Commercial designation or agreement with the amendment to MHDR but received no response. Approval of the requested FLUM amendment and proposed single-family detached, townhomes and multi -family housing would provide a transition in uses and zoning between the single-family residential subdivision zoned R-4 to the west and the Commercial designated property zoned C -G to the east. Additionally, the Ten Mile Creek will provide a natural 100 -foot wide transition and buffer area along the east boundary of the site between the proposed residential and future commercial development. A rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C -G to the R-15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts is proposed consistent with the proposed CPAM designation of MHDR. The applicant has submitted a site plan, which depicts single-family detached dwellings along the perimeter boundary of the single- family portion of the site with townhomes internal to the development; and multi -family on the eastern portion of the site. A large central common area is proposed within the single-family portion of the site. Amenities for the multi -family development are separate from that of the single-family development. Conceptual building elevations (photos and renderings) were submitted that depict the general style of development proposed for the development. All structures, except single-family residential detached homes, are required to comply with design standards. Additionally, because the rear and/or side of structures on Lots 2-9 and 33-48, Block 3; and Lots 2, 7, 9 and 14, Block 10, that face W. Waltman Lane and 1-84 are highly visible, these elevations should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step -backs, pop -outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single -story structures are exempt from this requirement. To ensure the site develops as proposed and recommended by staff with this application and in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends a DA is required with the rezone containing the provisions included in Exhibit B of the staff report. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 141 building lots (consisting of 126 single-family and 15 multi -family lots) and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land. A phasing plan was also submitted that proposes 4 phases of development. Access is proposed via 2 accesses from W. Waltman Lane; one for the single-family portion and one for the multi -family portion. An existing stub street (i.e. W. Ruddy Drive) at the west boundary of the site is proposed to be extended to Waltman Lane with development. A stub street is proposed to the out -parcel at the northwest corner of the site for future access; a concept plan has been submitted that depicts how those two properties could redevelop in the future. At the request of the emergency services, staff recommends private streets are provided within the multi -family portion of the site for addressing purposes. Waltman Lane is required to be improved as % of a 36' wide collector street section, plus 12 feet of additional pavement for a total of 30 feet with curb, gutter, sidewalk and a gravel shoulder. Improvements to Waltman Lane will require the reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek. As part of this application, the applicant proposes to enter into a Cooperative Development Agreement with ACHD to construct the extension of Corporate Drive north of this site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Lane. This will take place as part of the first phase of development & will provide additional access to the site and the area and provide for access while the Ten Mile Creek bridge on Waltman Lane is reconstructed. Street buffers are required to be provided along W. Waltman Ln. and 1-84 in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends the entire street buffer and sidewalk along W. Waltman Lane; and the entire street buffer, including the berm and wall, along 1-84 shall be constructed with the first phase of development. Qualified open space and site amenities are proposed in accord with UDC standards; a total of 6.87 acres of open space and 8 site amenities are proposed. Site amenities for the overall development consist of a clubhouse, swimming pool, 2 playground areas, park area, pergola shade structure fire pit, a 10 -foot wide multi -use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek and a pedestrian bridge over the creek to connectivity to the east. A 10' wide multi -use pathway is proposed along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek; a pedestrian bridge is also proposed to the east for future interconnectivity. Noise abatement is required for residential developments adjacent to state & federal highways; the applicant proposes a 9' tall berm & 4' tall Simtek granite wall adjacent to 1-84. A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi -family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in 14 structures on 15.89 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district in accord with UDC Table 11-2A-2. The units will be housed in a mix of 8-, 16- and 24-plex 2- and 3 - story structures ranging in size from 779 to 1,258 square feet. A mix of 1 -bedroom (70), 2 -bedroom (136) and 3 -bedroom (66) units are proposed. A minimum of 509 parking spaces are required with 272 of those being in a covered carport or garage; a total of 537 spaces are proposed with 272 being carport spaces for a total of 28 spaces above UDC standards. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions & a DA Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2018-0023, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2018- 0023, as presented during the hearing on July 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0023 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 1 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: July 19, 2018 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant, Schultz Development, has submitted an application for the following: Replacement of the existing Development Agreement (MDA) with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan; Amendment to the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan (CPAM) to change the land use designation on 39.25 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential; Rezone (RZ) of 38.48 acres of land from the C-G to the R-15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts; Preliminary Plat (PP) consisting of 141 building lots and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land; and, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a multi-family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in the R-40 zoning district. See Section IX of the staff report for more information. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP applications with the conditions of approval noted in Exhibit B per the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit D. Note: The MDA request does not require action from the Commission; City Council is the decision making body. III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-2018-0023, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 19, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications). Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2018-0023, as presented during the hearing on July 19, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0023 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 39 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 2 IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: The site is located at 505, 521, 615, 675, W. Waltman Lane, in the SE ¼ of Section 13, Township 3N., Range 1W. Parcel No.’s: S1213428020, S1213428050, S1213427872, S1213427880, S1213427890, S1213427840, S1213428010, S1213428301, S1213427860 B. Owner(s): Bling LLC and Go for It, LLC 16130 N. Elder St. Nampa, ID 83687 C. Applicant: Schultz Development PO Box 1115 Meridian, ID 83680 D. Representative: Matt Schultz, Schultz Development PO Box 1115 Meridian, Idaho 83680 E. Applicant’s Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is for an amendment to the Development Agreement, Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment, Rezone, Preliminary Plat and a Conditional Use Permit. A public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on all of these applications except for the amendment to the Development Agreement, which only requires Council approval, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: June 29, 2018 C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 22, 2018 D. Applicant posted notice on site(s) on: July 9, 2018 E. Posted to Next Door: June 27, 2018 VI. LAND USE A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: This site consists of mostly vacant/undeveloped land with a few old outbuildings, zoned C-G; the land is currently used for animal grazing. B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: North: W. Waltman Ln. and rural residential properties, zoned R1 and RUT in Ada County East: Single-family residential properties, zoned C-G South: I-84; Mountain View Equipment, Wahooz and Roaring Springs, zoned C2 in Ada County and C-G respectively West: Single-family residential properties in The Landing Subdivision, zoned R-4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 40 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 3 C. History of Previous Actions: This property was annexed in 2006 (AZ-06-063, Waltman Property) with the requirement of a Development Agreement, recorded as Instrument No. 108131100. In 2008, a preliminary plat (PP-08-001) was approved for Browning Plaza subdivision; several time extensions were approved (TE-10-028; TEC-12-008; TEC-14-005; H- 2016-0008) but the plat expired on April 7, 2018. D. Utilities: 1. Public Works: a. Location of sewer: The sanitary sewer mainline intended to provide service to the subject site currently exists in W. Waltman Lane, and along the east boundary adjacent to Ten Mile Creek. b. Location of water: Water mains intended to provide service to the subject site currently exist in W. Waltman Lane, and in N. Ten Mile Road and in W. Ruddy Drive. c. Issues or concerns: None E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary of the site. 2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property except possibly the creek which may present a hazard to young children. 