2018-08-16MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Broadway Avenue
Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 6:00 PM
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance
__X__ Lisa Holland __X__ Steven Yearsley
__O__ Gregory Wilson __O__ Ryan Fitzgerald
__X__ Jessica Perrault __X__ Bill Cassinelli
__X__ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairperson
Item 2: Adoption of Agenda
Adopted
Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item]
A. Approve Minutes of August 2, 2018 Planning and
Zoning Commission Meeting
Approved
Item 4: 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 Belveal Subdivision (H-2018-0076) by
TTS Development, LLC, Located at 385 S. Locust Grove
Rd.
1. Request: Rezone property from L-0 (1.494 acres) to C-C; and
2. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) commercial building
lots on 1.33 acres if land in a proposed C-C zoning district;
and
3. Request: Modification to Development Agreement to change
from those uses allowed within the L-O zoning district to those
allowed within the C-C zoning district
Recommend Approval to City Council – Scheduled 09-18-18
B. Public Hearing for Verasso Village North (H-2018-0071) by
Chad Olsen, Located at 3471, 3513, 3543 and 3561 E. Tecate
Ln.
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family
development consisting of 68 residential units on 1.698 acres
of land in the C-G zoning district
Continued to 10-04-18
C. Public Hearing for Zions Bank Drive Through (H-2018-0077)
by Matt Huffield Located at 1767 W. Island Grove Rd.
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-
Through Establishment within 300 Feet of Existing
Residences
Approved as presented in Staff Report with Modifications
D. Public Hearing for Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision (H-2018-0074)
by 4345 Linder Road, LLC Located at 943 W. McMillan Rd.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 40.6 Acres of Land to the
R-4 Zoning District; and
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of 128 Single Family
Residential Lots and 10 Common Lots on Approximately
40.6 Acres of Land in the Proposed R-4 Zoning District
Recommend Approval to City Council with Modifications – Scheduled 09-18-18
Meeting Adjourned at 8:04 PM
Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting August 16,
2018.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of August 16, 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, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, and Commissioner Lisa
Holland.
Members Absent: Commissioner Gregory Wilson, and Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald.
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 ___X___ 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
August 16th, 2018, with roll call.
Item 2: Adoption of Agenda
McCarvel: The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. There have
been no changes, so could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented?
Cassinelli: 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.
Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item]
A. Approve Minutes of August 2, 2018 Planning and
Zoning Commission Meeting
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 2 of 48
McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have one item on
the Consent Agenda and that is to approve minutes for the August 2nd, 2018, Planning
and Zoning meeting. Could I get a motion to approve the Consent Agenda?
Holland: So moved.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda as
presented. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
McCarvel: So, at this time I would like to briefly explain the public 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 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 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 sheet in the back as you entered for anyone wishing to
testify. Any person testifying will come forward and be allowed three minutes. If they
are speaking for a larger group, like an HOA, and there is a show of hands to represent
that group, they 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 4: Action Items
A. Public Hearing for Belveal Subdivision (H-2018-0076) by
TTS Development, LLC, Located at 385 S. Locust Grove
Rd.
1. Request: Rezone property from L-0 (1.494 acres) to C-C;
and
2. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) commercial building
lots on 1.33 acres if land in a proposed C-C zoning district;
and
3. Request: Modification to Development Agreement to change
from those uses allowed within the L-O zoning district to
those
allowed within the C-C zoning district
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 3 of 48
McCarvel: So, at this time I would like the record to reflect that Commissioner Yearsley
is present.
Yearsley: Sorry for being late, Madam Chair.
McCarvel: We will let it slide just this once. So, at this time we would like to open the
public hearing for Item H-2018-0076, Belveal Subdivision, and we will begin with the
staff report.
Allen: Thank you, Madam Mayor -- Chair. Excuse me. Members of the Commission.
The next -- or the first application before you tonight is a request for a rezone and a
short plat. This site consists of 1.49 acres of land. It's zoned L-O, located at 385 South
Locust Grove Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north is rural residential
properties, zoned R-1 in Ada county. To the east is Locust Grove Road and single
family residential properties, zoned R-15. To the south is vacant and developed
commercial properties zoned C-G and to the west is industrial properties, zoned I-L.
This property was annexed back in 1999 with the requirement of a development
agreement, which has been modified since that time. A daycare center currently
operates in the existing building at the west end of this site. The Comprehensive Plan
future land use map designation is mixed use community. A rezone of 1.49 acres of
land from the L-O to the C-C zoning district is proposed consistent with the mixed use
community future land use designation. A conceptual development plan was submitted
as shown that depicts how the site is proposed to develop with two commercial
buildings, associated parking areas, and driveway access via South Locust Grove
Road. Conceptual elevations were also submitted for the future buildings on the site. A
short plat is proposed consisting of two building lots on 1.33 acres of land in the
proposed C-C zoning district. There is one existing structure on the west portion of this
site that I mentioned that's the daycare right now that will be retained until
redevelopment occurs at some point in the future. The concept plan demonstrates how
the site may redevelop upon removal of that structure. One driveway access exists to
this site via South Locust Grove Road, which is proposed to remain and provide access
to both of the proposed lots. Because local street access is not available, the UDC
requires the property owner to grant cross-access ingress-egress easements to
adjoining properties. Therefore, staff is recommending a cross-access easement and
driveway stubs are provided to the property to the north and to the south. A 25 foot
wide landscape street buffer and sidewalk exists along Locust Grove in accord with
UDC standards and modification to the existing development agreement is proposed to
update the uses allowed on the property from those allowed in the L-O district to those
allowed in the C-C district, consistent with the proposed rezone request. Staff is
recommending new provisions are included in the agreement that require a future
development of the site to substantially comply with the conceptual development plan
and building elevations associated with this application and the design standards listed
in the architectural standards manual. The Commission is not a recommending body on
that application, that's just for information purposes for you. Written testimony has been
received from Kent Brown, the applicant's representative, and they are in agreement
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 4 of 48
with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the report.
Staff will stand for questions.
McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Brown: For the record, Kent Brown, 3161 East Springwood, Meridian, Idaho. And I
think Sonya has covered everything, unless you have a specific question that you would
like me or the applicant answer. I don't know what else to really tell you. We are
looking to have flex space buildings. He has a construction business and he would like
to have his office there and have clients come to meet them and talk about building a
house. The back part, like most flex space buildings, has a garage door, but that's not
what you would see from the street. Other than that I don't know what else I can really
tell you about the -- the landscape berm is in most of the improvements have already
been installed, other than what would be the asphalt around the building and parking
stalls and so forth that would be there, but in the previous applications the -- the berm
was put in. We need to put in a fire hydrant and we need to put in a streetlight and we
are more than willing to do that and have understood that, so --
McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant?
Brown: Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Chris, did we have anybody signed in for public testimony?
Johnson: Madam Chair, no one has signed in.
McCarvel: Okay. That being said, is there anybody in the room at this time that would
like to testify on this application? Okay. Come forward. As you approach the mic just
give your name and address for the record.
Smith: Robert R. Smith. 335 South Locust Grove Road. I own the property that
adjoins this on -- it would be his north boundary and my south -- south boundary.
McCarvel: Okay.
Smith: I have lived there since 1966. He has not been a very good resident for me. He
-- every year I have got to call him to get the weeds -- or call the code enforcer to have
the weeds removed and he's developed this property -- can I come forward --
McCarvel: Don't speak until you get back to the mic, because he can't get it on the
record. We can pass them from here. Okay.
Smith: All of his wastewater runs off of his property onto me. It has run into my shop in
those pictures right there. I consulted with him. He ignored the situation and has not
done a thing to his fence. I would like to have a berm on that -- that property line of his,
plus a four foot fence down the -- our property, so we could be screened from him.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 5 of 48
McCarvel: Okay.
Smith: So, if -- if we could make that statement to where it would be enforced I would
really appreciate it. According to the Meridian code enforcer, Meridian has no ruling on
runoff water of an adjacent property to anyone. So, I couldn't even get any help from
Meridian when this all happened. The county, at the time they widen Locust Grove
Road has a drain for our irrigation that runs on his property and they left him a bid for
that. I told him about it when he hauled all that fill in there to where he ought to leave
that open to where he could get his water -- the runoff into that drainage, but nothing's
happened.
McCarvel: Okay.
Smith: That's been quite a while ago.
McCarvel: Okay.
Smith: Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone else here to testify on this application tonight? Okay.
Would the applicant like to come forward.
Brown: We have a --
McCarvel: Name and address for the record. Sorry, Kent.
Brown: Oh. 3161 East Springwood. Ken Brown. We have -- if you look at the site
plan, we have a large green space that is along that northerly boundary separating the
two of us. We also have a sidewalk that goes along there. I understand that that run off
-- it took place during the huge snow that we had and -- and, yes, some water did go
down onto his property at that time. He's had issues with the weeds. This makes us -- I
mean we are putting in lawn and asphalt and making all of that area that he's concerned
about and generally code enforcement's come out and hasn't asked my client to do
anything, because he's already in the process of doing it and it's kind of like I'm in
charge of the berm on our neighborhood and we have got some goat heads next to our
pumphouse and the maintenance guy notifies me and, you know, you are out there
trying to take care of it and -- but weeds are weeds and it just keeps coming back, but
this will help I think mitigate the situation between the two neighbors.
McCarvel: So, your landscape shows the -- all water running towards --
Brown: We -- we are required --
McCarvel: -- his current property.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 6 of 48
Brown: -- with any of the applications to keep any water on our site and we will do that.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant?
Yearsley: Madam Chair, what about the fence?
McCarvel: Yeah. Is it amenable for a fence or -- come to the microphone. Sorry.
Brown: We are planning on fencing that northerly boundary.
McCarvel: Okay. And what kind of fence is that going to be?
Belveal: It will either be a six foot dog eared cedar or vinyl.
McCarvel: State your name and address for the record.
Belveal: Brent Belveal. 745 North Ralston Street in Meridian.
McCarvel: Okay.
Belveal: It will either be six foot dog eared cedar or six foot vinyl.
McCarvel: Okay.
Belveal: Down that north property line.
McCarvel: Okay.
Belveal: Front to back.
McCarvel: Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant?
Belveal: Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. So, at this time could I get a motion to close the public
hearing for Item H-2018-0076?
Cassinelli: So moved.
Perreault: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018-
0076. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 7 of 48
McCarvel: I think this is going to be a nice addition to what's right now bare ground and
clean that space up nicely. I'm in favor of it.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner.
Cassinelli: Question for -- for staff. What was -- what was the feedback, if any, from
ACHD having that access to Locust Grove so close to Watertower?
Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioners, Commissioner Cassinelli, the existing driveway,
it's -- it's there. It's already -- they didn't make any changes to it.
Cassinelli: Okay. Even with the -- with requiring access through the neighboring
developments they -- they don't want to eventually see that closed off? Didn't have a
concern on that?
Allen: Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. The cross-access or --
Cassinelli: It -- there is the cross-access that's going to be going in to the -- to the
south; is that correct?
McCarvel: South and north.
Allen: That -- that's what's in the recommendation now, yes.
Cassinelli: Okay. And to the north eventually?
Allen: Yes. Uh-huh.
Cassinelli: Okay. With -- with those -- with those accesses what I'm asking is -- is
ACHD, once those go through, are they re -- they are not requiring the closure of that --
the driveway to Locust Grove? That will remain there?
Allen: That will remain, yes.
Cassinelli: Okay. And they didn't -- they don't have an issue with that?
Allen: No.
Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. I will just make a comment. That would be -- I like the
project. They are, you know, looking to landscape it and fence in the neighbor to the
north if ACHD doesn't have a -- my only concern is that access and the proximity to
Watertower, but I will defer to ACHD and if they don't have an issue with that, I'm -- I
think I'm good with it.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 8 of 48
McCarvel: Any other thoughts? No other discussion, would someone like to make a
motion?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to City Council of file -- file number H-2018-0076 as presented in
the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, with staff's recommendation.
Holland: Second.
Yearsley: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on file H-2018-
0076. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Allen: Madam Chair, may I just clarify the motion, please.
McCarvel: Sure.
Allen: Was there any changes to the staff recommendation?
McCarvel: No. I don't believe so.
Cassinelli: No.
McCarvel: He said with staff recommendations.
Allen: Thank you.
B. Public Hearing for Verasso Village North (H-2018-0071) by
Chad Olsen, Located at 3471, 3513, 3543 and 3561 E. Tecate
Ln.
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family
development consisting of 68 residential units on 1.698
acres
of land in the C-G zoning district
McCarvel: At this time we would like to open the public hearing for item H-2018-0071,
Verasso Village North and we will begin with the staff report.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 9 of 48
Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application is
a conditional use permit. This site consists of 1.7 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at
3471, 3513, 3543, and 3561 East Tecate Lane. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the
north is commercial property, Culver's restaurant and Les Schwab tires, zoned C-G. To
the south is multi-family -- previous phases of Verasso Village, zoned C-G. To the east
is Records Avenue and a church, zoned R-8. And to the west is developed commercial
properties zoned C-G. This property was annexed back in 2005 and included in the
Una Mas Subdivision. A development agreement was required as a provision of
annexation, which has been subsequently modified. The Comprehensive Plan future
land use map designation is mixed use regional. A conditional use permit is requested
for a multi-family development, consisting of 64 dwelling units on 1.7 acres of land in a
C-G zoning district. The number of units has been reduced from the original application
submittal from 68 to 64. This is the fourth phase of Verasso Village multi-family
development. It differs from previous phases in that all of the units will be located within
one structure, rather than two units in each structure. The development is proposed to
consist of 14 one bedroom and two bedroom units. The gross density for the
development is 37.65 units per acre, consistent with that desired in the mixed use
regional designated areas. The applicant would like the flexibility to construct either a
three or four story structure. The number of units would stay the same either way. The
amount of common area would increase if a four story structure is built. Parking is
located under the units on the ground floor, as shown on the site plan before you.
Private usable open space, common area, and site amenities are provided in accord
with UDC standards. An interior courtyard with fountains is proposed as shown on the
second floor and an open grassy area along the west boundary of the site, which also
serves as an emergency access -- is proposed similar to that in previous phases. A
minimum of 121 parking spaces are required. A hundred and forty-five spaces are
proposed, for a total of 24 additional spaces beyond those required. A 20 foot wide
landscape street buffer is required along Records Avenue. An attached sidewalk
already exists along Records. Conceptual building elevations and a rendering were
submitted as shown for the proposed structure. Building materials are proposed to
consist of stucco, with either cement or wood siding, and metal accents. The final
design is required to comply with the design standards listed in the architectural
standards manual. Chad Olsen, the applicant, submitted written testimony in
agreement with the staff report and staff is recommending approval with conditions.