3. Flood Plain: This site is not located in the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATION(S): This site is designated Commercial on the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Commercial designation is to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area residents and visitors. Uses may include retail, wholesale, service and office uses, multi - family residential, as well as appropriate public uses such as government offices. PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION: The applicant proposes to change the land use designation on 39.25 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) for this site. The purpose of the MHDR designation is to allow for the development of a mix of relatively dense residential housing types including townhouses, condominiums and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from 8 to 15 units per acre, with a target density of 12 units per acre. These are relatively compact areas within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and individual project identity. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The applicant proposes to develop a mix of single-family detached, townhome and multi-family (i.e. apartments) dwellings on the site at an overall gross density of 10.53 units per acre consistent with the density desired in the requested MHDR FLUM designation. Although single-family detached dwellings aren’t specifically listed as a type of use desired in the MHDR designation, staff finds the transition in uses to existing single-family detached units to the west and mix of uses that achieve the overall desired density appropriate in this case. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & ACTION ITEMS: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in italics): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 41 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 4 “Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, medium-high and high-density single-family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities.” (3.07.01E) A variety of residential categories are proposed in this development consisting of single- family detached homes, townhomes and apartments. Staff is unaware how “affordable” the units will be. “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B) The proposed single-family and multi-family units will provide diversity in housing types in this area of the City; staff is unaware if the units will be owner-occupied or rentals. “Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A) The proposed development is required to provide common open space in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 for residential districts; and 11-4-3-27C for multi-family developments. (See Analysis below in Section IX for more information). “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F) City sewer and water services are available to be extended to the subject property with development of the site. “Locate high-density development, where possible, near open space corridors or other permanent major open space and park facilities, Old Town, and near major access thoroughfares.” (3.07.02, pg. 55) The proposed development abuts I-84, a major access thoroughfare and an interchanges is located nearby for easy access. The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary of this site which is planned for an open space corridor containing a multi-use pathway. “Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) There are some existing rural residential properties across W. Waltman Ln. to the north and abutting residential properties to the west in The Landing Subdivision. The UDC and Comprehensive Plan deem residential uses to be compatible with other residential uses regardless of density. “Support land uses that do not harm natural systems and resources.” (3.06.01H) The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary of this site and will serve as an amenity next the multi-use pathway planned to be constructed with this development. The proposed development should not harm any natural systems or resources. “Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B) Pedestrian walkways are proposed through the site to the multi-use pathway along the east boundary of the site. The multi-use pathway should promote neighborhood connectivity as part of the community pathway system. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 42 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 5 “Identify transitional areas to buffer commercial and residential uses, to allow uses such as offices and other low intensity uses.” (3.05.03A) The proposed development will buffer the existing single-family residential uses to the west from the future commercial uses to the east and the multi-family development will provide a transition between single-family detached residences and future commercial uses. “Evaluate comprehensive impact of growth in all land use decisions (e.g., traffic impacts, school enrollment, parks, etc).” (3.01.01B) Comments have been received on this application from ACHD, ITD, and WASD and are included in Exhibit B of the staff report. “Coordinate with transportation agencies to ensure provision of services and transit development.” (6.02.02H) A Valley Regional Transit bus stop is located 0.9 of a mile from this site at E. 2nd St. and E. Broadway Ave. VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC) A. Purpose Statement of Zoning District(s): The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian comprehensive plan. Residential districts are distinguished by the dimensional standards of the corresponding zone and housing types that can be accommodated (UDC 11-2A-1). B. Schedule of Use: 1. UDC Table 11-2A-7 lists the principal permitted (P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the R-15 zoning district. Any use not explicitly listed is prohibited. 2. UDC Table 11-2A-8 lists the principal permitted (P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the R-40 zoning district. Any use not explicitly listed is prohibited. C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district; and UDC Table 11-2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district. D. Landscaping: Landscaping is required within street buffers in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and within common open space areas in accord with UDC 11-3G-3E.2. E. Off-Street Parking: See UDC Table 11-3C-6 for off-street parking requirements for single-family and multi-family dwellings. IX. ANALYSIS Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: A. Development Agreement Modification (MDA): The applicant proposes to replace the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #108131100) with a new agreement to accommodate the proposed residential development plan. The provisions of the existing DA are included in Exhibit A.9. The existing DA, recorded in 2008, is for a 400,000 square foot commercial development consisting of professional offices, a hotel, big box retail store and smaller retail spaces distributed among 21 separate buildings that was previously planned to develop on this site. Since many of these provisions do not apply to the proposed residential development, the applicant wishes to replace the agreement with a new DA based on the proposed development plan. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 43 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 6 Staff has reviewed the provisions in the existing DA and is recommending the provisions that are still applicable from this agreement are carried over into the new DA as follows: 1) requirement for Corporate Drive to be extended across the Ten Mile Creek from the north to Waltman Lane with the first phase of development; 2) improvement of Waltman Lane adjacent to the site as required by ACHD; 3) extension of Ruddy Drive at the west boundary to Waltman Lane; 4) protection and enhancement of any existing vegetation and trees along the Ten Mile Creek; 5) construction of the street buffers along Waltman Lane and I-84 with the first phase of development; and, 6) construction of a multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. B. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPAM): An amendment to the Future Land Use Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan is proposed to change the land use designation on 39.25 acres of land from Commercial to Medium High Density Residential (see Exhibit A.2). The applicant’s narrative states that because the site is located between ¼ and ½ mile west of S. Meridian Rd, a principal arterial street, on a local street (i.e. W. Waltman Ln.), commercial development is not viable. Therefore, the applicant requests an amendment to the FLUM in order to develop residential uses on the site. There are two (2) parcels located at 737 and 755 W. Waltman Ln. in Ada County that are included in the CPAM request that are not part of the proposed development plan. Staff requested the applicant include these parcels as leaving the two properties with a Commercial designation would not be compatible with existing abutting residential uses and future residential development if the proposed CPAM is approved. The applicant sent letters to those property owners (Geronimo Martinez – 737 W. Waltman Ln.; and Steven Cooper – 755 W. Waltman Ln.) notifying them of the intent to include their properties in this application and included a request for them to indicate their preference of maintaining the current Commercial designation or agreement with the amendment to MHDR but received no response. Approval of the requested FLUM amendment and proposed single-family detached, townhomes and multi-family housing would provide a transition in uses and zoning between the single-family (detached) residential subdivision zoned R-4 to the west and the Commercial designated property zoned C-G to the east. Additionally, the Ten Mile Creek will provide a natural 100-foot wide transition and buffer area along the east boundary of the site between the proposed residential and future commercial development. C. Rezone (RZ): A rezone of 38.48 acres of land from the C-G to the R-15 (west 22.59 acres) and R-40 (east 15.89 acres) zoning districts is proposed consistent with the proposed CPAM designation of MHDR. The legal description submitted with the application, included in Exhibit C, shows the boundaries of the property proposed to be rezoned. Site Plan: The applicant has submitted a site plan, included in Exhibit A.3, which depicts single- family detached dwellings along the perimeter boundary of the single-family portion of the site with townhomes internal to the development; and multi-family on the eastern portion of the site. A large central common area is proposed within the single -family portion of the site. Amenities for the multi-family development are separate from that of the single-family development. Conceptual Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations (photos and renderings) were submitted that depict the general style of development proposed for the single-family detached, townhomes, multi-family and clubhouse structures as shown in Exhibit A.7. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 44 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 7 All structures, except single-family residential detached homes, are required to comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and in the Architectural Standards Manual. To ensure compliance, a Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to application for building permits. Additionally, because the rear and/or side of structures on Lots 2-9 and 33-48, Block 3; and Lots 2, 7, 9 and 14, Block 10, that face W. Waltman Lane and I-84 are highly visible, these elevations should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application is required to be submitted and approved for all new uses on the site, except for single-family residential detached homes to ensure the use and site design is consistent with UDC standards. The Design Review application may be submitted concurrently with the CZC application. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed and recommended by staff with this application and in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommends a DA is required with the rezone containing the provisions included in Exhibit B. Further, staff recommends the existing DA is replaced with a new DA containing the aforementioned provisions as discussed above in Section A. D. Preliminary Plat (PP): The applicant proposes a preliminary plat consisting of 141 building lots (consisting of 126 single-family and 15 multi-family lots) and 18 common area lots on 37.87 acres of land. A phasing plan was also submitted that proposes 4 phases of development (see Exhibit A.4). Existing Structures: There are few old outbuildings on this site that will need to be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat. Dimensional Standards: The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district and 11- 2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and finds that all of the proposed lots comply with the minimum standards. Access: Access to streets is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-3. Two accesses are proposed for the site via W. Waltman Lane; one for the single-family portion and one for the multi-family portion. An existing stub street (i.e. W. Ruddy Drive) at the west boundary of the site is proposed to be extended to Waltman Lane with development. A stub street is proposed to the out-parcel at the northwest corner of the site for future access; a concept plan has been submitted, included in Exhibit A.8, that depicts how those two properties could redevelop in the future. Alleys: Alleys are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11 -6C- 3B.5. Common Driveways: Common driveways are required to be constructed in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D. An exhibit is required to be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures; driveways for lots that abut the common driveway but are not taking access from the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 45 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 8 driveway should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway. Private Streets: At the request of the Fire Dept. and Police Dept., minimum 26-foot wide private streets should be provided in the multi-family portion of the development for addressing purposes and shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F.4. A private street application is required to be submitted with the final plat application. Traffic Impact Study (TIS): A TIS was prepared for this development by Thompson Engineers, Inc. and submitted to ACHD for review with this application. The TIS notes that all study roadways and intersections are anticipated to operate at an acceptable level of service at build-out of the development in 2022. Street Improvements: Abutting the site, Waltman Lane is required to be improved as ½ of a 36- foot wide collector street section, plus 12 feet of additional pavement for a total of 30 feet with curb, gutter, sidewalk and a gravel shoulder. Improvements to Waltman Lane will require the reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek which will be the responsibility of ACHD; the Applicant will enter into a Cooperative Development Agreement with ACHD to ensure the bridge is constructed when necessary and to allocate costs. The applicant proposes as part of this application to enter into a Cooperative Development Agreement with ACHD to construct the extension of Corporate Drive north of this site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Lane. This will take place as part of the first phase of development (54 building lots) and will provide additional access to the site and the area and provide for access while the Ten Mile Creek bridge on Waltman Lane is reconstructed. Landscaping: Landscaping is required to be provided within the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B and 11-3G-3E. Street buffers are required to be provided along all streets as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along W. Waltman Ln., anticipated to be reclassified from a local to a collector street; and a 50- foot wide street buffer is required along I-84, an interstate. Staff recommends the entire street buffer and sidewalk along W. Waltman Lane; and the entire street buffer, including the berm and wall, along I-84 shall be constructed with the first phase of development. Parking lot landscaping will be required within the multi-family portion of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. Pathway landscaping is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. A minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip is required along each side of the pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. Open Space & Site Amenities: Qualified open space and site amenities are required to be provided in residential districts per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. In addition to these requirements, common open space and site amenities are required in the multi-family portion of the development (see Section E below). A minimum of 10% (or 3.79 acres) qualified open space and 2 site amenities are required for the overall development based on the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3A. A total of 6.87 acres of open space and 8 site amenities are proposed in accord with this requirement. Site amenities for the overall development consist of a clubhouse, swimming pool, 2 playground areas, park area, pergola shade structure fire pit, a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek and a pedestrian bridge over the creek to connectivity to the east. Parking: Parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family dwellings. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 46 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 9 Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required to be provided with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Because the street classification of W. Waltman Lane is changing from a local to a collector street with this development, a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required to be constructed along Waltman. Pathways: The Pathways Master Plan depicts a segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system along the east boundary of this site adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek. The applicant proposes to construct a 10-foot wide pathway in accord with the Plan. The pathway is required to be placed within a public use easement. Staff recommends the pathway is constructed in its entirety with the 2nd phase of development. The applicant should coordinate with Kim Warren, Park’s Department Pathways Project Manager (208-888-3579), regarding specifications for the pathway and the public use easement; the easement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Waterways: The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary and crosses the northeast corner of this site. There are no other major waterways that cross this site. All ditches that cross this site should be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6 with the exception of the creek which is a natural waterway and shall remain open and be protected during development. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as follows: a 4-foot tall Simtek granite wall along I-84; a 6-foot tall open vision wrought iron fence adjacent to micro-paths and the pathway along the east boundary of the site; and a 6-foot tall vinyl fence to separate single-family building lots from adjacent common areas that are visible from a public street. Utilities: Street lights are required to be installed along public streets adjacent to the development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. All development is required to connect to the City water and sewer system unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Adequate fire protection shall be required in accord with the appropriate fire district standards. The Applicant’s narrative states there is an existing 15 inch sewer main along the east half of the Waltman Lane frontage and along the west top of bank of the Ten Mile Creek through the site. The 8 inch sewer main connection will be in Waltman Lane and will service the entire site via gravity sewer with adequate cover. An existing 12 inch water main is located in Waltman Lane along the full frontage of the site. This development will connect in Waltman at two locations and also to the existing 8” stub located in W. Ruddy Drive at the west boundary from The Landing Subdivision. Pressurized Irrigation: An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development in accord with UDC 11-3A-15 as proposed and will be served by Nampa Meridian Irrigation district. A regional pressure irrigation pump station with a Ten Mile Creek takeout is proposed to be constructed to NMID standards at the northeast corner of the site near Waltman Lane. Storm Drainage: An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances, per UDC 11-3A-18. The Applicant proposes underground seepage beds and/or retention ponds in accord with ACHD design criteria to be determined during the final plat and development plan process. Noise Abatement: This site is located along the north boundary of Interstate 84. Noise abatement is required to be provided for residential uses abutting Interstate 84 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D, which require a berm or a berm and wall combination to be constructed parallel to the interstate a minimum of 10’ higher than the elevation at the centerline Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 47 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 10 of the interstate. A 9-foot tall berm and 4-foot all Simtek granite wall is proposed as noise abatement along I-84 (see cross-section in Exhibit A.5 and wall detail in Exhibit A.6). E. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 272 dwelling units in 14 structures on 15.89 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district in accord with UDC Table 11-2A-2. The units will be housed in a mix of 8-, 16- and 24-plex 2- and 3-story structures ranging in size from 779 to 1,258 square feet. A mix of 1-bedroom (70), 2-bedroom (136) and 3- bedroom (66) units are proposed. Specific Use Standards: The specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments apply to the proposed use as follows: A minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space is required to be provided for each unit. The site plan submitted with this application depicts a minimum of 80 s.f. of private usable open space for each unit consisting of a patio or deck (see Exhibit A.3). The floor plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application s hould clearly depict compliance with this requirement. Developments with 20 units or more shall provide a property management office, a maintenance storage area, a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should include these items. A minimum of 250 square feet of common area is required for each unit containing more than 500 and up to 1,200 square feet; and a minimum of 350 square feet of common open space is required for each unit containing more than 1,200 square feet of living area. Two hundred and six (206) of the units are between 500 and 1,200 square feet (s.f.); and 66 of the units are over 1,200 s.f.; therefore, a minimum of 74,600 s.f. (or 1.71 of an acre) of common open space is required consistent with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C. A total of 162,734 s.f. (or 3.74 acres) is proposed in accord with this requirement. (Note: the open space exhibit included in Exhibit A.6 does not include the 66 units that are over 1,200 s.f. – the exhibit should be revised prior to the Council meeting.) For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, 4 site amenities are required to be provided with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D. For developments with more than 100 units, the decision making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. The applicant proposes a clubhouse, swimming pool, pergola shade structure, fire pit, a segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system along the Ten Mile Creek and a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek providing pedestrian access to the east as amenities for the multi-family development. These amenities fall within the quality of life and recreation categories; another amenity should be provided that falls within the open space category or widen the existing central common area to a minimum of 50 feet to comply with the minimum dimensions of 50’ x 100’ in size. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 48 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 11 Landscaping is required to comply with UDC 11-4-3-27-F. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation as follows: the landscaped area shall be at least 3-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24 inches for every 3 linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plants. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should demonstrate compliance with this requirement. The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. The applicant should comply with this requirement and submit a recorded copy of the agreement to the Planning Division prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. A minimum building setback of 10 feet is required unless a greater setback is otherwise required per UDC 11-4-3-27B.1. The preliminary plat should be revised to include building footprints to ensure compliance with setback requirements. Note: A minimum of 20 feet separation between buildings is required per Building Code unless a reduction is approved through the Building Department. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in areas not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The applicant should comply with this requirement. Parking: Parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for multi-family dwellings. Based on (70) 1-bedroom units, (136), 2-bedroom units, and (66) 3-bedroom units, a minimum of 509 spaces are required with 272 of those being in a covered carport or garage. A total of 537 spaces are proposed with 272 of those being carport spaces in accord with UDC standards; a total of 28 spaces are provided above the minimum requirements. Management & Maintenance: Because the multi-family development is proposed to be subdivided (2 structures to each lot), staff is concerned that the overall property may not be consistently managed and maintained. Therefore, staff recommends a provision is added to the DA that requires the entire development to be managed and maintained by the same company. Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted that depict the general style of development proposed for the multi-family and clubhouse structures as shown in Exhibit A.7. Compliance with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and in the Architectural Standards Manual is required for these structures. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review (DES): A CZC and DES application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application for any buildings within the multi-family development. Staff recommends approval of the subject applications based on the Analysis above in Sections VII and IX, per the Findings in Exhibit D. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 49 of 101 Tanner Creek – MDA, CPAM, RZ, PP, CUP (H-2018-0023) PAGE 12 X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings/Other 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Existing & Proposed Future Land Use Map 3. Site Plan (dated: 3/2/2018) 4. Preliminary Plat & Phasing Plan (dated: 4/18/2018) 5. Landscape Plan (dated: 3/30/2018) 6. Open Space Exhibit & Site Amenity Details 7. Conceptual Building Elevations (Photos & Renderings) 8. Conceptual Development Plan for Property at Northwest Corner of Site 9. Existing Development Agreement Provisions B. Agency and Department Comments and Conditions C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Rezone Boundary D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 50 of 101 - 2 - A. Drawings/Other Exhibit A.1: Vicinity/Zoning Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 51 of 101 - 3 - Exhibit A.2: Existing & Proposed Future Land Use Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 52 of 101 - 4 - Exhibit A.3: Site Plan (dated: March 2, 2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 53 of 101 - 5 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 54 of 101 - 6 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 55 of 101 - 7 - Exhibit A.4: Preliminary Plat (dated: 4/18/18) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 56 of 101 - 8 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 57 of 101 - 9 - Exhibit A.5: Landscape Plan (dated: 3/30/2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 58 of 101 - 10 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 59 of 101 - 11 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 60 of 101 - 12 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 61 of 101 - 13 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 62 of 101 - 14 - Exhibit A.6: Open Space Exhibit & Site Amenity Details Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 63 of 101 - 15 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 64 of 101 - 16 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 65 of 101 - 17 - Exhibit A.7: Conceptual Building Elevations (Photos & Renderings) Single-Family Detached Units: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 66 of 101 - 18 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 67 of 101 - 19 - 4-Plex, 5-Plex and 6-Plex Style: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 68 of 101 - 20 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 69 of 101 - 21 - Apartments (8 units – Building Type 3) (dated: February 8, 2018): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 70 of 101 - 22 - Apartments (16 Units - Building Type 1) (dated: February 8, 2018): Apartments (24 Units - Building Type 2) (dated: February 8, 2018): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 71 of 101 - 23 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 72 of 101 - 24 - Clubhouse (dated: February 5, 2018): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 73 of 101 - 25 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 74 of 101 - 26 - Exhibit A.8: Conceptual Development Plan for Property at Northwest Corner of Site Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 75 of 101 - 27 - Exhibit A.9: Existing Development Agreement Provisions 4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under City’s Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian Unified Development Code § 11-2B which are herein specified as follows: 40 building lots and 2 common lots on 38.21 acres in the proposed C-G zoning district. The pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan are applicable to this AZ 06-063 application. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: 1. A phasing plan shall be submitted with phase 1 of the development. 2. The existing agricultural use (grazing of cattle) on the property will be allowed to continue after annexation into the City, until phase 1 of the development occurs. A maximum of 25 cows and 2 horses will be allowed to exist on the site at any time. 3. The applicant shall improve Waltman Lane adjacent to the site and off-site to the end of the split corridor improvements, per the half street sections attached in Exhibit A.6 of the staff report, prior to occupancy of any structure within the site. 4. All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 5. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 6. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. 7. No building permits shall be issued or construction traffic allowed (except for infrastructure improvements such as sewer, water, & roads) on this site until: a. The construction related to the split corridor Waltman Lane/Meridian Road/Main Street intersection has commenced and the applicant has installed a gate with paved access to Ruddy for use by the Waltman residents. Such gate shall be installed prior to beginning any other construction on the site and shall be removed by the applicant prior to dedication and ACHD acceptances of the street connection to Ruddy Drive. This temporary secondary access shall be useable to Waltman residents at all times during the construction of the subject property. OR b. Corporate Drive is extended across the Ten Mile Creek and is connected to Waltman Lane. 8. Development on this site shall not exceed a site trip generation of 8,000 ADT from the site prior to the extension of Corporate Drive from the north bank of the Ten Mile Creek at its current stub, south to Waltman Lane. Approval shall be obtained from ACHD prior to Certifi cate of Zoning compliance application submittal for future structures to verify compliance with the allowed ADT. A Certificate of Zoning compliance application(s) will not be approved for any structure(s) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 76 of 101 - 28 - on the site that exceeds the total allowed ADT for the site until Corporate Drive is extended. 9. Ruddy Drive shall be extended as a public street into this site and up to Waltman Lane, as shown on the concept plan(s). 10. At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Drive or any other street within The Landing Subdivision. 11. Provide a pedestrian network within the parking areas that will help to guide pedestrians through the parking areas safely. This network shall include pedestrian only pathways and sidewalks that connect the distant parking areas to the buildings. A pedestrian plan shall be included with the master concept plan for this development; submit with the first CZC application on this site. 12. All buildings in the development shall be subject to the administrative design review standards listed in the UDC and future design guidelines pertaining to architectural character, color & materials, and parking lots. In addition to the aforementioned standards, the lots directly adjacent to Waltman Lane shall also comply with design standards pertaining to pedestrian walkways. Architectural design elements on the structures shall continue all the way around the structures, similar to the example provided by the applicant at Target included as Exhibit A.7 of the staff report. 13. All buildings on the site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual office and retail elevations submitted with this application unless the Development Agreement is modified by the developer once actual users are identified. 14. All buildings shall contain architectural elements and landscaping features that break up any long façade or wall, as determined by the Planning Director, that face the freeway, a main drive aisle, a parking area, or a residential district. These architectural elements shall include at least two changes in materials or colors, and some modulation in the façade, including but not limited to, windows, columns, cornices, extrusions, or other architectural enhancements. 15. Any outdoor uses and/or activity areas (including restaurant seating) adjacent to residential uses along the west and northwest boundaries shall require conditional use permit approval (unless the adjacent uses are changed into non-residential uses). 16. Prohibited uses along the western and northwestern property boundaries are as follows: drinking establishments, drive-thru establishments, fuel sale facilities, fuel sales facilities/truck stops, and vehicle washing facilities. 17. Except for a potential hotel site at the southwest corner, all structures proposed on the site over 100,000 square feet that are within 100 feet of a residential district or use shall obtain conditional use permit approval. 18. Standard hours of operation for businesses along the west and northwest property boundaries adjacent to residential uses are limited to the hours between 8 am and 11 pm (unless the adjacent uses are changed into non-residential uses) with the exception of a hotel use, which shall be allowed to operate 24 hours. 19. For concept plan #1, all structures along the west and northwest property boundaries adjacent to existing residences shall be limited in height to two stories and shall have a minimum setback of 25 feet adjacent to the existing residences (unless the adjacent uses are changed i nto non- residential uses), with the exception of the proposed hotel. If a hotel is built at the southwest corner of the site as depicted on the concept plan, a 25-foot setback shall be required for the first story, a 100-foot setback shall be required for the 2nd story, and a 200-foot setback shall be required for anything greater than 2 stories, adjacent to existing residences. Structures along the west and northwest property boundaries directly adjacent to residences shall position second story (and higher, in the case of a hotel) windows in such a manner as not to have views directly into Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 77 of 101 - 29 - neighboring residential properties. For concept plan #2, appropriate setbacks will be determined at the public hearing for the preliminary plat and conditions will be pl aced on the plat accordingly; No Development Agreement modification shall be necessary. 20. For concept plan #1, no rear loading areas, delivery areas, trash areas, or obtrusive lighting shall be permitted adjacent to existing residences on the west and northwest property boundaries. Further, all trash enclosures shall be constructed of concrete or masonry materials. 21. A minimum of 10 buildings shall be required on this site. 22. Development of this site shall be generally consistent with either one of the two conceptual site plans approved with this application, as determined by the Planning Director, unless the Development Agreement is modified by the developer once actual users are identified. If the applicant proceeds with concept plan #2, a new preliminary plat application will be required. 23. Prior to issuance of the first occupancy, a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be constructed at the northeast corner of the site as depicted on concept plan #1 and as approved by the Parks Department, on the east side of the Ten Mile Drain in alignment with the existing pathway on the north side of Waltman Lane, in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8 and 11-3B- 12, and the Master Pathways Plan. 24. The vegetation and trees that currently exist along the banks of the Ten Mile Creek shall be protected or enhanced as part of this development. The applicant shall work with the Parks and Recreation Department regarding the removal or replacement of any trees on this site. 25. Construct a 50-foot wide landscape buffer along the interstate. This buffer shall be designed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7 and be placed along the entire southern boundary of the subject site, prior to the occupancy of the first building in this development. 26. Construct a 20-foot wide landscape street buffer along Waltman Lane (a collector street) east of the Corporate/Waltman intersection. A 10-foot wide buffer shall be constructed along Waltman Lane (a local street) west of the Corporate/Waltman intersection. These buffers shall be designed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7 and constructed prior to the occupancy of the first building in this development. 27. Construct a 25-foot wide landscape buffer and a 6-foot tall masonry wall between residential uses and properties zoned C-G as depicted in Exhibit A.8 of the staff report. This buffer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-9 and be placed adjacent to any existing residential uses which would include The Landing Subdivision and the two residential parcels located adjacent to the northwest corner of the subject property (if these properties are still functioning as residential uses and have not converted to commercial by the time building permits are applied for), prior to occupancy of the adjacent building. 28. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #1, relocate Waltman Lane further to the south, vacate the existing right-of-way, and install a 25-foot wide landscape buffer on the north side of Waltman (off-site) adjacent to the Haddock property, as depicted on concept plan #1 and Exhibit A.9 of the staff report. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #2, appropriate buffers shall be determined at the public hearing for the preliminary plat and the plat shall be conditioned accordingly. 29. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #1, construct two driveways as proposed on concept plan #1, on the south side of Waltman Lane, no wider than 36-feet each. No driveway accesses to Waltman are approved west of the Waltman/Corporate intersection. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #2, appropriate driveway locations shall be determined at the public hearing for the preliminary plat. 30. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #1, construct a maximum of 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 78 of 101 - 30 - access points to Corporate Drive as shown on concept plan #1, unless the Development Agreement is modified by the developer once actual users are identified. If the applicant chooses to develop consistent with concept plan #2, appropriate access points shall be determined at the public hearing for the preliminary plat. 31. The applicant shall comply with all landscaping standards described in the UDC, including but not limited to UDC 11-3B-8 which outlines the standards for parking lot landscaping. 32. The applicant shall be responsible to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit and design review approval from the Planning Department prior to all new construction on the subject property. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 79 of 101 - 31 - B. EXHIBIT B - AGENCY AND DEPARTMENT COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of rezone of this property. Prior to the rezone ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of rezone ordinance adoption, and the developer(s). A final plat application will not be accepted until the DA is executed. The DA(s) shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the rezone. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual development plan and building elevations included in Exhibit A and the conditions included in Exhibit B of the staff report. b. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. Note: Single-family detached units are not subject to Design Review. c. The rear and/or side of structures on Lots 2-9 and 33-48, Block 3; and Lots 2, 7, 9 and 14, Block 10, that face W. Waltman Lane and I-84 shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. d. Noise abatement shall be provided for residential uses abutting Interstate 84 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. e. Qualified open space and site amenities shall be provided within the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 for residential developments as proposed with this application. f. Prior to issuance of any building permits on the subject property, the property shall be subdivided. g. The vegetation and trees that currently exist along the banks of the Ten Mile Creek shall be protected or enhanced as part of this development. The applicant shall work with Elroy Huff, City Arborist, regarding the removal or replacement of any trees on this site. h. The Applicant shall extend Corporate Drive north of this site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Lane with the first phase of development (54 building lots). This will provide for access to the proposed development and general vicinity while the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek on Waltman Lane is reconstructed. i. Improvements to Waltman Lane adjacent to the site as required by ACHD, including the bridge crossing over the Ten Mile Creek, shall be completed after Corporate Drive is extended from the north to Waltman Lane in accord with ACHD requirements. j. The entire street buffer and sidewalk along W. Waltman Lane; and the entire street buffer, including the berm and wall along I-84, shall be constructed with the first phase of development. k. The entire segment of the 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek and the pedestrian bridge shall be constructed with the second phase of development. l. The multi-family development in its entirety shall be managed and maintained by the same company to ensure consistency. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 80 of 101 - 32 - 1.2 Site Specific Conditions – Preliminary Plat 1.2.1 The preliminary plat included in Exhibit A.4, dated 4/18/2018, is approved as submitted. 1.2.2 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A.5, dated 3/30/2018, shall be revised as follows: a. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along W. Waltman Lane. b. Depict landscaping along all pathways as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C. 1.2.3 The entire street buffer and sidewalk along W. Waltman Lane; and the entire street buffer, including the berm and wall, along I-84 shall be constructed with the first phase of development prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. 1.2.4 Alleys are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. 1.2.5 An exhibit is required to be submitted with final plat applications that contain common driveways that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures; driveways for lots that abut the common driveway but are not taking access from the driveway should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway as set forth in UDC 11-6C- 3D.7. 1.2.6 A perpetual ingress/egress easement shall be filed with the Ada County Recorder for common driveways, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D.8. A copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division. 1.3 General Conditions of Approval – Preliminary Plat 1.3.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. 1.3.2 Comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches, laterals, canals and/or drainage courses, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. 1.3.3 Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.4 Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15, UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 1.3.5 Comply with the sidewalk standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.6 Install all utilities consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-21 and 11-3B-5J. 1.3.7 Construct all off-street parking areas consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5I, 11-3B- 8C, and Chapter 3 Article C. 1.3.8 Construct the required landscape buffers consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C (streets). 1.3.9 Construct storm water integration facilities that meet the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C. 1.3.10 Protect any existing trees on the subject property that are greater than four-inch caliper and/or mitigate for the loss of such trees as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10. 1.3.11 Provide bicycle parking spaces as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G consistent with the design standards as set forth in UDC 11-3C-5C. 1.3.12 Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. 1.3.13 Construct all required landscape areas used for storm water integration consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 81 of 101 - 33 - 1.3.14 Comply with the structure and site design standards as applicable, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 1.3.15 Comply with all provisions of UDC 11-3A-3 with regard to maintaining the clear vision triangle. 1.3.16 Low pressure sodium lighting shall be prohibited as an exterior lighting source on the site. 1.3.17 All fencing constructed on the site shall comply with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7. 1.4 Ongoing Conditions of Approval – Preliminary Plat 1.4.1 The applicant and/or property owner shall have an ongoing obligation to prune all trees to a minimum height of six feet above the ground or sidewalk surface to afford greater visibility of the area. 1.5 Process Conditions of Approval – Preliminary Plat 1.5.1 No signs are approved with this application. Prior to installing any signs on the property, the applicant shall submit a sign permit application consistent with the standards in UDC Chapter 3 Article D and receive approval for such signs. 1.5.2 The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application from the Planning Division, prior to submittal of any building permit applications for the townhome and multi-family structures. 1.6 Site Specific Conditions of Approval – Conditional Use Permit 1.6.1 The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments. Plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall demonstrate compliance with these standards. 1.6.2 The site plan included in Exhibit A.3, dated 3/2/2018, shall be revised as follows: a. Depict a minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space (i.e. patio or balcony) for each unit in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.3. b. Depict a property management office, a maintenance storage area, a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. c. Depict all on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults on the site plan in areas not visible from a public street, or fully screened from view from a public street. d. The central common area (i.e. open grassy area) shall either be widened to a minimum of 50 feet to comply with the minimum size requirements of 50’ x 100’ for open space amenities; or, another amenity from the Open Space category shall be provided as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27D. 1.6.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A.5, dated March 30, 2018 shall be revised as follows: a. Depict landscaping along the foundations of all street facing elevations in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27-F as follows: the landscaped area shall be at least 3-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24 inches for every 3 linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plants. b. Landscaping is required along pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. A minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip is required along each side of the pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 82 of 101 - 34 - 1.6.4 The multi-family development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. 1.6.5 A minimum building setback of 10 feet is required unless a greater setback is otherwise required per UDC 11-4-3-27B.1. 1.6.6 A minimum of 20 feet separation between buildings is required per Building Code unless a reduction is approved through the Building Department. 1.6.7 Private streets are required in the multi-family portion of the development for addressing purposes and shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F.4. A private street application shall be submitted with the final plat application. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 2.1.1 Applicant shall be required to construct a minimum 14-foot wide gravel access road over the existing sanitary sewer trunkline adjacent to Ten Mile Creek. This access can be co-located with sidewalk/pathways, as long as the design incorporates the minimum considerations of the wastewater maintenance equipment. 2.1.2 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat and/or building permit application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 2.2 General Conditions of Approval 2.2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 83 of 101 - 35 - 2.2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898- 5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Sectio n 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375- 5211. 2.2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 84 of 101 - 36 - 2.2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 3. POLICE DEPARTMENT 3.1 Provide private streets within the multi-family portion of the development for addressing purposes. 4. FIRE DEPARTMENT 4.1 Any newly installed Fire Department connections for sprinkler or standpipes will require locking Fire Department plugs. 4.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 4.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department in accordance with International Fire Code Section (IFC) 508.5.4 as follows: a. Fire hydrants shall have a Storz LDH connection in place of the the 4 ½” outlet. The Storz connection may be integrated into the hydrant or an approved adapter may be used on the 4 1/2" outlet. b. Fire hydrants shall have the Storz outlet face the main street or parking lot drive aisle. c. Fire hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. d. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10’. e. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18” above finished grade to the center of the Storz outlet. f. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the Meridian Water Dept. Standards. g. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 4.4 In accordance with International Fire Code Section 503.2.5 and Appendix D, any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. Cul- D-Sacs shall be 96’ in diameter minimum and shall be signed “No Parking – Fire Lane” per International Fire Code Sections 503.3 & D103.6. 4.5 All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles, and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4. 4.6 Provide signage (“No Parking Fire Lane”) for all fire lanes in accordance with International Fire Code Sections 503.3 & D103.6. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 85 of 101 - 37 - 4.7 Ensure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation as set forth in International Fire Code Section 304.1.2. 4.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs, and access roads with an all weather surface are required to be installed before combustible construction material is brought onto the site, as set forth in International Fire Code Section (IFC) 501.4. 4.9 To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project which serves more than 30 homes, as set forth in International Fire Code Section D107.1. The two entrances should be separated by no less than ½ the diagonal measurement of the full development as set forth in International Fire Code Section D104.3. The applicant shall provide a stub street to the property to the (west/east/north/south). 4.10 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway District cross section standards and have a clear driving surface. Streets less than 26’ in width shall have no on-street parking; streets less than 32’ in width shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the drivable surface dimension exclusive of shoulders. The overhead clearance shall be a minimum of 13’ 6”. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 80,000 GVW as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.2.1 and D103.6.1 and D103.6.2. 4.11 Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with International Fire Code Appendix B to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix C. 4.12 Provide a Fire Department Key box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy as set forth in International Fire Code Section 506. 4.13 The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level as set forth in International Fire Code Section 505.1 and Meridian Amendment 10-4-1. 4.14 The applicant shall work with Public Works and Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance and is placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property, as set forth in International Fire Code Section 505.1 and Meridian Amendment 104-4-1. 4.15 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150’ of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.1.1. 4.16 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on- site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official as set forth in International Fire Code Section 507.5.1. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 86 of 101 - 38 - 4.17 All R-2 occupancies with 3 or more units shall be required to be fire sprinkled as set forth in International Fire Code Section 903.2.8. 4.18 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100’ of all fire department connections as set forth in local amendment to the International Fire Code 10-4-1. 4.19 The Fire Department will require Fire Department locking Connection caps on all FDC inlets. IFC 102.9. 4.20 Buildings over 30’ in height are required to have access roads in accordance with the International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 4.21 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have traffic calming devices installed without prior approval of the Fire Code Official. National Fire Protection IFC 503.4.1. 4.22 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL - Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144mm) or three stories in height shall have at least two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. The access roads shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line as set forth in International Fire Code Appendix D104.1. 4.23 As set forth in International Fire Code Section 504.1, multi-family and commercial projects shall be required to provide an additional sixty inches (60”) wide access point to the building from the fire lane to allow for the movement of manual fire suppression equipment and gurney operations. The unobstructed breaks in the parking stalls shall be provided so that building access is provided in such a manner that the most remote part of a building can be reached with a length of 150' fire hose as measured around the perimeter of the building from the fire lane. Code compliant handicap parking stalls may be included to assist meeting this requirement. Contact the Meridian Fire Department for details. 4.24 Over 100 apartment units without an approved sprinkler system or 200 apartment units with an approved sprinkler system will require a secondary access per International Fire Code Section D104.3. 4.25 Secondary emergency access routes shall be protected from illegal entry by a gate or collapsible bollards as set forth in IFC 503.5. An example would be the MaxiForce Collapsible bollards that is wrench activated or an approved equal. 4.26 The driveways in the multi -family portion of the development shall be private streets and shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11 -3F-4 with a minimum width of 26 feet. 4.27 All public streets shall be a minimum of 33 -feet wide. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 The project developer shall design and construct a multi-use pathway consistent with the specifications set forth in the Meridian Pathways Master Plan (Chapter 3). Proposed location of pathway on west side of the Ten Mile Drain is acceptable to the Pathways Project Manager. Project Developer shall also provide a pedestrian bridge crossing of the Ten Mile Drain to connect with proposed future pathways to the east. 5.2 Prior to final approval, the applicant shall submit a public access easement for a multi-use pathway on the west side of the Ten Mile Drain to the Planning Division for Council approval and subsequent recordation. The easement shall be a minimum of 14’ wide (10’ pathway + 2’ shoulder each side). Use standard City template for public access easement. Easement checklist must accompany all easement submittals. 5.3 Construct multi-use pathway per typical paving section(s) shown in the Meridian Pathways Master Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 87 of 101 - 39 - Chapter 3. 5.4 The owner (or representative association) of the property affected by the public access easement shall have an ongoing obligation to maintain the multi-use pathway. 5.5 Six-foot tall open vision fencing shall be installed between pathways and (live) water irrigation canals and laterals as detailed in the Meridian Pathways Master Plan, Chapter 3, page 3-5. All other fence details per UDC 11-3A-7. 5.6 Should any discrepancy exist between these conditions and the requirements of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, the developer shall work with Pathways Project Manager to achieve a pathway design that meets both City and irrigation district objectives. 6. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 7. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 88 of 101 - 40 - 8. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT 9. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) 9.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval (Preliminary Plat) 9.1.1 Prior to plan approval and ACHD signature on the first final plat enter into a Cooperate Development Agreement with ACHD for the construction of the Corporate Drive extension, which will al so include the construction of a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek. Construct Corporate Drive north of the bridge as a 40-foot wide commercial street section with vertical curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. The crossing of Ten Mile Creek will require a 58-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. South of the bridge construct Corporate Drive with a minimum of 30-feet of pavement and 3-foot wide gravel shoulders. The Cooperative Development Agreement shall include the roadway and bri dge design and construction, as well as allocation of costs (70% ACHD and 30% the applicant). 9.1.2 In order to ensure that Corporate Drive will be extended, the following items must be in place prior plans acceptance for the first final plat. Cooperative Development Agreement; Financial surety provided by the applicant meeting the terms of the Cooperative Development Agreement; Full design and approved plans for the roadway and bridge. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 89 of 101 - 41 - 9.1.3 Abutting the site, improve Waltman Lane as ½ of a 36-foot wide collector street section, plus 12-feet of additional pavement (to total 30-feet) with vertical curb, gutter, and a 5-foot wide (or 7-foot wide attached) detached concrete sidewalk with a 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch sized to accommodate the roadway storm runoff constructed on the north side of the roadway. 9.1.4 If detached sidewalks are constructed, then the right-of-way may extend to 2-feet behind the back of curb and the sidewalks can be placed in a permanent right-of-way easement. 9.1.5 Construct center left turn lanes on Waltman Lane at the apartment driveway located approximately 430- feet east of Corporate Drive and at Kearney Avenue. 9.1.6 Reconstruct of the existing Ten Mile Creek bridge crossing on Waltman Lane as a full 36-foot street section with vertical curb and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. 9.1.7 To ensure the existing Ten Mile Creek bridge crossing on Waltman Lane is improved when necessary and to allocate costs, the applicant shall enter into a Cooperative Development Agreement with ACHD. 9.1.8 The Cooperative Development Agreement should include bridge design and construction, as well as allocation of costs (76% ACHD and 24% the applicant). 