Staff will stand for any questions.
McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward? We
don't have --
Allen: I'm not sure where the applicant is.
McCarvel: Okay. Is there anyone here to testify on this application?
Johnson: Madam Chair, nobody has signed in.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 10 of 48
McCarvel: Okay. Is there anybody in the room tonight that would -- that wishes to
testify on this application? Okay. I guess the applicant won't be coming back forward.
So, at this time do we want to close and discuss on what we have got or continue it?
Yearsley: Madam Chair, my recommendation would be to continue, because I have
questions and I'm not ready to move this forward without --
McCarvel: Right.
Yearsley: -- answers.
McCarvel: All right.
Perreault: I agree.
McCarvel: Can we have a motion then?
Cassinelli: Do we close the public hearing first?
Yearsley: No.
McCarvel: No.
Yearsley: The public hearing is still open.
McCarvel: Yeah. It's open, because we will -- we will join it back at that point.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: I move to continue file number H-2017-0071 to the hearing date of
September 6, 2018, for -- the applicant wasn't -- because the applicant was not here to
answer questions from the Planning Commission.
Perreault: I second that motion.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2018-0071. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
C. Public Hearing for Zions Bank Drive Through (H-2018-0077)
by Matt Huffield Located at 1767 W. Island Grove Rd.
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a DriveThrough
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 11 of 48
Establishment within 300 Feet of Existing
Residences
McCarvel: Moving on. We will open the public hearing for H-2018-0077 and we will
begin with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Next item on the
agenda is the Zion's Bank drive through. I am filling in for Josh this week. Just to let
you know, the applicant is here this evening to discuss with you a conditional use permit
for a drive through use, so I want to make it clear on the record that the bank is a
financial institution in our code. That's a principally permitted use and the only reason
why they are here before you this evening is to allow the -- the associated drive through
use, because it's within 300 feet of an existing residence and another drive through
that's proposed and been approved to be constructed on this site. The subject property
is approximately one acre of land and it's currently zoned C-C. To the north we have a
public street, Island Green Drive and residential properties in the county. East is vacant
commercial property, which has been approved by the department in the Planning
Division for a vehicle carwash facility, which is this L-shaped piece here. To the south
we have West Chinden Boulevard and commercial property in Knighthill Center, zoned
C-G. And, then, the west we have Einstein's Oilery that abuts this particular property.
In 2014 this property did come before the Commission and ultimately got approved by
Council to rezone it with the C-C zoning district. The project was called Chinden and
Linder Crossing and it was approved to have a nine commercial -- or nine sub -- nine lot
commercial subdivision on the site. As part of that approval the City Council did
approve a development agreement modification, which also runs with the particular
parcel and the subject site. The applications and the elevations that are before you this
evening are found to be consistent with that recorded development agreement. So,
here is the site plan that the applicant has shared with you and it's part of the staff
report. I would mention that all of the -- the site plan and the landscape plan that's
before you this evening is in compliance with UDC standards, not only for driveway
widths, but also the specific use standards for drive throughs. The only exception to
complying with code is the requirement for the landscape buffer along the west
boundary of the site. So, what had happened was when Einstein Oilery went in they
actually constructed a six foot wide landscape buffer alone that boundary. A portion on
it falls on their property and a portion of it falls on this property. Well, after we wrote the
staff report and had a condition of approval in the staff report, the applicant brought that
to our attention and so they have asked us to modify that condition in the staff report
and that would be Condition 4.A -- 4-A, excuse me, and how it currently reads -- it's
requiring that they rip out the curbing and construct a five foot wide landscape buffer in
accordance with the UDC standards. After staff had evalu -- had a chance to evaluate
the proposal, we feel that the applicant can go through that alternative compliance
process with staff. It's a staff level approval. And we can allow that buffer to remain as
is with the addition of additional plantings and I think the application is going to share
what their proposal will be as far as an alternative to allow that buffer to remain as is.
So, if you -- the Commission so desires, I would ask that we do modify -- modify that
condition as you take deliberation on this particular application. So, again, here is the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 12 of 48
landscape buffer -- or the landscape plan that was submitted. Again, everything is in
compliance, except for -- again, if you can see my cursor here, this west boundary.
Sample elevations were provided on this particular application, so we are looking at
brick veneer, concrete lintels, glazing, sheet metal paneling on the roofing. So, a mix of
materials. Keep in mind the applicant still has to come back to staff and get approval of
their -- their final design, but in -- in general staff is supportive of the proposed
elevations as you see this evening. Staff did not receive any written testimony on the
subject. And, again, we are recommending approval with conditions and if it's your
desire we ask that you modify Condition 4-A and as you deliberate I can share with you
how we want that to read. With that I will stand for any questions you have.
McCarvel: Any questions for staff?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: Bill, can you go back to the site plan? Is there -- are they providing an
escape lane or are they doing three bays for -- how is that configuration working?
Parsons: Very good question, Commissioner Yearsley. Yes, the escape lane is the
outer drive aisle here. So, if stacking occurs here, then, someone can get by and get
out of the drive through per UDC standards.
McCarvel: Any other questions for staff?
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Bill, can you just -- can you reiterate on that landscape buffer between the
proposal and the -- and the Einsteins Oilery. What is it supposed to be again and what
is it -- it's five feet now. What -- what is it -- what are the requirements?
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Cassinelli, the
current code requires a minimum ten foot wide buffer, five on each property. Whichever
one gets -- whichever development occurs first, that developer or that person that
constructs bears the burden of putting in the trees. We don't tag the other property
owner with the trees, because we don't want to have so many trees in that planter island
that they won't grow and mature. Again, in this particular case a three foot -- a three
foot buffer was constructed with Einsteins and, then, they built the other three on this
property. But it actual -- the buffer width is actually five feet. So, it's going to be five
feet deficient from what city code requires now. But, again, we have the ability of
alternative compliance to allow that to remain as its constructed, if the applicant adds
additional planters or does something equal to or better than what code requires. In
these particular instances in my experience with it, we typically get more planning. So,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 13 of 48
what code requires -- and that seems to offset or mitigate some of those concerns that
staff has. The other thing is is it's a good buffer between the different competing uses
on the property and so we believe five feet is adequate separation between these two
uses.
Cassinelli: Thank you.
McCarvel: Any other questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come
forward?
Huffield: Matt Huffield. Cole Architects. Address --
McCarvel: If you can pull that mic just a little closer. There you go.
Huffield: Address 1008 West Main Street, Boise, Idaho.
McCarvel: Thank you.
Huffield: The -- the proposed project -- I think there was a little confusion in the width. I
think the total width is currently six feet and it's supposed to be ten feet. So, we are two
feet short, not five feet short on our side.
McCarvel: Okay.
Huffield: And we will be adding additional landscaping per the requirement as
requested. Overall the project -- I think it's a C-C zone. It's an improved use in the
zone. It's filling in of the development that's already there. I think there is also a Carl's
Jr. going in next -- two lots down. That's already been approved. There is a car wash
right next to us. And so I think it's a -- it's a valid use in that zone. We -- we have
designed the building and the -- the drive through such that it -- it works well with the --
the property and the street frontage. We push it as far away from the residential area
as possible, so it is buffered from that. There is significant landscaping in that area and
parking as well. So, it's -- it is protecting the resident's area as best we can.
McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: And you are in agreement with the staff report, besides that one condition?
Huffield: Yes.
Yearsley: Okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 14 of 48
McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Okay.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Where is the access -- what's the road there? Where is the access to West
Island Green Drive? And, Bill, if you can show us on your -- on the -- where the access
to the -- to the proposed -- the drive through.
Huffield: It's right where the -- we actually come across the -- so, you come in front of
Einstein's and, then, come over to the shared access
Cassinelli: Okay.
McCarvel: Any other questions of the applicant? Okay. Thank you.
Huffield: Thank you.
McCarvel: Do we have anyone signed up for public testimony on this?
Johnson: Madam Chair, we had one person sign in. Andrew Lawrence.
McCarvel: And please state your name and address for the record.
Lawrence: Andrew Lawrence. 1685 West Brandt Lane, Meridian.
McCarvel: Okay.
Lawrence: My -- my only real question that I have is where are the entrances to the
drive through and the exit? I would think that would be a real important thing to bring up
and it -- it hasn't been brought up and I -- I can't tell from this picture.
McCarvel: Bill, could you go back to that picture or -- there we go. Can you see the
arrows where it comes in --
Parsons: Or can you see my cursor?
McCarvel: Yeah.
Parsons: The arrow on the mouse? So, basically, they should share access with --
Lawrence: Okay. The entrance and exit is north and south?
Parsons: That's the entrance. Yes. Correct.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 15 of 48
Lawrence: Okay. And that is for the drive --
Parsons: So, the drive through -- yeah.
Lawrence: Oh, I see. It goes around.
Parsons: Yeah. It would come in from the west --
Lawrence: And exit north?
Parsons: Or south. Yeah. And, then, come back through and, then, head back out.
Lawrence: Is there any type of a berm to protect the residents? The reason I ask that
is Idaho Central is -- has a beautiful berm. We used to see headlights until the berm
filled in -- or I should say the trees and it's not a problem anymore, but it comes right in
our house before they -- they grew out. I don't want that to be a problem with this and
that is -- from the original picture of where it is structured on the lot -- I am to the eastern
and north -- I am right at the entrance where they come off of Linder and pull into that
lot. Ah, there we go. I'm right on the corner there and --
McCarvel: On that cul-de-sac or the -- close to Brandt Lane?
Lawrence: Pardon me?
McCarvel: On the entrance at Linder and Brandt or in the cul-de-sac?
Lawrence: Both of them. The entrance to Brandt Lane and to the commercial lot where
this is -- yeah.
McCarvel: So, you are the lot --
Lawrence: West Island Green -- well, my concern -- I -- I'm a little protected there, so I
shouldn't be whining about it, but we have two other residents, possibly three, that will
be victims of this.
McCarvel: Yeah. I think the drive through itself is clear on the other end of the lot.
Lawrence: Yeah. Where you can see the C there on the edge, that's the -- my
understanding is where the exit is and it's aimed right at the -- between the B and the W
on West Brandt Lane on this map.
McCarvel: That's on the other side of that --
Lawrence: No. I'm using that as a reference point. But it just -- it concerns me and I
felt that it should have been dealt with and perhaps we can get the people up here to
explain it a little further.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 16 of 48
McCarvel: Yeah. I think --
Lawrence: It's not that difficult to put a wall -- a four or five foot wall up around an
abutment to protect people, but if that's the exit that is going to be a problem.
McCarvel: Bill, can you elaborate, again, and what the landscape is on that end there
up against Island?
Yearsley: He can --
McCarvel: Yeah. We will have the applicant address it. Thank you.
Lawrence: Thank you very much.
Yearsley: Madam Chair, did we ask if anybody else wanted to testify?
McCarvel: Oh. I'm sorry. Was there anybody else in the room that wished to testify on
this application? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Huffield: Yes. Matt Huffield. 1008 West Main Street, Boise, Idaho. Could you pull up
the landscape plan? So, I think there is a couple things going on here that may not be
relevant just from the plan is in the northeast corner if a vehicle is coming out there --
first of all, there is a trash enclosure there that is a six foot high wall -- CMU brick wall
that --
McCarvel: Okay.
Huffield: -- will block most of the light. There is also a row of hedges across there that
will block the remainder of it. So, I think from a light standpoint -- pollution standpoint
from vehicles, I think it's minimal and I think that the landscaping along the street is
already in place, but that may not be the case. But the landscaping you are putting in
along that area is how much? Is --
Huffield: I think they are probably a three or four foot row of hedges.
McCarvel: Okay.
Huffield: So, it should be enough to -- to block vehicular lighting.
McCarvel: Block the light.
Huffield: And, then, again, the -- the corner that he's concerned about there, there is the
trash enclosure there that will block it one hundred percent.
McCarvel: The six foot tall --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 17 of 48
Huffield: Yeah.
McCarvel: Yeah. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant?
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: So, will you have an ATM drive through there? People might be coming
through there after business hours?
Huffield: Correct. There is an ATM drive through.
Perreault: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you.
Huffield: Thank you.
McCarvel: At this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2018-
0077?
Yearsley: So moved.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded and to close a public hearing for H-2018-
0077. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: I think this is a great fill in project and it's here before us because it's within
300 feet of another drive through and I think they have addressed keeping traffic away
from that drive through and I think it flows nicely through there, along with -- I think it's
sufficient mitigation with the fence and the landscaping there for headlights. Maybe a
few taller bushes. I don't know.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: Bill, will you put up the landscaping plan. So, I think the architect has actually
done a very decent job. One of the concerns was the ATM. If you look, the ATM
typically sits I think in front of the building there and they have got a tree right in front of
where -- so, hopefully, it would block a lot of that and so -- and where they have got
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 18 of 48
enough other shrubs and trees and stuff to the north, I think with that it should mitigate a
lot of the concerns. I would recommend if the -- if the -- the gentleman who testified if
he has more questions to -- to get with the architect afterwards and to -- to kind of
discuss those options and -- and make that, but I think just for the drive through I think
it's actually a fairly good location and they have done a fairly good job trying to mitigate
any of those, so --
McCarvel: Okay. Any other comments or are we ready for a motion?
Holland: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Holland.
Holland: And would say I tend to agree. I think they have -- they have done a good job
of putting enough landscape buffers and especially with that trash enclosure that's six
feet tall, I think that will help with some of the -- the light pollution coming through there.
I'm ready to try and make a motion if everyone else is ready to go.
McCarvel: Sure.
Yearsley: Then, Bill, is there a use of bringing up -- excuse me, Madam Chair.
McCarvel: Yes.
Yearsley: To bring up what we want it to say for that item 4-A?
McCarvel: Yeah.
Parsons: Yeah. Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the way it's written now it
just says the applicant shall construct a five foot wide landscape buffer along the west
boundary in accord with UDC standards. So, if it's your desire for them to keep it the
way it's constructed now, but add additional plantings, then, we can just modify that to
say that they need to seek alternative compliance to deviate from the five foot
requirement and, then, we can take care of it on our end to make sure that when they
come in with their certificate of zoning compliance and design review that we will
address it appropriately and make it match up with what's currently constructed.
Yearsley: Thank you. Um, Madam Chair? I actually like the -- the smaller buffer right
there between the two uses. I think it -- I think it serves its purpose to have the -- some
-- some landscaping there, but not overwhelm the site. So, I would be in favor of that
option.
McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Holland.
Holland: Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I
move to approve file number H-2018-0077 as presented in the staff report for the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 19 of 48
hearing date of August 16th, 2018, with the following modification: That we modify
condition of approval 4-A to allow the applicant to submit an alternative compliance for
the landscape buffer to deviate from the five foot requirement and work with staff on
that.
Yearsley: Second.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on H-2018-0077
with modification of 4-A. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
D. Public Hearing for Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision (H-2018-
0074) by 4345 Linder Road, LLC Located at 943 W. McMillan
Rd.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 40.6 Acres of Land to
the
R-4 Zoning District; and
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of 128 Single Family
Residential Lots and 10 Common Lots on Approximately
40.6 Acres of Land in the Proposed R-4 Zoning District
McCarvel: At this time we will open the public hearing for item H-2018-0074, Whitecliffe
Estates Subdivision and we will begin with the staff report.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Oh.
Cassinelli: Before we do that I just want to reiterate my -- from my e-mail earlier that I
live within the 300 foot radius of this project, so I will -- I would like to stay up here and
see the presentation, but I'm going to recuse myself.
McCarvel: Okay. Everybody good with that?
Cassinelli: As long as everybody's okay. I think I can be -- I think I can be fair, but
based on the fact of just -- that I'm in the mail out and in the 300 foot radius, I think as
far as -- as everybody's concerned and whatnot, I think it looks --
Yearsley: Well -- and I guess so -- so you are not going to vote on it, is that what it is?
Cassinelli: That's -- that's correct.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 20 of 48
Yearsley: So, if that's the case are they allowed -- because -- to stay here --
Cassinelli: Are we okay with --
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Yearsley: Okay. All right.
Cassinelli: If you -- if you --
Yearsley: No, I --
Cassinelli: I can -- I can step down, too.
Yearsley: -- I don't have a problem, but I know on projects that I have actually recused
myself they actually had me to go outside to listen and not to be an influence.
McCarvel: It was your project --
Yearsley: No, it wasn't my project --
McCarvel: Oh.
Yearsley: -- I just -- so that's why -- I just want to make sure legally wise --
McCarvel: Yeah. No. I think you are fine.
Yearsley: -- it's acceptable for him to stay there. Okay.
McCarvel: Okay.
Cassinelli: Because I'm happy to -- I can -- I can hop on down, too.
McCarvel: Yeah. No. You are fine.
Cassinelli: Okay. And is everybody okay with that?
Yearsley: Yeah.
Cassinelli: Okay.
McCarvel: All right. Okay.
Parsons: Madam Chair, are you ready?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 21 of 48
McCarvel: Let's begin with the staff report.
Parsons: All right. Let's begin. Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the
Commission. The next item on the agenda is the Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision. The
applicant here -- is here this evening to discuss annexation and a preliminary plat with
you. The site consists of 40.6 acres of land currently zoned RUT in Ada county. Is
located at 943 West McMillan Road on the south side of McMillan between Linder and
Meridian Roads. So, it's not quite the mid mile, but it's maybe a quarter of a mile from --
east of Linder Road. There is no history on this particular property, as it's currently
zoned and annexed in the county. The current comp plan -- Comprehensive Plan
designation for the particular subject is a medium density residential and office. So, in
our -- in our analysis of the staff report, at least our Comprehensive Plan analysis, we
have tried to justify for you why we don't feel an office component is pertinent to the
application and why residential is more suitable for it. So, you can see all on the east
boundary here you see some office -- an office park. It's still pretty undeveloped at this
point. There is only one office building in there, so because the Comprehensive Plan --
that designation on the Comprehensive Plan is not parcel specific, like a zoning
designation is, staff feels that there is addition -- or sufficient office in this particular
area, so we have recommended -- at least support the applicant's request for this
particular 40 acres to be entirely R-4 residentially zoned property. So, the applicant is
here, again, to annex the property. They are proposing a preliminary plat that consists
of 128 building lots and ten common lots. They are requesting, again, the R-4 zoning
district. The subdivision is proposed to be phased or developed in three phases. Staff
has a recommended provision in the development agreement that the park and the
associated amenities come in with the first phase. Something for you to take under
consideration this evening. And the minimum lot size in the R-4 zoning district is 8,000
square feet and the plat before you complies with those standards. And, then, the gross
density for the particular subdivision is 3.15 dwelling units to the acre. So, it's just right
at that cusp of three to eight dwelling units to the acre and that medium density
residential zoning designation. If you recall in the staff report staff did recommend that
the applicant bring forth quite a few changes before you this evening. The applicant has
obliged most of staff's request. The pedestrian connection has been included. The one
lot that was substandard has been corrected to meet the minimum 8,000 square foot
requirement. The easements have been referenced on the plat. The applicant has
provided a pedestrian connection to the west -- the Crossfield Subdivision to the west
located mid block between Lots 5 and 6 and they have also addressed staff's concerns
with the long block length. They have agreed to doing some kind of -- a raised
crosswalk here to provide traffic calming as we suggested and requested by staff.
Probably the biggest concern or criticism from the applicant is the requirement for losing
access to McMillan Road. I would mention to Commission that's -- that's something
that our code requires us to do as part of our review of an application. Typically we look
at surrounding developments and see what kind of stub streets are provided to a
particular property. In this case you can see that there are four stub streets to this 40
acres, so in staff's opinion this is viable -- suitable access to this particular property and
another access to McMillan Road is not required. I would mention to you that we did
reach out to ACHD to try to gain their support on closure of that access point and they
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 22 of 48
could not find any fault to deny the access and they did approve the applicant's request
to -- to keep that access point to McMillan Road. So that's something the applicant
certainly wants to discuss with you this evening. If you -- if you looked at the aerial you
will see there is an existing structure and some outbuildings on this particular property.
That will be removed with the first phase of development as well. So, again, the only
access to the arterial roadway is the McMillan Street access as proposed by the
applicant and, then, the four stub streets to the property will be extended with this
subject property -- this subject development. A 25 foot wide landscape buffer is
required along McMillan Road, because it is an arterial roadway. You can see a lot of
discussion in the staff report regarding what the ultimate look or the land -- how that's
going to be landscaped in the future. As you can see we called out in the staff report
that there is a fairly large irrigation canal that runs in front of that, the Lemp Canal, and,
then, Idaho Power has some pretty significant power poles running through that and
they have a 60 foot wide easement. But as I mentioned to you in my opening
statement, the applicant has addressed those. What they have shown does fit within
the context of those easements. They have reached out to those entities and they have
communicated to her that what she's proposing is tentatively approved. So, it can work
with -- the way they are showing it to you this evening. The applicant will be required to
widen out McMillan Road. So, there is a question in our mind how that -- how the
irrigation district will provide access to the Lemp Canal. Currently my discussions with
the applicant she has indicated that they are planning on taking access or maintenance
of that canal on the north side of it and not on the south, so she said they were willing to
work with her, enter into a license agreement and allow her to landscape all the way up
to the south bank of the Lemp Canal as part of her development. So, we are -- staff is
fairly confident that she can meet the 25 foot requirement. We are not sure how it
would look on the north side. Currently the way the code is written is anytime we widen
the roads, if there is -- if the road is not going to be widened immediately, then, any
surplus right of way is -- has a ten foot gravel shoulder and the rest is vegetated, so that
when the roadway is widened we want to make sure that ACHD puts back in
landscaping as part of the development, so we don't end up with this gravel or
unlandscaped sections a roadway throughout our city. In this particular case McMillan
Road will be constrained with that waterway. There is a Lemp -- they are -- it's going to
be a three lane roadway, center turn lane and two -- two drive lanes and so there is a
good chance there won't be a lot of gravel between the bank ditch and the right of way,
so I'm not sure if we have some conditions that the applicant has to provide that gravel
shoulder and maintain landscaping in front of that canal, but I don't know if it's going to
be warranted in this case. So, the conditions we need to modify to make sure we get
what we need from the applicant on that. As part of the request the applicant is
requesting that Council grant -- or leave the Lemp Canal open, so they do not want to
tile that, because it is a large facility. If memory serves me correctly, I believe the canal
company went in and actually concrete lined that ditch, so water wouldn't be seeping, so
there has been quite a bit of maintenance, attention to detail on this particular canal.
Again, the City Council has the ability to waive the large -- these large facilities in this
case and if you have ever driven down that segment of roadway you can see a -- that's
pretty much open all the way along that south side of the canal -- or that south side of
the road. The UDC does require a minimum of ten percent open space and the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 23 of 48
applicant has -- is providing 4.78 acres of qualified open space in accordance with UDC
standards. You can see half of that is the landscape buffer along McMillan Road. The
large central park here with the tot lot and some internal pathways and, then, there is
also more of a passive open space that links some of these blocks together to allow
people to get to the park and, of course, with the addition of the micro path lot here that
staff is recommending this evening. The applicant has provided you some sample
elevations of what's expected to be constructed in that development. Again, in the R-4
zone there are minimum home sizes that you have to comply with, so a single story
home there is a minimum 14,000 -- or, excuse me, 1,400 square foot minimum and,
then, a two story home has to be a minimum of 1,600 square feet. So, we will note that
on the building restriction form when they come in and subdivide their -- their phases.
We did receive written testimony on this particular application. We received written
testimony from Richard Kepler, had some concerns about traffic, and, then, we also
received the applicant's response from Becky McKay and I will let her go over some of
the items that she wants to address with you this evening. But I will let her get to her --
her testimony, let the public testify, and if there is any conditions you need me to -- to go
through and have modified certainly happy to do that for you. Again, staff is
recommending approval with the provisions of a development agreement. I will
conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have.
McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward.
McKay: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
I'm Becky McKay with Engineering Solutions. Business address 1029 North Rosario in
Meridian. I'm representing the applicant on this project, who is Todd Amyx and the --
the application says 4345 Linder Road, LLC, but that's -- that's who it is, Todd Amyx
and, then, Mr. Brineger. This particular parcel, as Bill indicated, is just a little over 40
acres. It's surrounded by development. You have Paramount Subdivision to the north,
which is R-8. Cobblefield to the west, which is R-8. Cedar Springs to the east, which is
L-O and R-8. And, then, Baldwin Park to the south, which is R-8. As you can see from
the aerial, this is an in-fill parcel that central services have been stubbed to the property.
As Bill indicated, there are four local stub streets to this parcel and when we went to
design the property, obviously, you know, from our perspective, based on the number of
trips that will be generated, which is 1,208 vehicle trips per day at build out, we believe
that the development warrants its own access to McMillan Road. We did do a traffic -- a
traffic study done by Thompson Engineers. They determined 60 percent of the traffic
will go east, 40 percent of the traffic will go west, and we do need to mitigate and build a
turn lane at our entrance due to the volume that we will create. In my -- when I had the
neighborhood meeting we had I think six or seven residents that attended. They
seemed to like the density of the project, the size of the lots. Their primary concern
was, obviously, traffic within their neighborhood. I made the comment to them that in
our pre-application conference with the City of Meridian that staff would like us to not
have our own independent access to McMillan and they said, well, we definitely object
to that. In my meetings with ACHD, based on the Fox Run Way collector roadway into
Paramount, that is 710 feet west of my approach. So, as far as meeting the standards
for a minor arterial and an access to it, I meet all ACHD standards. I meet all site
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 24 of 48
visibility standards and I do not have a competing approach that is directly across from
us, which makes for a safer -- safer approach to the arterial. Now, in -- in designing this
I wanted to make sure that, one, we didn't create a situation where we had cut-through
traffic coming through us from the other subdivisions, nor were we putting cut-through
traffic into their development. So, I tried to design it to basically balance that traffic out
and that was kind of the driving force of what's before you. As you can see, we have
significant landscaping that is adjacent to McMillan Road. That's the Lemp Settlers
Canal there. We have a 48 foot common lot there. As far as landscapable area up to
top of bank is 35 feet. We will have a detached sidewalk on the south side, which is
consistent with what they have done along that McMillan corridor where you have the
Settlers Canal traversing parallel with McMillan. We have our central open space right
there off our -- our island entrance. That is 2.44 acres. So, it's a very large central open
space. There is going to be a pond, a playground area, picnic shelters and we have
pathways that go through it linking the entire development. We have another pocket
park that is located just south of that. That's approximately .64 acres. So, a little over
half acre. We have pathways, grassy areas, and, then, we are going to have a yard
shuffleboard facility there, so there will be an amenity within that. As Bill indicated,
there is 4.11 acres of open space or what we consider eligible open space. So, we do
exceed the ten percent required and here is kind of a blow up of that central open
space. As you can see, we have pathways that come through -- where is my little --
there we go. So, we have micro paths and pathways that come through and lead down
to the play area, the picnic area, and come down and there is another pathway that
goes to the south. On our pocket park here we have pathways that go -- come in from
the west and will take people up and over to the central common area and, then, a drop
down micro path here. As you can see here are the stub streets that we propose. Ada
County Highway District has asked us to do a stop control here at Bryce Canyon and
Bird Drive. So, this will be a four way stop to slow traffic. Here, since we have a
pedestrian pathway, we will do a raised pedestrian-friendly crossing, so the cars will
have to slow down to go up and over and, then, we talked to ACHD about doing another
one on this roadway. This is the plat that's before you. When we designed this our
client Mr. Amyx liked the larger lots, so even though we are designated medium density
residential, we are asking for a step down. We did not ask for R-8, we are asking for R-
4. Our density -- our gross density is 3.14 dwelling -- or 15 dwelling units per acre. Our
lots will range from 8,000 -- and I have got one that's clear up to 17,000 square feet.