9.1.9 In order to ensure that the Waltman Lane bridge is constructed, the following items must be in place prior plans acceptance for the final plat necessitating the improvements. Cooperative Development Agreement; Financial surety provided by the applicant meeting the terms of the Cooperative Development Agreement; Full design and approved plans for the bridge. 9.1.10 Install “NO PARKING” signs on Waltman Lane abutting the site. 9.1.11 Extend 1 stub street into the site, Ruddy Drive, with two 21-foot wide travel lanes, a 10-foot wide center landscape island, vertical curb, gutter, within 50-feet of right-of-way, and a 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. 9.1.12 Construct 1 local street, Kearney Avenue, to intersect Waltman Lane, 330-feet west of Corporate Drive. 9.1.13 Construct the entry portion of Kearney Avenue with two 21-foot wide travel lanes, a 10-foot wide center landscape island, vertical curb, gutter, and a portion of an 8-foot wide planter strip within 60-feet of right- of-way with a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalks. 9.1.14 Provide a permanent right-of-way easement for detached sidewalks located outside of the dedicated right- of-way. 9.1.15 Plat all of the center landscape islands as right-of-way owned by ACHD. The applicant or the home owners association shall apply for a license agreement if landscaping is desired within the islands. 9.1.16 Construct all other internal local streets as 33-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks within 47-feet of right-of-way. 9.1.17 Construct an off-set cul-de-sac turnaround with a minimum radius of 45-feet at the terminus of SW 7th Street. 9.1.18 Construct three 20-foot alleys within the site, located as follows: One east/west alley to run between Kearney Avenue and Malayan Avenue. One north/south alley to run between Jacksnipe Drive and Backwoods Drive. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 90 of 101 - 42 - One alley to run north from Jacksnipe Drive and curve to the east to intersect Malayan Avenue. 9.1.19 All alleys with horizontal curves shall be designed using the AASHTO equation 3-38. HSO= R (1 – cos(28.65*S/R)) using S = 80. 9.1.20 Construct one 24-foot wide full access driveway onto Waltman Lane located approximately 430-feet east of Corporate Drive. 9.1.21 Construct one 28-foot wide driveway onto Malayan Avenue located 300-feet south of Eider Drive. Sign this driveway for “NO PARKING”. 9.1.22 Construct 1 stub street to the north, 7th Avenue, located 130-feet east of the west property line. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, “THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE.” 9.1.23 Provide a road trust deposit in the amount of $18,000 to pay for future traffic calming on local streets within The Landing Subdivision provided when Ruddy Drive is extended into the site. 9.1.24 Other than access specifically approved with this application direct lot access to Waltman Lane is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 9.1.25 Payment of impact fees is due prior to issuance of a building permit. 9.1.26 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 9.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 9.2.1 All proposed irrigation facilities shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-way (including all easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right -of-way (including all easements). 9.2.2 Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACHD right-of-way. 9.2.3 In accordance with District policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing non- compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant’s engineer should provide documentation of ADA compliance to District Development Review staff for review. 9.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 9.2.5 A license agreement and compliance with the District’s Tree Planter policy is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. 9.2.6 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 9.2.7 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right -of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 9.2.8 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District’s Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 9.2.9 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACHD Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Standards unless Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 91 of 101 - 43 - specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 9.2.10 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy. 9.2.11 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 ACHD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from ACHD. 9.2.12 If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACHD Planning Review will review the site plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time unless a waiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. 10. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD) 11. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 92 of 101 - 44 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 93 of 101 - 45 - Exhibit C: Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Rezone Boundary Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 94 of 101 - 46 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 95 of 101 - 47 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 96 of 101 - 48 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 97 of 101 - 49 - D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that the proposed map amendment from Commercial and to Medium-High Density Residential is consistent with elements of the Comprehensive Plan as noted in Sections VII & IX above. b. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. Staff finds that the proposal to modify the Future Land Use Map to allow for mix of residential uses will be compatible with adjacent residential uses and future commercial uses as recommended in Section IX and Exhibit B. c. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan as recommended by staff in Exhibit B (see Sections VII and IX for detailed analysis). d. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. Staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. e. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Staff finds the proposed amendment will be compatible with adjacent existing residential and future commercial uses. f. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities in this portion of the city. Sewer and water services are available to be extended to this site. g. The proposed map amendment (as applicable) provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. Staff finds the proposed map amendment provides a logical juxtaposition of uses and sufficient area to mitigate any development impacts to adjacent properties. h. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. For the reasons stated in Sections VII and IX and the subject findings above, Staff finds that the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City as recommended by Staff. 1. REZONE: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant a rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 98 of 101 - 50 - Staff finds that the proposed map amendment to the R-15 and R-40 zoning districts is consistent with the proposed MHDR FLUM designation proposed for this site and should be compatible with existing and future uses in the area. Therefore, Staff finds the amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan (see section VII above for more information). b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the pr oposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds that the proposed map amendment to the R-15 and R-40 zoning districts is consistent with the purpose statements of the residential districts as detailed in Section VIII above. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare if the site is developed in accord with the conditions of approval in Exhibit B. City utilities will be extended at the expense of the applicant. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-5B-3.E). Staff finds the proposed rezone of this property is in the best interest of the City if the applicant develops the site in accord with the conditions listed in Exhibit B. 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision- making body shall make the following findings: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use if Council approves the requested FLUM amendment to MHDR; if the applicant complies with the conditions included in this report, the proposed plat should be consistent with the transportation and circulation goals. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section VII, of the Staff Report for more information. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property upon development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the developer at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 99 of 101 - 51 - d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property that should be brought to the Commission or Council’s attention. ACHD and ITD consider road safety issues in their analyses. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider any public testimony that may be presented when determining whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which Staff is unaware. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features on this site that need to be preserved. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission and Council shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional & development regulations of the R-15 and R-40 districts (see Analysis Section IX for more information). b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent and harmonious with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation of MHDR for this site. c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use should be compatible with other existing and future uses in the general area and with the existing and intended character of the area. d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this repor t, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 100 of 101 - 52 - e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently available to the subject property. Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare of the area. h. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use. Further, staff finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 19, 2018 – Page 101 of 101