Our average lot size in the project is 9,168 square feet. So, these are pretty good size
lots. They vary in width from 70 to 75 and, then, of course, the corner lots are larger,
they are like 85s and 90s and, then, they are all 115 feet deep. This kind of gives you
an idea of the type of homes that Mr. Amyx and his building team build. They have built
the -- you know, these throughout the valley. In Alpine Point. We did Decatur Estates
off of Linder for them. They are, obviously, very attractive, since we -- they have a
group and team of builders you get a good variety of architecture and a mix of materials
and -- and good modulation. This is one of the models that Mr. Amyx has constructed
that they put in the fall collection. Going through the conditions of approval, as Bill
indicated the staff had asked for some clarification on our plat, which we did clarify the
Idaho Power easement, that 60 foot easement, because there is a transmission line that
runs along the south side of McMillan. We also delineated the Settlers easement for the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 25 of 48
canal to make sure that, obviously, we can have an adequate area to construct our five
foot sidewalk and landscaping. I was alarmed by the condition two under 1.1 -- oh,
sorry. Item A, second bullet point, it said the applicant shall replace the proposed road
access to West McMillan Road with a pedestrian connection that meets the
requirements of the UDC. I did not make that change, because I do not feel that that is
an appropriate modification. This project warrants the access. This will operate at a
level of service C. If you go to Summit Way, which is in the Cedar Springs development
that -- according to Ada County Highway District that collector roadway is operating at a
level of service D. So, obviously, if we eliminate our access to McMillan, then, that will
send more trips through these other developments, which, in my opinion, is not good
planning and so we are objecting to bullet point number two. Bill asked me to put a
pedestrian pathway to Cobblefield to the west. I did do that. The only thing that we are
objecting to is it says that we shall work with the Cobblefield Crossing HOA to connect
the pathways. That is easier said than done. Some of the HOAs are very easy to work
with and some are not and so, then, what happens if we have an HOA that does not
want to cooperate, then, I end up having a condition that I can't satisfy, because it says I
shall. Now, I will be glad to make the attempt, but I just object to the word shall. I will
put the ped path there, I would love the residents to have interaction. Pedestrian -- they
have got open space and walkways over here, but sometimes they get very persnickety
about other residents using their private open space that they pay for and so I ran
across that before. Secondly, on item 1.1.3F, we were required to receive approval
from Idaho Power and Settlers on our landscape improvements. It's premature at this
process because neither agency will grant us approval until we give them construction
plans and the final landscape design. I did have the landscape architect modify the
landscape plan to incorporate staff's comments and restrict the type of trees that go
along the McMillan corridor where we have the transmission lines to I think a type one,
Bill, is that what we agreed upon? So, I guess I would like item 1.1.3F removed,
because I -- it's impossible to -- to comply with that at this juncture. Other than that we
feel we have got a really great project. It's low density. The lots around me are 4,500,
4,000 square feet, 6,500 square feet, 7,400 square feet, then, there is some lots over
here that are in the seven and nine thousands. So, as far as adding another kind of lot
size to this area, that's what we will be doing with that 9,000 square foot average, you
know, providing a little bit of diversity and I think based on the Comprehensive Plan
that's what it encourages is -- that we provide diversity and we have got the smaller lots,
we have got the office component, and so staff has been supportive of -- of the overall
proposal. The neighbors like the density. They like the bigger lots. And I will open up
to questions.
McCarvel: I have just one question for you, Becky. Which -- that second condition on --
that you shall work with the HOA, what -- what number was that?
McKay: 1.1.1A, bullet point one.
McCarvel: Okay. And so, then, the -- leaving the access to McMillan was what
number?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 26 of 48
McKay: 1.1.1A, bullet point 2.
McCarvel: Okay.
McKay: And, then, I did submit responses. They -- they did come in today. I had two
staff members out with the flu, so this week's been kind of crazy. So, it does, basically,
outline in my August 16th letter that I provided to staff the conditions that we were
asking for changes and the gravel condition up here on McMillan, because I just don't
know if I'm going to have the room to do that based on the widening -- we will have to
widen 17 feet from center line and -- and Settlers has lined that section of the Settlers
Canal.
McCarvel: Any other questions for staff -- or for the applicant?
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Becky, did you say the pedestrian path on the west side connects with some
common area in Crossfield?
McKay: Cobblefield? Yes.
Perreault: Or Cobblefield. Excuse me.
McKay: Yeah. If I --
Perreault: What is that? Okay.
McKay: I will show you -- right here.
Perreault: Okay.
McKay: So, they have basically some linear open space and, then, they have -- it looks
like a pathway that comes up and so our micro path is right there.
Perreault: Okay. Thank you.
McKay: But that is, like I said, private open space, so --
McCarvel: Any other questions? Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: Madam Chair. Becky, so what is this open space on the upper right -- left-
hand corner?
McKay: Right here?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 27 of 48
Yearsley: Yes.
McKay: That is the low point of the property and so that will be storm drainage.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: And as far as groundwater, the groundwater out in this area is at about nine to
11 feet. So, we anticipate we will have like seepage beds, not ponds.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: That's what -- what we want to install.
Yearsley: So, on the bullet point 1.1A, so are -- about the -- you know, you shall
coordinate, are you just wanting that condition removed all together or just taking the
shall out?
McKay: I guess I'd like to take the shall out. I -- I don't -- I will be glad to contact them,
but if they -- if they won't allow the fence to have a gap in it, then, it's a micro path to
nowhere.
Yearsley: Right.
McKay: And I had that happen at Isola Creek. We did -- we did a micro path, because
the staff wanted us to try to make interconnectivity to Bridgetower and we went to the
Bridgetower homeowner association and they said we are not -- you build your path, but
we are not taking the fence down. So, we built the path, spent the money, and it goes
into a fence. So, I guess I don't want that to happen again.
Yearsley: Okay. So, if we are -- if the -- if you couldn't get access to it what you're
asking for is that pathway to be removed --
McKay: Yes.
Yearsley: -- is what I understand.
McKay: I mean it would serve no purpose.
Yearsley: Right.
McKay: I would rather just put the area back into the lots and spend the money on
amenities than on a pathway to nowhere.
Yearsley: Okay. And you don't need that pathway for a block length or anything like
that?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 28 of 48
McKay: No.
Yearsley: Is that correct?
McKay: No.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: Because we have got -- we have these two sub streets right here.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: And, plus, that's the perimeter there.
Yearsley: Right.
McKay: Now, it was not put there from block length.
Yearsley: Okay. On the 1.1.13F, the receive approval for the landscaping plans, you
want that one removed all together or do you -- do you want to just say at the time of
construction or -- I mean what -- what are your -- just trying -- I'm just trying to get
clarification to make sure, you know --
McKay: On the 1.1.3A we did restricted the class -- class one trees along the
transmission lines. We are fine with that.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: It was the -- the second portion where grass or gravel on the north side of the
Lemp will be installed because that's their access.
Yearsley: Right.
McKay: See, Settlers' accesses the Lemp Canal from McMillan.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: So, that's why they haven't required that any of the developments build an
access road on the south and have allowed us with license agreements to grass right
up to the top of bank, which gives it a lot better, you know, appeal when you drive down
McMillan Road.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: So, I can't do anything that Settlers won't allow me to do.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 29 of 48
Yearsley: Right. No. I understand that. I was actually talking about 1.1.13F, the
receive approval for the landscaping plan from the irrigation and the Idaho Power.
McKay: Yeah. It's not possible to do that at the preliminary plan stage.
Yearsley: Okay. Preliminary plat. Okay.
McKay: Correct.
Yearsley: So, my question is could we actually make that at final design or at
construction or something and, then, at preliminary plat?
McKay: Yeah. Final plat. At final plat.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: Yeah. Like prior to final plat's signature obtain Settlers and Idaho Power
approval for the landscape plan adjacent to their facilities.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: That would be totally acceptable.
Yearsley: Okay.
McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you.
McKay: Thank you.
McCarvel: Do we have anybody signed up for public testimony?
Johnson: Madam Chair, we had one person sign in. Jody McMillan.
McCarvel: Okay.
McMillan: I am Jody McMillan. 2672 West Tenuta, Meridian. I'm here as a parent of
200 students and most importantly as the PTA president of Hunter Elementary. This
new subdivision I'm asking the board to deny. It's going to have 128 homes, which at
least will have 50 something kids going into Hunter. Our school was built for 650
students. We are currently at 789. For an elementary school that is not appropriate.
It's not safe. We do not have the room for more students. There are already several
subdivisions that are being built right now have already been approved, that is going to
bring more students to Hunter Elementary, because no other school around us also has
room. Paramount is at 550. They are about to get all the apartment buildings.
Prospect is at 750 also and they are having CBH building right near them. It is time for
the City of Meridian to stop planning for the future residents and start focusing on the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 30 of 48
ones that are here now. We are jeopardizing the future and the safety and education of
our children by overcrowding them at schools that cannot possibly keep up with this
growth. I asked you to consider this, pass it, put it on to future after the new school is
built and we can see, then, how many students we have. But right now we have no
more room at Hunter Elementary. Thank you.
McCarvel: I have one question for you. When is that school scheduled to be built?
McMillan: We were told 2021 possibly.
McCarvel: Okay.
McMillan: West Ada does currently own land near Sellers Park. It was supposed to be
an elementary school that all of those subs would funnel into. Baldwin Park. Cedar
Springs. This subdivision. That would be perfect. That would alleviate everything. But
there is no plan to build there for right now.
McCarvel: Thank you. Is that all that signed in?
Johnson: That was all that signed in.
McCarvel: Okay. Is there anyone else in the room who wishes to testify on this
application? Okay. Would the applicant like to respond?
McKay: Thank you, Madam Chair and Members of the Commission. Becky McKay. I
have always worked closely with the Meridian School District or West Ada School
District. I have had a lot of middle schools, elementaries, high schools in my projects
throughout my 28 years. Hunter Elementary, that's the one in Bridgetower. That was
part of -- I did the Bridgetower development. Obviously, we are straining the school
system. I have met with Joe Yochum. We have been -- he's -- he's been active trying
to plan for more sites. I know they are planning -- they just passed their bond for the
new Owyhee High School that's coming through as an annexation. I'm doing an
elementary north of Eagle. So, you know, the private sector, we are trying to have
those private-public partnerships to make sites available to the school district. Some of
them are at cost. Some of them are full donations. The north Meridian area has really,
you know, grown rapidly and they do need some new schools out here, but we just can't
shut growth off and say until you build a new school, you know, they -- they basically
have indicated in their response, you know, they can't guarantee that the kids in this
development will be able to attend the schools that are nearest them, because they are,
obviously, juggling some of these schools. Now, what Joe's told me is they are going to
start building some smaller schools, but more numerous, that some of the elementaries
are too large and there is kind of, I guess, a happy medium as far as the number of
students. But I'm doing everything I can to help the district. I just want to let you know
that. Thank you.
McCarvel: Becky, how -- how long until this is all built out?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 31 of 48
McKay: This is a three phase project. Mr. Amyx will probably -- do phase one next year
and, then, probably phase two would be in 2020 and, obviously, depending on the
market, phase three may be in 2020 or maybe 2021. If things slow, interest rates go up
or the economy starts to falter a little bit, obviously, you know, it's -- it's based on
demand.
McCarvel: Okay.
McKay: I think Decatur Estates -- I think it was of similar size and number of lots and I
think we did it in three years. A little -- maybe a little bit less.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: So, did the school district actually -- so, they -- they submitted, I'm assuming,
the standard letter, but they didn't say that we can't handle the growth or we don't want
the -- you know, they didn't come actually out and say anything against this project;
correct?
McKay: Madam Chairman, Commissioner Yearsley, no, they just say new residents
cannot be assured of attending the neighborhood school, as it may be necessary to bus
students to available classrooms across the district.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: And that they encourage us to provide safe walkways, bike paths, but nowhere
in this letter does it basically state that this should be denied.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: And -- and staff has us constructing all the sidewalk and landscaping adjacent
to McMillan and we showed it in our first phase. So, we will make that connection to get
that safe route to schools.
Yearsley: Okay.
McKay: Thank you.
McCarvel: Any other questions? Okay. All right. Thank you. So, at this time can I get
a motion to close a public hearing on H-2018-0074, Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision.
Holland: So moved.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 32 of 48
Perreault: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018-
0074. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: I will just start off by, yea, R-4. Sorry. I think they have done a good job of
working with staff on getting some of the issues addressed and I guess I will just start
off with the one I know. We don't really have the final say on, but I think the access to
McMillan Road -- I like it staying. I mean I think -- as long as ACHD has recommended
it's safe and they are doing the turn lanes, I think the more we can alleviate some of that
stacking and driving through the other subdivisions and I think -- that's great and I think
-- I agree that changing the wording on making it mandatory, that she make that happen
with the micro path. I think if they are open to it, great. If not, I don't think we can hold
her -- or that developer accountable what another subdivision may or may not say.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: I agree. I -- I'm very happy to see an R-4 development come in and I am
also in agreement with the access from McMillan. I think it's -- it's -- you know, when
you have the R-8 subs they are just dense enough that you tend to have a lot of cars
parked on the street itself and, then, that creates an additional -- additional, you know,
issues with safety. If you have a car parked on each side of the street and, then, you
have, you know, 120 cars from 128 homes filtering through all those, I just -- I think the
McMillan access is necessary. And I -- I really like this -- this large park area. That size
I think is fantastic. It's -- It's nice to see something that substantial.
McCarvel: Yeah. I agree. Instead of a bunch of little ones.
Perreault: Right.
Holland: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Holland.
Holland: I tend to agree I think with both of your comments and I -- I can see where
staff concern would be having several access points off of McMillan, but I would agree,
I think it makes more sense to keep it there, to keep traffic moving throughout those
neighborhoods safely. I also appreciate that they have done what was requested in
putting some -- some stop measures on one of those corners and -- and making it a
little bit safer for some of the pedestrians walking out of the parks. But I think it's a very
well thought out project and it's nice to see some R-4 density.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 33 of 48
Yearsley: Madam Chair, I agree. And I do -- I think the access is acceptable. I
understand what staff is looking for, but given that McMillan is going to be three lanes, I
don't think it's bad and they have got enough room on both sides to have that access. I
also agree that on the pathway that having her, you know, shall do that, you know, I
think she should make every effort to try to make that connection, but have the -- if the
adjoining property doesn't want it, have them submit a letter to her that we don't want
that pathway as a proof that she did every effort type situation. I think as we talked, the
-- the approval of landscaping from the irrigation and power company at the final plat I
think is acceptable and everything. The one lady that had talked about the schools, you
know, that -- that's always a tough one, because, you know, schools are overcrowded.
However, if you talk to the school district they don't actually build a new school until they
have enough students to fill a school, so you have a little bit of over -- you have
overcrowding until you have enough to fill another school and, then, they work to build
another school. So, you kind of have the cart before the horse or horse before the cart
situation and so -- and at what point do we as a city draw the line and say no more, you
know. Was it this application? The next one. Or the previous one that we should
have? You know, that's always a hard decision to make and -- and so I think it's -- I
think it's a good in-fill project. I agree that the R-4 is exciting, that we actually see some
bigger lots again. So, I -- I'm in favor of this application.
McCarvel: I agree on the schools and that's why I was curious, the school is scheduled
for 2021 and this is not even scheduled to be built out until approximately then. So, I
think it should -- I don't think this is the one that tips the bucket. So, I would be in favor
of it with the modifications that we discussed. Okay. Would somebody like to make a
motion? They are all staring at you, Commissioner Yearsley.
Perreault: Bill, can you potentially pull that staff report up for 1.1.1A? It might help.
Yearsley: So, I guess the question I have with the maintain access, that's not under our
purview, that's a City Council purview, but we can make a recommendation; correct?
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Yes. That is correct. You can --
you can recommend striking that condition.
Yearsley: Okay.
Parsons: And I have -- I have the list of Becky's revisions to the condition, so I'm happy
to go over that if you would like.
Yearsley: Actually, that would be great. Because I think I might be missing one.
Parsons: Yeah. We got it -- we have -- it's in your packet, but it's just easier for me to
kind of jot down what I heard and let you know how I think we could change it if you -- if
you want me to go over them real quickly. So, item 1.1.1A, bullet one, is the micro path
connection to the west. So, if you want some flexibility in there you can say with -- if -- I
think from what I have heard from the discussion tonight it's your desire if they can't
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 34 of 48
obtain the subdivision's approval, then, you don't want the pathway at all. It's not even
required, because it's going nowhere.
Yearsley: Yes.
Parsons: I think that's your desire in your motion that provided -- do you want that -- her
to work with the HOA prior to City Council hearing and get that answer, so that Council
can take the appropriate actions or do you want to give them the latitude -- because
that's their phase three, if I remember correctly, and so do you want to give them that
latitude all the way to phase three, five years to figure it out. It -- it's up to your purview
tonight. But I think I'm on board with where the Commission's going I believe is if you
can't get their approval, then, not even get it -- don't even have a pathway to nowhere,
because, I'm telling you, Isola Creek is burned in my memory for a long time and that's
not the intent. The intent is to have this pathway connect and that's why we wrote the
condition so strongly is because we see the value as -- as planners we see value -- all
of us see value in connecting open space with other subdivisions.
Yearsley: Right.
Parsons: And whether or not we can make that all come together is -- is the challenge
for us.
McCarvel: I would say let's get it done sooner than later, so -- I mean you're going to
have a fence there and construction can be done and make the gate or open the fence
at the time where you're doing construction and that right up to the --
Parsons: I think -- Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I think if the -- if Becky
could reach out -- she has a month before you get to -- to City Council. At least get
something in writing from the HOA that says, yeah, we are -- we will entertain it or we
are supportive of it. At least Council knows that there is a possibility it could happen
and make that happen and give at least the applicant assurances that they have some
assurety -- some surety that this is going to happen -- some certainty I guess.
Yearsley: Okay.
Parsons: That makes a lot of sense in my mind. The other bullet point was 1.1.1A,
bullet two. You want to strike that, because you want the access road to stay as shown
by the applicant. 1.1.3A talks about the grass and gravel. I think we have that worked
out. I think we should just strike that provision, as the applicant has suggested, just
leave the note provide the class one trees and strike out the provision for grass or
gravel on the north side of the Lemp Canal, because I don't think there is going to be
any room for it by the time the irrigation gets in there and it doesn't make a lot of sense
and code allows -- and they are still going to have the 25 foot buffer on the opposite
side of the canal. So, we are -- we are in good shape there.
Yearsley: So -- so that one was 1.1 -- 1.1 --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 35 of 48
McCarvel: Three.
Yearsley: Yeah. 3A.
Parsons: And D is almost the same situation. Just gives them -- I would just strike D.
1.1.3D. F is the requirement that they obtain approval. We are just modifying that one
to say with the final plat or prior to signature on the final plat they have those approvals
secured.
Yearsley: Right.
Parsons: And, then, I -- as I look through her response and looked at the staff report
before the meeting, I did note that there was an error with condition 1.2.1. Staff
inadvertently left an R-8 -- comply with the R-8 dimensional standards and as you know
this is an R-4, so we -- we want to get that cleaned up as well for the applicant. And
that's all that I captured for you as far as modifications.
Yearsley: Okay. I think I -- I think I can do that one. All right. Thank you, Bill.
Parsons: You're welcome.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to
recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2018-0074 as presented in the
staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, with the following modifications:
That Section 1.1.1A, bullet point one, be modified to have that the applicant -- how do I
want to word that? The applicant needs to work with the -- or to work with the HOA to --
or at least to have discussions with the HOA to see if they are amenable to having a
connection -- a pathway connection prior to City Council I think is what we talked.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Yearsley: Okay. Item 1.1.1A, bullet point two, be removed. Item 1.1.3A and B
removed. And 1.1.1 -- or 1.13 --
McCarvel: F.
Yearsley: -- F be modified that the -- that she shall receive approval from the irrigation
district and Idaho Power at -- at final plat. And, then, I think it was 1.1 -- 1. 2.1 to have it
be changed from an R-8 to an R-4 designation.
Holland: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 36 of 48
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval of H-2018-0074
with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: Okay.
Parsons: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Yes.
Parsons: I have a couple items for you.
McCarvel: Mr. Parsons.
B. Public Hearing for Verasso Village North (H-2018-0071) by
Chad Olsen, Located at 3471, 3513, 3543 and 3561 E. Tecate
Ln.
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family
development consisting of 68 residential units on 1.698
acres
of land in the C-G zoning district
Parsons: A couple things for you to take under consideration before we leave this
evening. So, the first is the applicant is here in the audience. He was here for -- he
showed up for his Verasso number -- Verasso -- we called it number four, but Verraso
Village No. 4. I know you guys have continued that to September 6th. I didn't see
where anyone was signed up and wishing to testify on the item this evening, so if it's
your desire to reopen that up this evening to answer your questions -- ask questions of
the applicant and you feel comfortable with doing that and taking action on that
application tonight, we can certainly do that. If not we can stay with the original motion
and, then, have him come back on the 6th and you can ask your questions then.
McCarvel: I guess my question would be -- Sonya has left and it's her -- she's the one
that's been working on this application. Would it be -- do you feel comfortable in all the
details of this application or doing --
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the report was fairly clean. The
applicant is in agreement with the conditions of approval. I'm not sure if you had any
desires -- I'm not sure what your questions are, but I'm certainly comfortable if you are
to assist in getting this closure. I know Sonya and I talked about it before she left and
she wanted to get it wrapped up tonight. The way we can do that -- certainly happy to
oblige her.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 37 of 48
Yearsley: And, Madam Chair, my guess would be kind of leaning on Legal. This could
open a potential for a challenge, is that not correct?
Pogue: That -- my main concern is that someone may have been here, may not have
signed up, but left once we -- you continued it and that could open --
McCarvel: I know there was people coming and going and I wasn't paying attention to
who -- if somebody did get up and leave right at that moment, so --
Yearsley: So, just for legal purposes, we could go through this process, it goes through
City Council, get approved and be challenged and have to go through the entire process
again my understanding.
Pogue: Correct. On a technicality.
Yearsley: And my guess is -- is -- is the applicant wishing to take that chance. I guess
if -- if we want to bring him up to talk to them. I -- because, ultimately, I'm okay to move
forward with it, but it -- it's his liability if someone does challenge in my opinion. So, I
will leave that to the chair to decide how she would like to proceed.
McCarvel: Yeah. I -- would the applicant, please, come forward. Have you been
listening to our discussion there? Are you willing to take that risk?
Olsen: Yes.
McCarvel: Okay. Oh, sorry. State your name and address for the record.
Olsen: Chad Olsen. 12790 West Telemark Street, Boise, Idaho. 83713.
McCarvel: Okay. All right.
Olsen: It was my understanding that the Commission was the final say tonight, because
this does not go to Council and I don't know if that would affect your decision. In all the
meetings we have had for the Verasso project I think the very first one we had two
people come to our neighborhood meeting. On two none came. On three none came.
And on four none came. So, it's been a pretty good project and I'm willing to take the
risk. I think there would be an appeal period no matter what we do at the end of the ten
-- you know, at the end of ten days. So, I'm willing to take the chance.
McCarvel: Okay. I would say if the applicant is willing to take the chance I think our
next meeting is looking fairly full already anyway by this draft. It already has I believe
five items on it. I -- I would be amenable to moving forward --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Yearsley: -- because he's -- he's willing to take that risk.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 38 of 48
McCarvel: Yeah. The risk is up to you and, then, we will -- yeah. I was just thinking
there would be another shot at City Council, but, you're right -- this is it. It's a CUP.
Yeah. I think with hearing what the neighborhood response has been, let's go ahead
and move forward.
Yearsley: So, at that point we need to make a motion to reopen --
McCarvel: Yes.
Yearsley: Okay. Madam Chair, I move that we --
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: -- reopen file number H-2018-0071 to the hearing date of August 16th and
allow the -- the applicant to present his case.
McCarvel: Okay.
Holland: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to reopen H-2018-0071. All those in favor
say aye. Opposed?
Cassinelli: Nay.
McCarvel: Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: We were at the point where we were asking the applicant to give his
presentation.
Olsen: Chad Olsen. 12790 West Telemark Street, Boise, Idaho. 83713. Sorry for
being late. For some reason I get mixed up on the Commission times versus the
Council times. But, anyway, so the -- this is the fourth project -- fourth phase of the
Verasso project, located on Records and just down from The Village there and it's been
a very successful project for us. This is a component of two bedroom units and some
one bedroom units. We currently have three bedroom units out there and they are built
in a configuration of townhomes and what we are finding is on this last piece that the
demand has been to incorporate some smaller units in our development, so that we
have a nice mixture of all kinds of units, meaning three bedrooms, two bedrooms and
one bedroom. So, this is an attempt to basically fulfill what market is asking us to do.
We have -- it's a little bit smaller of a site, so we have struggled a teeny bit trying to get
something that really looked like our current project and -- and fit in on a -- on a
harmonious fluid type look and so what you see before you on this picture with the cars
parked underneath was our attempt to do that and keep that architecture and kind of a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 39 of 48
contemporary fashion. We get a lot of compliments on our project, about how it looks,
and we have really strived to maintain a very good look out there in that -- that area of
the development of the city. We have -- are asking for 64 units. The application I
noticed said 68 and we were struggling with some open common space area
considerations and so we ended up sizing it down to 64 units so that we could maintain
the open space. We have a couple of ideas on even how to create even more open
space and so what you see before you is an application for 64 units with a mixture of
two bedroom and one bedroom, most of them being two bedroom, and I stand ready to
answer any questions you might have.
McCarvel: I have got a question. You said you wanted -- was this -- you said you
wanted flexibility to be three or four stories?
Olsen: Yes. That is correct.
McCarvel: Okay. And what height would you be at at four stories then?
Olsen: At four stories we would be about 50 and that zone allows for 65.
McCarvel: Okay. And what does that get you? You're still wanting to stay at the 64,
just more open space with inside the atrium area?
Olsen: Yeah. Inside the atrium area or we had even thought about breaking that -- that
huge building up into two buildings and having more common space in between,
creating a courtyard like we have on our other projects. That seems to have been a
really -- you know, when we first did that there wasn't anything like that we had ever
seen here in this valley period, not Meridian but anywhere, and that has really been just
a -- kind of a unique marker to our development where people just really -- I mean they
really spend a lot of time in that open space and so one of the ideas was instead of
having such a large building is to possibly have two and, then, by doing two we might
have to go to that -- that next story up, kind of like the Regency did, and, then, that
would provide us more open space. It's a -- it's a big consideration for us and what we
are noticing is in the marketplace that a lot of -- of the people that reside -- our residents
use that open space quite a bit.
McCarvel: Yeah. I would imagine it's an interesting space just kind of private and cut
off, so -- Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Madam Chair. So, then, along those lines what -- well, what -- is there -- are
there any buildings in that vicinity that are at that height or is this going to be the tallest?
Olsen: I would say the buildings that are closest in that height are the Regency.
Perreault: Okay.
Olsen: And that's split by our own -- our other projects, Verasso one, two and three. I
know that on the other side of Verasso, phase one, there is an open field and that open
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 40 of 48
field was approved for apartments as well and I know they are tall. So, I don't feel like it
will be, you know, out of place.
Perreault: Okay.
Olsen: You also have a shopping mall, which is -- which is the former Rosauers and
that's pretty tall, too. I don't think it will look out of place.
Perreault: Okay.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: If you -- if you go four stories are your -- are you planning on keeping the --
the unit count the same?
Olsen: Yes, I am.
Cassinelli: Okay. So, you're -- okay.
Olsen: Yeah. We are not going to change the density. One of the things that I haven't
brought up yet is the parking and, you know, we -- we are not actually just the builders.
We build it and we own it and parking is a big consideration and in this particular
diagram that you see before you we have 30 extra car spaces and there just can never
be enough parking. It just seems there can never be enough. And so we just
constantly -- we deal with the problems that we create. So, if we create solutions up
front, then, what happens is we get to deal with it down the end -- down the road and it's
much easier for us as we manage these units. Verasso one, two, and three have four
spaces per unit. They have two in the garage and, then, two outside and so we just
don't have -- we just don't have the problems. So, we really were cognizant of trying to
put a little extra parking in, so that the people could -- so, by nature of that, going up in
units would, then, decrease that extra parking space. So, we would not be going up in
units. The density would be at 64.
McCarvel: And those extra units -- that includes your compact spaces -- you have
plenty of regular size --
Olsen: We do. We do. That configuration you see as a one way and that's an 18 foot
lane, but that's a one way and you can really get by on like 15.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Olsen: So, technically, none of them needed to be compact. That was just the -- the
surveyor thought that the minute that we went under 20 that the spaces needed to be
compact. So, we actually went back through and relabeled that and changed that lane
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 41 of 48
to 17 and, then, none of them became compact anymore. There is a couple, but not a
lot.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: So, if you were to consider doing the two buildings and going four stories, is
that going to change the number of parking spaces?
Olsen: It might increase it --
Perreault: Okay.
Olsen: -- what we are thinking and so when you are covering so much building -- so
much land with that much building it just doesn't provide for, you know, the nice little
courtyards and it doesn't allow us to use the space as efficiently. So, I think that -- I
think either the one building configuration or the two building configuration, we will be
able to keep the extra parking that we have now and either make the decision to create
more open space or more parking, but probably more open space. I feel like we have
enough parking. Thirty extra spots is quite enough. But, again, we don't want to burden
our neighbors. We don't want them to park at Culver's and, then, have them call us and
get upset with us or something or -- or Les Schwab or something and so, you know, we
feel like we want to create the solution up front for our own problems and -- and make it
appropriate.
Holland: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Holland.
Holland: One follow up question. If you were to do the two buildings would that reduce
the number of covered parking spaces?
Olsen: Yeah. That would. That would. Because it would, then, be back to trying to put
both buildings under -- but maybe not. Maybe we could just do two. It just would
depend on the configuration of the 32, but -- but either way we would have some
covered, because that's -- that's the ordinance and people would want them covered.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Currently you're at -- at the three story configuration what is
your height?
Olsen: Currently at the three story configuration we are at 40 feet.
Cassinelli: Forty feet?
Olsen: Uh-huh.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 42 of 48
Cassinelli: Okay. You're saying you would be at 50 feet at four stories?
Olsen: Yeah. That's correct. Currently right now that very top floor is a vaulted ceiling,
so it's really tall. We just wouldn't have as much vault on the very top. If you go back to
-- can I do that from here?
Parsons: Sure.
Olsen: You can see on the very top of those roofs that that's kind of a flared roof and so
that was a lot more vaulted up there. That just wouldn't be as vaulted that way. It would
be down a little bit. Also the parking garage itself was a little bit taller underneath. If the
parking went outside it could get -- it could be made smaller as well. Shorter in that
distance. But, again, that zone allows for 65 feet and -- but I don't think we would even
be close to that.
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: You don't have a rendering of what that four story would look like?
Olsen: I don't have the rendering with me, but it would look very similar to the one
rendering that you see there. It just would be a little more flatter on the top of the roof.
But, you know, in consideration of the design of the Verasso project we have really tried
to maintain that to look really good. There -- there would be no way at this point that we
would do something to jeopardize what we have already built out there. That's number
one. Number two, there is the certificate of zoning compliance that -- that I feel is kind
of rigorous and I'm kind of glad for that, because it really pushed us at the very
beginning of the project and we are kind of glad for it now.
Yearsley: Okay. As a follow up -- and I will just state it out right now, I actually have
been intrigued with the four story idea. However, without actually seeing a concept I'm
not comfortable recommending approval of a concept and so allowing him to talk -- I
would be willing to continue it to have him come back with a four story if he would be
interested. But I guess for me personally -- and I will let others weigh in as well, but I'm
not comfortable, especially given the semi-residential to the -- to the east a little bit of
going that high without at least some purview by myself. So -- so just so you --
McCarvel: Yeah. I would tend to agree. That's why I started with that question in the
beginning is I'm trying to get my mind wrapped around what that would look like and,
unfortunately, I'm one of those people that's got to see it and especially since this is the
CUP and this is the only shot we have at it.
Yearsley: Absolutely.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 43 of 48
McCarvel: If you are considering -- I mean I would be willing to approve the rendering
you're showing us, but if you're considering four story or two buildings or something, I
think we would like to see that.
Olsen: Yeah.
McCarvel: So, I guess that's -- that's your choice at this point. Do we approve what's in
front of us and, then, you're strapped to building -- I mean what's your timeline on this?
Olsen: Oh, you know, in the next few months. We are fine.
McCarvel: Okay.
Olsen: If it meant coming back and taking a little bit more time that's -- that's totally fine
with us. We are not in a rush to -- to go to market quickly. We have our hands full. We
are building quite briskly now and should be done in the next, you know, six to seven
weeks, so --
McCarvel: And just so you know, I mean I think this is beautiful and I think that's a very
interesting concept and I think that courtyard especially in such a busy area like that,
having an enclosed private space, instead of open private space to all the noise and the
traffic and everything, I think that's a really unique -- really great idea. So, yeah, I'm
happy with this and I would be excited -- if you are thinking about changing it, I think we
would like to see it, so it's --
Olsen: Yeah.
McCarvel: -- your choice at this point.
Olsen: We will accept that.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: So, if you were to -- I'm not a fan of -- of the length. I'm not a fan of the long
building.
Olsen: Yeah.
Perreault: I really like the idea of the two buildings, but also taking into consideration
the four stories, what that brings along with it, but -- so, then, if that's the case would the
open space or the courtyard, then, be open to the street or is it still going to be private
and enclosed?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 44 of 48
Olsen: It would be -- a lot of times on a project like this -- we call this a podium deck.
One side is left open and that's for sun, actually. That way you can grow things. Not
that you can't grow things in a completely enclosed courtyard, but in this particular case
we would arrange the buildings so that they were in a courtyard like fashion, keeping
with the same kind of spirit that we have already created and so it would be open, but
as far as sound goes that's a consideration, because I built phase one when Records
didn't go through and now it goes through and it's a lot more noisy and so -- so that
being said, I think we could create a courtyard with two buildings and I think we could
create a sound barrier with landscaping and so I think we can get the best of both
worlds with the -- with the two buildings and get a little more open space. It's also
harder to create a courtyard on top of a parking garage and so we would have a little bit
more flexibility in working with the ground, as opposed to working on top of a cement
slab. Not that we couldn't do it, but it's just that -- I think would be easier. So, I have no
issue going back and maybe generating a site plan that shows both. We were a little
taken off guard, because the city code for building next to the property line -- or five feet
away is -- is fine. We actually came to this -- this Commission and got an approval for
that. But the building code changes that. That was kind of like last minute. And so,
then, we were kind of stressing out and, then, going quite quickly to try to figure this out
and keep the open space requirement. But we have settled on 64 and we can either
look at that as doing one single building or two and I am more than happy to bring it
back before the Commission, so that you guys can see it and -- because we want a
great project.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: Is it -- I'm just throwing this out there. Is it possible to do -- if you do split it
up and do two buildings, I'm assuming it's running lengthwise from Records from east to
west is the length of that building; correct? So, it's running -- you're getting -- it's -- it's
going -- if you're standing at Records it's going back towards the co-op -- or I mean
towards --
McCarvel: Eagle.
Cassinelli: -- former Rosauers there.
Olsen: Yeah. That's a long tangent.
Cassinelli: If you split it up into two buildings, is it possible to do one building three
stories closer to Records, the second building at four stories -- is that a possibility to still
get the unit count and do some of the things you want to do?
Olsen: We could have two unique buildings by doing that, but each building would
create its own set of circumstances with architects. It would be easier to do two -- two
of the same type of buildings and almost make them like towers, so that each one
looked the same. But back to your question about the long running tangent, we would
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 45 of 48
have the ability to split it up and actually use the building to block a little bit of the sound
if we put it -- if we put the courtyard -- I'm just trying to think what's the best way to put
this -- parallel -- if we put the buildings parallel to the Rosauers building so that each
building was parallel with some open spaces for parking and, then, we, basically, block
that sound and created the courtyard with the two buildings, just kind of like we have
done everywhere else. And so without a site plan it's probably difficult to -- to see that.
I have looked at it a couple times, so it's easier for me, but -- but, yeah, two different
buildings might be a little more difficult.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? I guess my question is do you
have these renderings available? Is this a short turnaround? Do you want --
Olsen: Sure.
McCarvel: -- to come back --
Olsen: We could come back on -- I think September 6th. If that seems full and you
wanted to bump us, we could bump to the next meeting. We are fine.
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission --
McCarvel: Yes, Bill.
Parsons: -- the first hearing in September -- it has five projects on it. I wouldn't say it's
full, but one -- one application could take a while and the other ones filled up as well.
So, both of those are filled. I would almost --
Olsen: October?
Parsons: -- go on the 6th or the -- the next one in October, but I will leave it up to you.
If it's just to look at elevations I don't think it -- and we don't really have anyone here to
testify and I don't think we are going to take a lot of deliberation on looking --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Parsons: -- at some new renderings, so I think we could probably get through it fairly
quick on the 6th would be my opinion, if that gives the applicant enough time to pull his
information together, because typically we like to have something ten days prior to the
public hearing, so that we can get -- you want staff's take on the elevation changes, too.
So, maybe the -- the 20th or maybe the first hearing in October may be the best option.
McCarvel: Okay.
Parsons: Either way I don't --
McCarvel: You're saying the 20th is pretty full --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 46 of 48
Parsons: Maybe they want to go to the 20th, so we can get Sonya those revised
plans, so she can at least let you know how that impacts the open space if there is two
structures --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Parsons: -- and the parking and all of those things. We don't want to --
McCarvel: Well, I guess I'm asking are you more comfortable with moving it to the
October date? October 4th?
Parsons: I think we are going to be filling up this winter, so I --
McCarvel: Okay.
Parsons: Things are coming in and we are pushing things to the 4th already, so I can
tell you it's -- it's stacking up and so no time is a good time, but to me I don't want to
leave the applicant hanging out there too long, but at the same time I want staff to have
enough time to review it and get our take on -- on their changes, so that you can make
the right decision.
Olsen: I would be okay with October. That gives us a little more time to look at
everything and just make sure everything is perfect.
McCarvel: Okay. October 4th then.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: I move to continue file number H-2018-0071 to the hearing date of October
4th for the purpose of reviewing some additional renderings.
Yearsley: Second.
Cassinelli: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2018-0071 to October 4. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: Anything -- any -- wait a minute.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 47 of 48
Parsons: Everyone is getting antsy up there. Madam Chair, Members of the
Commission, I did have one last item. As I mentioned to you, I had a couple things to
share with you this evening and so thank you, Chad, appreciate you working with us
and sticking around. So, just -- just more -- some -- some information for you. So, over
the last couple months staff has been working on a revised staff report template and
what we have -- we have gone through the directors, we have gone to City Council, we
are fine tuning that document as -- as we sit here as the days move along, but at some
point, either the next hearing or the following hearing, I want to prepare a memo for you
and share that document with you and try to get your take on it and your review of it as
well. But it will be a drastic change from what you see now and read now. There will be
a community matrix section of it. There will be a project summary table at the beginning
of the report that gives you the high level items of what the request is, how many lots,
the density, level of service for the roads. You will have all of that in a table format. Did
ACHD provide comments? Yes or no. Are they going into planning -- are they going to
their commission, because the applicant can reach an agreement with ACHD. And,
then, there will be a community matrix section that will say how does this comply with
the city's master plan for water and sewer. Are schools overcrowded? Yes or no. Are
there pathways. Yes or no. I mean there is going to be a lot more information in there
to help you make a better informed decision on applications and we will get that to you
earlier in the report than later in the report. So, again, I'm excited about what's kind of
transpiring, but I just wanted to put that on your radar to keep your eyes open for that. It
is going to be something new and approved. And, again, we have coordinated with
Fire, Police, school district -- we have reached out a wide net to get the right comments
I think for you -- you guys and the Council as you deliberate on these land use
applications. We are trying to get you the right information and make sure we are -- we
are capturing everything. And as you know, we are having more and more residents
coming to these hearings and complaining about schools, the roads, density, so having
that at your fingertips readily available I think is going to be a great tool and resource for
you all. On that note I will go to the next item that I wanted to share with you and as
part of your service to the City of Meridian the city -- the planning division actually pays
for your membership to the American Planning Association. As part of that membership
you have access to their website and this is their web -- and I pulled it up here just in
case many -- many of you may not know or maybe you do or you don't, but at least I
wanted to provide this as a resource to you as you get up there and deliberate on land
use application. A particular site has a lot of things on policies, on training, on best
practices for -- for our planning profession. It's certainly -- I'm -- I'm a certified planner,
so I spent quite a bit of time looking at this site and trying to find ideas and continue my
education and learning latest trends on planning. So, I didn't know if some of you were
aware that you were members of this or not, but I guess my question for you tonight is if
you -- I wanted to share this with you and if you see this being a value, the city will
continue to provide for that annual membership. If it's something that you guys don't
think you would use and you haven't taken advantage of this resource yet, then, I would
just ask that at least give me some feedback as to whether or not you want us to
continue paying for that, that you see value in it and that way I can at least pass it along
to Caleb and our director to see where they want to go moving forward. But, again, I
just wanted to let you know there is a resource here. We pay for the membership. I'm
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 48 of 48
just asking you to follow up with me as to whether or not you see value in it or if you -- if
you have been using this or if you even knew about it. And so I will close with that
remark and stand for any questions you may have, at least regarding this website or
maybe if you want to let me know if any of you have looked at this site or were even
aware of it and so I can kind of gauge that as part of my conversation with Caleb
sometime next week.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: What is our -- how do we log on? Username and password. What is the
actual website? Is it --
Parsons: American Planning Association is how I get to it. I get a log on from the city
and so I don't -- I'm not sure how all that works and that's why I said I would have to do
more research on that. Again, Caleb had mentioned to me that -- to bring it up and see
if you guys knew about it and we are taking advantage of this. So, I don't know if you
guys have your own membership numbers or how all that works, but I can certainly
follow up with him and get more information for you.
McCarvel: I know I have not been given one. I don't know if -- no. Okay. So, we have,
obviously, not been using it.
Parsons: Do you get magazines in your mail -- mailbox from the city?
McCarvel: Sometimes they bring them by here. Some -- I mean I think it's a couple
times a year they bring one by, but it's not been consistent.
Parsons: Typically on that -- I wish I had one here, but I thought they put your member
number right on your mailing label on it, so if you haven't noticed it you might want to
look.
McCarvel: And I say it hasn't been consistent, but I don't know how often they come, so
maybe it is consistent.
Parsons: On a regular basis you should be getting -- I don't know if it's --
McCarvel: Is it monthly or quarterly or --
Parsons: It seems like it's monthly. I have a whole bunch of magazines in my --
McCarvel: I would say, obviously, at this point we didn't realize we had this available to
us at the website level. Is this something that's coming up for renewal next week or at
the end of the year?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 16, 2018
Page 49 of 48
Parsons: Well, it's something that we budget every year. So, I just -- I would imagine
it's part of our budget cycle already and certainly if you want to get back to me -- if you
find a magazine and see if there is a login number and I can try to get some more
information from Caleb and maybe next meeting we can discuss it and you guys can let
me know what you think and I will share that with Caleb.
McCarvel: Okay.
Yearsley: That works.
Parsons: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Perreault, real quick.
Perreault: Oh. I make a motion to close the public hearing for August 16th, 2018.
Holland: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for August 16.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Before Bill as another --
MEETING ADJPVRNED A 04 P. M.
APPRIOVED ORECqR l IN 5 FIL EOCEEDINGS.) 09 06
F(#i0c RVEL - CHAIRMAN
ATTEST: ��' ''l /1 p;�
AlMYV-AKelV.Aff3r3'N
DATE APPROVED
AUS ,
ST
I. city. of r
�E IDIAN
IDAHO
`sem SEAL A)
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Date: August 16, 2018
Agenda Item Number: 3A
Project File Number:
Item Title: Approve Minutes of August 2, 2018
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Notes
I TEM SHEET
C ouncil Agenda I tem - 3.A .
Presenter:
Estimated Time f or P resentation:
Title of I tem - Approve M inutes of August 2, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission M eeting
AT TAC HM E NT S:
Description Type Upload D ate
Minutes Cover Memo 8/3/2018
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 3 of 106
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 2, 2018
Page 10 of 10
Parsons: Thank you, Madam -- turn my mike on. Sorry, Dean. Yes, I do have one
housekeeping item that I do want to bring up with the commissioners this evening and
kind of kudos for Caleb and his -- and Brian for doing all this work and bringing this
information to you guys. It is an important -- I think -- I want to express my appreciation
for what you guys do and your attendance here at -- at these meetings. I know they are
-- they can get long. We get a lot of questions from -- from concerned citizens and a lot
of these things are discussed repeatedly over and over at these hearings. So, again, I
want to express my appreciation, but I would also want to share with you that it's
important that you guys are all here in attendance. If you recall a couple years ago we
did expand the body of the Planning and Zoning Commission from seven to -- from five
to seven and that was the intent. We were getting more and more citizens and we
wanted to have a more balanced representation from this body to provide that feedback.
So, I just wanted to remind the Commission this evening that when that change -- when
we changed the law from five to seven, we changed in our code that the Commission
was -- also had an expectation to attend a certain number of meetings and so I'm not
going to read into the record as to what that policy is, but I have here -- put up here on
the screen and just let you know that a lot of this came down from the clerk's office.
They are going to do a quarterly report and kind of track the attendances for all of our
Commissions, not just the Planning and Zoning Commission, and I will be sharing that
with you as I get those reports from -- from our clerk's office. So, again, just -- just FYI
for you, but I just thought it was an important note for all of you as you continue to serve
on this Commission and thank you for your service.
McCarvel: Thank you. That being the end of our agenda, could I get a motion?
Yearsley: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley.
Yearsley: Move that we adjourn.
Wilson: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:28 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
r S411674W�-
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
August 2, 2018
Page 11 of 10
RHONDA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTEST e��° AU�yy
.JAY ES - ITY CLERK C✓' "� , %90 >
Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
August 16, 2018
Item #4A: Belveal Subdivision
Vicinity/Zoning Map
Conceptual
Development Plan
Conceptual Elevations
Short Plat
Landscape Plan
Item #4B: Verraso Village North
Vicinity/Zoning Map
Site Plan
Landscape Plan
Conceptual Rendering/Building Elevations
Item #4C: Zions Bank Drive Through
Site Plan
Landscape Plan
Proposed Building Elevations
Item #4D: Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision
Landscape Plan
Proposed Building Elevations
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Date: August 16, 2018
Agenda Item Number: 4A
Project File Number: Public Hearing H-2018-0076
Item Title: Belveal Subdivision by TTS Development, LLC., Located
at 385 Locust Grove Road
1. Request: Rezone property from L-0 (1.494 acres) to C -C; and
2. Request: Short Plat consisting of two (2) commercial building lots
on 1.33 acres if land in a proposed C -C zoning district; and
3. Request: Modification to Development Agreement to change from
those uses allowed within the L -O zoning district to those allowed
within the C -C zoning district
Meeting Notes
I TEM SHEET
C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.A .
Presenter:
Estimated Time f or P resentation:
Title of I tem - Public Hearing for B elveal Subdivision (H-2018-0076) by T T S Development,
L L C , L ocated at 385 S. L ocust G rove Rd.
C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials
C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing
AT TAC HM E NT S:
Description Type Upload D ate
S taff Report Cover Memo 8/10/2018
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 15 of 106
Hearing Date: 8/16/2018
Hearing Type: PZ
Item Number: 4-A
Project Name: Belveal Subdivision
Project Number: H-2018-0076
Signature NameAddress City-State-ZipFor Against Neutral I Wish To TestifySign In Date/Time
Changes to Agenda: None
Item #4A: Belveal Subdivision (H-2018-0076)
Application(s):
Rezone
Short Plat
Development Agreement Modification
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.49 acres of land, zoned L-O, located at 385 S. Locust Grove
Rd.
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:
North: Rural residential property, zoned R1 in Ada County
East: Locust Grove Rd. & SFR properties, zoned R-15
South: Vacant & developed commercial property, zoned C-G
West: Industrial property, zoned I-L
History: This property was annexed in 1999 with the requirement of a DA, which was later modified. A daycare center currently
operates in the existing building at the west end of the site
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C
Summary of Request: A rezone of 1.49 acres of land from the L-O to the C-C zoning district is proposed consistent with the MU-C
FLUM designation. A conceptual development plan was submitted showing how the site is proposed to develop with 2 commercial
buildings, associated parking areas and a driveway access via S. Locust Grove Rd.; conceptual elevations were also submitted for the
future buildings on the site.
A short plat is proposed consisting of 2 building lots on 1.33 acres land in a proposed C-C zoning district. There is one existing
structure on the western portion of this site that will be retained until redevelopment occurs at some point in the future. The concept
plan demonstrates how the site may redevelop upon removal of the structure.
One driveway access exists to this site via S. Locust Grove Road Drive which is proposed to remain & provide access to both of the
proposed lots. Because local street access is not available, the UDC requires the property owner to grant cross-access/ingress-egress
easements to adjoining properties. Therefore, staff recommends a cross-access easement and driveway stubs are provided to the
property to the north & to the south.
A 25’ wide landscaped street buffer and sidewalk exists along Locust Grove in accord with UDC standards.
A modification to the existing DA is proposed to update the uses allowed on the property from those allowed in the L-O district to those
allowed in the C-C district consistent with the proposed rezone request. Staff recommends new provisions are included in the DA that
require future development of the site to substantially comply with the conceptual development plan and building elevations associated
with this application; and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.
Written Testimony: Kent Brown, Applicant’s Representative (in agreement w/staff report)
Staff Recommendation: Approval
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-
2018-0076, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 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-
0076, as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0076 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
a.
qwmmw
' _ • '' - �� � �r„4 • '� ,.1•.. r >s-' _r4 `. 1 r < <.., _ ' y � . �Li�r+ � - ;f K • i � p.� �r . Sr`
• 70,
'` _.•..,,•"`. ����•�+` ., i" �•��t • 1/f,� � i � 'fir; .�,•
..., rr:• %f%,-.. � .L `!ice �[�'•. .• :
f
K
A I -
NEW MIM
L-ef
,• s f _
49
A 116
+ _ .. .. 1, _ r� _ a.. �� ~ _ - ~ •� _ }�
'� ' y •.� V eR �e•w ,R''y's _ Mc •� ' ., .. .. ., ��t4 Yf� Z•
—mr
sem'
:•�„�' 41 � °i !'���irr .� 1]Q Y�,+ r - ' •} � .moi y , � . �, R..'A.
.r "fit � �►- : r' .1�, ra . � ,.� � ° �� :. '� �-lA - ,. A"if ,~�11 � �a���s+1R�.�+y��
- �lq, r, i _ � ' Ir• •' d � � . Y � .r`�' 7 ;, •'�� � C �- � "1'I8 "o�ir `fir-.'" �, `�
.f . `F ,�s* r% l rT i � f ' �1 r4• R'm' Lt - .T '� rye :' ►a
4 �� `s���•��• ',:.,�;. •�^. �� '.tet.* y►"�'��' !'�.� ��^`� 'i VIlk
ms's '•.'�"�r' � r'. a / ' Ig �.�� � �" A• �*"it �� �T�'�� � •l!� � �^�`�" �- �'L.-��
i ! " tel\\' �'.rl* �~ •>4'i� �n f�. —�► MI' °�''•� tylia •u
• -- ?tea #Y M1r S
d !
{� •�•`� R �� �_ 1�►" EL,
'T_^ftb
OWIft. 44M'
A IMP
104
`fir'. � � �. • i� �. ] �, �. �;��'�'rt....`L..`•.,�1a�� W.�i��(i� s wy'���►lp �-q.����� ',~•
u�►y1wI.
[1�i!wwsi
.,u.l�:�
��� - "=:'•tic•'` ���
n r..:-
1 c
�I� � __ _. i.5_l�,
'. �'.
��1 '�:
s�
•,, _
-- :, •�
-LL ._
1' � � M -
��� - _.s�
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 1
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date: August 16, 2018
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA (H-2018-0076)
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant, TTS Development, LLC, has submitted an application for a rezone (RZ) of 1.49 acres
of land from the L-O to the C-C zoning district; a modification to the existing development agreement
(MDA) to update the uses allowed on the property from those allowed in the L-O district to those
allowed in the C-C district; and a short plat (SHP) consisting of 2 building lots on 1.33 acres of land
in the proposed C-C zoning district.
II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed RZ, SHP and MDA applications in accord with the
provisions in Exhibit B and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit D.
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-2018-0076, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August
16, 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-2018-0076, as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the
following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0076 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 385 S. Locust Grove Road, in the NE ¼ of Section 18, Township 3 North,
Range 1 East (Parcel No.: S1118110161)
B. Owners:
TTS Developments, LLC
745 N. Ralstin St.
Meridian, ID 83642
C. Applicant:
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 16 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 2
Same as owner
D. Representative:
Kent Brown, Kent Brown Planning Services
3161 E. Springwood Dr.
Meridian, ID 83642
E. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information.
V. PROCESS FACTS
A. The subject application is for a rezone, short plat and development agreement modification. A
public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on the
rezone request and only before the City Council on the short plat and development agreement
modification request, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: July 27, 2018
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: July 20, 2018
D. Published on Next Door: July 24, 2018
E. Applicant posted notice on site(s) on: August 6, 2018
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: There is a childcare facility on the western portion of the site;
the remainder of the site is undeveloped. The property is zoned L-O.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Rural residential property, zoned R1 in Ada County
2. East: Single-family residential properties in Bellabrook Subdivision, zoned R-15
3. South: Vacant and developed commercial property, zoned C-G
4. West: Industrial property in Medimont Subdivision, zoned I-L
C. History of Previous Actions:
This property was annexed in 1999 with the requirement of a development agreement
[Woodbridge AZ-99-020 (parcel B of the annexation area), Resolution #287, DA Inst.
#100006603].
A modification to the development agreement as approved in 2009 (MDA-09-002, Inst.
#109074711).
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance for a daycare center for up to 28 children per day was
approved in 2012 (CZC-12-064).
A Certificate of Zoning Compliance for a 2,500 square foot addition to the existing daycare
center and an increase in the number of children cared for during the day to 130 was
approved in 2017 (A-2017-0191).
D. Utilities:
1. Location of sewer: A sanitary sewer main intended to provide service to the subject parcel,
currently exists in S. Locust Grove Road. A new sewer main will need to be extended into
the property to provide service to the individual lots.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 17 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 3
2. Location of water: A water main intended to provide service to the subject parcel, currently
exists in S. Locust Grove Road. A new water main will need to be extended into the property
to provide service to the individual lots.
3. Issues or concerns: None
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There are no waterways that cross this site.
2. Hazards: Staff is unaware of any hazards that may exist on this property.
3. Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the flood plain.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates this property as Mixed-Use
Community (MU-C).
The purpose of the MU-C designation is 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. Non-
residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use – Neighborhood
areas, but not as large as in Mixed Use – Regional areas. 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 are encouraged.
Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted below
(Figure 3-3 in the Comprehensive Plan, pg. 27).
Policies: 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):
“Require appropriate landscape and street buffers along transportation corridors (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.).” (3.06.02F)
A 25-foot wide street buffer with landscaping is required along S. Locust Grove Road, an
arterial street, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. There is an existing
landscaped street buffer that complies with UDC standards.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 18 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 4
“Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels.” (3.06.01F)
If a residential use still exists adjacent to the north property boundary at the time of lot
development and/or redevelopment, a 25-foot wide buffer will be required in accord with
UDC Table 11-2B-3, landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.
“Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D)
Only one access for this site is approved as shown on the plat; there is no local street access
available to this property.
“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 service is available and will be extended by the applicant with
development of the property in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
A. Purpose Statement of Zone (UDC 11-2B-1): 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 (6) districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures
accommodated in the 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).
B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2B-2 lists the principal permitted
(P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the C-C zoning district. Any use not
explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use is prohibited. Flex space and office uses are listed as
a permitted use in the C-C zoning district. Expansion of the existing daycare use requires CUP
approval.
C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district.
D. Landscaping: NA (Street buffer landscaping already exists on this site in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.)
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:
1. Development Agreement (DA) Modification: A modification to the existing DA to update
the uses allowed on the property from those allowed in the L-O district to those allowed in the C-
C district consistent with the proposed rezone request. The existing DA provisions are included in
Exhibit A.6.
Staff recommends new provisions are included in the DA that require future development of the
site to substantially comply with the conceptual development plan and building elevations
included in Exhibits A.4 and A.5; and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards
Manual. See Section I in Exhibit B for the changes recommended by Staff to the DA. No other
changes are proposed or recommended by Staff.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 19 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 5
2. Rezone:
The applicant has applied for a rezone of 1.49 acres of land from the L-O to the C-C zoning
district. As discussed above in Section VII, the proposed zoning is consistent with the
corresponding FLUM designation of MU-C and the policies in the Comprehensive Plan as noted.
The legal description submitted with the application, included in Exhibit C, shows the boundaries
of the property proposed to be rezoned.
The applicant has submitted a conceptual development plan, included in Exhibit A.2, showing
how the site is proposed to develop with 2 commercial buildings, associated parking areas and a
driveway access via S. Locust Grove Rd. Conceptual elevations were also submitted for the
future buildings on the site, included in Exhibit A.5.
3. Short Plat
The applicant has submitted a short plat application consisting of 2 building lots on 1.33 acres
land in a proposed C-C zoning district (see Exhibit A.3).
Existing Structures: There is one existing structure on the western portion of this site that will
be retained until redevelopment occurs. The concept plan demonstrates how the site may
redevelop upon removal of this structure.
Dimensional Standards: Future development on the site is required to comply with the
dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district. The structures
depicted on the concept plan comply with the setback requirements of the district.
Access: One driveway access exists to this site via S. Locust Grove Road Drive which is
proposed to remain. This driveway will provide access to both of the proposed lots. An easement
is depicted on the plat on Lot 2, Block 1 for the driveway and Note #6 describes the easement. No
other accesses are proposed or approved with this application.
Because local street access is not available, the UDC (11-3A-3A) requires the property owner to
grant cross-access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties. Therefore, staff
recommends a cross-access easement and driveway stubs are provided to the property to
the north (parcel #S1118110130) and to the south (parcel #R5901170120). A copy of the
recorded easements should be submitted with the short plat for City Engineer signature and
a note should be included on the plat referencing the recorded instrument numbers of the
easements.
Waterways: There are no waterways that cross this site.
Utilities: The UDC (11-3A-21) requires all development to connect to the City water and sewer
system unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer services are currently
provided to the existing building at the rear of the property.
Adequate fire protection shall be required in accord with the appropriate fire district standards.
Street lighting is required to be installed with development of this property in accord with the
City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.
Pressurized Irrigation (PI): The UDC (11-3A-15) requires an underground PI system to be
provided for this development in accord with UDC 11-3A-15.
Landscaping: A 25-foot wide street buffer landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC
11-3B-7C exists on the site; no other landscaping is required with the subdivision. Note: If the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 20 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 6
abutting property to the north is still a residential use at the time of lot development, a 25-foot
wide landscape buffer will be required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C.
Sidewalk: Sidewalks are required to be constructed with development in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Typically, a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk would be required
along S. Locust Grove Rd., an arterial street; however, because there is an existing attached
sidewalk that is in good condition, the Director is waiving this requirement as allowed by UDC
11-3A-17C.
Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7C.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC is required to be submitted prior to issuance
of any building permits on the site to ensure compliance with UDC standards and the conditions
noted in Exhibit B.
Design Review: All future structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in
the Architectural Standards Manual. A design review application is required to be submitted
concurrently with the CZC application(s).
In summary, Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone, short plat and development
agreement modification requests for this site per the provisions listed in Exhibit B of this report
in accord with the findings contained in Exhibit D.
X. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings/Other
1. Vicinity/Zoning and Aerial Map
2. Conceptual Development Plan (dated: March 12, 2018)
3. Short Plat (dated: 2/20/2017)
4. Landscape Plan/Exhibit Map for Lot Layout (dated: 2/20/2017)
5. Conceptual Building Elevations (dated: 12/14/2017)
6. Existing & Proposed Development Agreement Provisions
B. Agency & Department Comments
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Rezone Boundary
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 21 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 7
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning & Aerial Map
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 22 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 8
2. Conceptual Development Plan (dated: March 12, 2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 23 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 9
3. Short Plat (dated: 04/11/2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 24 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 10
4. Landscape Plan (dated: 08/23/2017)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 25 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 11
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 26 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 12
5. Conceptual Building Elevations (dated: 12/14/2017)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 27 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 13
6. Existing Development Agreement Provisions
Section 4 – USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT:
4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those in the L -O zoning under
City’s Zoning Ordinance codified as Meridian Unified Development Code §11-2B-2.
4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification
of this Agreement.
Section 6 – CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.
6.1 “Owner” shall develop the “Property” in accordance with the following special
conditions:
6.1.1 In accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of this Agreement, which are adopted
herein at reference as if set forth at length.
6.1.2 Sanitary sewer and water service shall be extended to and through the property within
three years of the approval of this Amendment by City Council or unless development of
the Property happens before the 36 month time limit is up. The Owner/Developer shall
submit a surety (letter of credit or cash), along with a bid, for 110% of the cost of
installation of these improvements prior to issuance of the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance. The Owner/Developer shall coordinate routing and placement of lines with
the Public Works Department.
6.1.3 The undeveloped portion of the Property shall be mowed and kept free of weeds greater
than 8” tall.
6.1.4 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for the establishment of the proposed use.
6.1.5 Landscaping (i.e. street buffers, buffers to residential uses, parking lot landscaping, e tc.)
shall be installed on the Property in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B.
Landscaping may be installed in phases over a period of three years of the approval of
this Amendment by City Council or unless development of the Property happens before
the 36 month time limit is up. A landscape plan, in compliance with current UDC
standards, shall be submitted for review and approval with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance application. A surety (letter of credit or cash), along with a bid, for 110% of
the amount of the cost of the required landscape improvements, shall be submitted to the
City prior to issuance of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 28 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 14
B. EXHIBIT B - AGENCY & DEPARTMENT COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 Development Agreement Modification
1.1.1 The Development Agreement for Woodbridge (AZ-99-020, Inst. #100006603; MDA-09-002,
Inst. #109074711) shall be amended as follows:
Section 4:
4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those in the L-O C-C zoning under
City’s Zoning Ordinance codified as Meridian Unified Development Code 11-2B-2.
Include new provisions in the agreement, as follows:
“Future development of the site shall substantially comply with the conceptual development
plan and building elevations included in Exhibit ___.” [Include the conceptual development
plan and building elevations in staff report Exhibits A.4 and A.5 in the development
agreement as an exhibit(s)].
Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural
Standards Manual and structure and site design standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-19.
Note: All other provisions remain the same.
The amended DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the City within six (6)
months of the City Council granting approval of the modification.
1.2 Site Specific Conditions of Approval – Short Plat
1.2.1 Applicant shall meet all terms of the development agreement for this subdivision.
1.2.2 The final plat prepared by Idaho Survey Group, LLC, stamped on 04/11/2018 by Gregory G.
Carter, shall be revised as follows:
a. Include a note stating direct lot access via S. Locust Grove Road, other than the access
approved with this subdivision, is prohibited as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3.
b. The 25-foot wide street buffer required along S. Locust Grove Rd. shall be on a common lot
or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner of business owner’s
association as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2a; depict and include a note accordingly.
c. Include a call-out for the easement described in Note #7 and graphically depicted on the plat
(i.e. see note #7).
d. Include the symbol depicted on the plat for the access driveway in the Legend.
e. Include a note on the plat referencing the recorded instrument numbers of the cross-access
easements required to the properties to the north (parcel #S1118110130) and south (parcel
#R5901170120).
1.2.3 The landscape plan prepared by Breckon Land Design, dated 08/23/2017, is approved as
submitted.
1.2.4 Submit a copy of the recorded easements granting cross-access to the properties to the north
(parcel #S1118110130) and south (parcel #R5901170120) with the plat for City Engineer
signature.
1.2.5 All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7C.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 29 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 15
1.2.6 If the City Engineer’s signature has not been obtained on the short plat within two (2) years of the
City Council’s approval thereof, the short plat shall become null and void unless a time extension
is obtained, per UDC 11-6B-7.
1.2.7 Prior to submittal for the City Engineer’s signature, have the Certificate of Owners and the
accompanying acknowledgement signed and notarized.
1.2.8 Applicant shall be responsible for the extension of sanitary sewer and/or water services to each
lot, and abandon any existing services that do not fall within design guidelines.
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 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.
1.3.3 The applicant has a continuing obligation to comply with the outdoor lighting provisions as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-11.
1.3.4 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.
4. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
2.1.1 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
2.1.2 Applicant shall be responsible for the extension of sanitary sewer and water mainlines into the
site to provide service to the individual lots. Any existing stubs that are not utilized for this
project will need to be properly abandoned per Meridian Public Works Department Standards.
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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 30 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 16
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.
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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 31 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 17
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.
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 The Police Department has no comments on this application.
4. FIRE DEPARTMENT
Project Overview:
1. Level of Service Travel time from nearest fire station (level of service expectation = 5
minutes)
This development is 2:00 minutes from the nearest fire station. If approved, the Fire
Department can meet the response time requirements.
2. Resource reliability Current reliability of closest fire station (expectation should be 85% or
greater)
This development is closest to Fire Station #3. Current reliability is 90% from this station
and meets the targeted goal of 85% or greater.
3. Resource allocation Risk Factor (1=residential, 2=residential with hazards, 3=commercial,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 32 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 18
4=commercial with hazards, 5=industrial)
This proposed commercial development has a risk factor of 3, in which current resources
would be adequate to supply service to this propose project.
4. Resources available Water Supply (list expectations)
Water supply for this proposed development requires 2250 gallons per minute for two
hours. (Approximate – see appendix B of the 2015 International Fire Code)
5. Accessibility Roadway Access, traffic
This project meets all required road widths and turnarounds. There will need to be “NO
Parking Fire Lane” signs installed on the driveway.
6. Specialty needs
a. Aerial device needed for development?
i. If yes, is one available within a 10 minute travel time
This proposed development will require an aerial device response in the case of a structure
fire. The closest truck company is 2 minutes travel time (in perfect conditions) to the
proposed development, and therefore the Fire Department can meet this need in the
required timeframe.
b. Other specialty needs (water rescue, hazmat, technical rescue)?
i. If yes, is one available within a 5 minute travel time?
There are no specialty needs on this project.
7. Other Comments
There appears to not be any additional parking for visitors. The fire department is
concerned that the roadways will become congested with vehicles.
4.1 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.
4.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department or
their designee 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 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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 33 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 19
additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project.
4.3 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.
4.4 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.
4.5 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.
4.7 Provide a Fire Department Key box entry system for the complex prior to
occupancy as set forth in International Fire Code Section 506.
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 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.
5. PARKS DEPARTMENT
5.1 The Park’s Department has no comments on this application.
6. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
6.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
6.1.1 Consistent with ACHD’s Minor Improvements Policy, the applicant should be required to
correct deficiencies or replace deteriorated facilities on Locust Grove Road abutting the
site.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 34 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 20
6.1.2 Locust Grove Road is classified as a minor arterial roadway. Other than the access
specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to this roadway
and should be noted on the final plat.
6.1.3 A Traffic Impact Fee may be assessed by ACHD and will be due prior to issuance of a
building permit. Please contact the ACHD Planner (see below) for information regarding
impact fees.
6.1.4 Plans shall be submitted to the ACHD Development Services Department for plans
acceptance, and impact fee assessment (if an assessment is applicable).
6.1.5 Comply with the Standard Conditions of Approval as noted below.
6.2 Standard Conditions of Approval
6.2.1 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).
6.2.2 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).
6.2.3 Private Utilities including sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the
ACHD right-of-way.
6.2.4 In accordance with District policy, 7203.6, 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.
6.2.5 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.
6.2.6 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.
6.2.7 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be
borne by the developer.
6.2.8 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.
6.2.9 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.
6.2.10 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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 35 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 21
6.2.11 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy.
6.2.12 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.
6.2.13 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 August 16, 2018 – Page 36 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 22
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Rezone Boundary
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 37 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 23
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 38 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 24
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Rezone Findings:
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 annexation, the
Council shall make the following findings:
a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan;
The Applicant is proposing to rezone the subject 1.49 acre property with a C-C zoning district
consistent with the MU-C FLUM designation for this property. Staff finds that the proposed
map amendment and future commercial use of the property complies with the provisions of
the Comprehensive Plan and should be compatible with the adjacent residential, commercial
and industrial uses (see section VII above for more information).
b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Staff finds that the proposed map amendment to the C-C zoning district is consistent with the
purpose statement for the commercial 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 map amendment will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare. 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 rezoning this property to the C-C zoning district is in the best interest of the City.
2. Short Plat Findings:
In consideration of a short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings:
a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with the Unified
Development Code;
The Comprehensive Plan designates the future land use of this property as MU-C; the proposed
zoning is C-C. The proposed short plat complies with the Comprehensive Plan and the
dimensional standards in the UDC for the C-C zoning district.
b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate
the proposed development;
Staff finds that public services are adequate to serve the site.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 39 of 106
Belveal Subdivision – RZ, SHP, MDA H-2018-0076 PAGE 25
c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s
capital improvements program;
Staff finds that the development will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds.
All required utilities are being provided with the development of the property at the developer’s
expense.
d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Staff finds that the development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting
services. The developer and/or future lot owner(s) will finance the extension of sewer, water,
utilities and pressurized irrigation to serve the project.
e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Staff recognizes the fact that traffic and noise may increase with the approval of this subdivision;
however, staff does not believe that any additional amount generated will be detrimental to the
general welfare of the public in the surrounding area. Staff finds that the development of this site
will not involve uses that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the public health,
safety or general welfare.
f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
Staff is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features associated with the
development of this site.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 40 of 106
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Date: August 16, 2018
Agenda Item Number: 4B
Project File Number: Public Hearing H-2018-0071
C D 1)� d- e0_ -b 9 -6 -1 r
Item Title: Verasso Village North by Chad Olsen Located at 3471,
3513, 3543 and 3561 East Tecate Lane
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi -family development
consisting of & residential units on 1.698 acres of land in the C -G
zoning district WJV_J ( LI
Meeting Notes
I TEM SHEET
C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.B .
Presenter:
Estimated Time f or P resentation:
Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Verasso Village North (H-2018-0071) by C had Olsen,
L ocated at 3471, 3513, 3543 and 3561 E. Tecate L n.
C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials
C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing
AT TAC HM E NT S:
Description Type Upload D ate
S taff Report S taff Report 8/14/2018
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 41 of 106
Hearing Date: 8/16/2018
Hearing Type: PZ
Item Number: 4-B
Project Name: Verasso Village North (H-2018-0071)
Project Number: H-2018-0071
Signature NameAddress City-State-ZipFor Against Neutral I Wish To TestifySign In Date/Time
Item #4B: Verraso Village North (H-2018-0071)
Application(s):
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.7 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 3471, 3513, 3543 &
3561 E. Tecate Ln.
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:
North: Commercial property (Culver’s restaurant and Les Schwab Tires), zoned C-G
South: Multi-family (Verasso Village No. 3), zoned C-G
East: Records Ave. and a church, zoned R-8
West: Developed commercial property, zoned C-G
History: This property was annexed in 2005 and included in Una Mas Subdivision; a DA was recorded as a provision of annexation,
which has been subsequently modified.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-R
Summary of Request: A CUP is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 64 dwelling units on 1.7 acres of land in the C-
G zoning district. The # of units has been reduced from the original application submittal from 68 to 64. This is the 4th phase of the
Verraso Village multi-family development. It differs from previous phases in that all of the units will be located within one structure
rather than 2 units in each structure.
The development is proposed to consist of (14) 1-bedroom and (50) 2-bedroom units. The gross density for the development is 37.65
units per acre consistent with that desired in MU-R designated areas. The applicant would like the flexibility to construct either a 3- or 4-
story structure; the number of units would stay the same either way – the amount of common area would increase if a 4-story structure
is built. Parking is located under the units on the ground floor.
Private usable open space, common area & site amenities are provided in accord with UDC standards. An interior courtyard with
fountains is proposed on the 2nd floor and an open grassy area along the west boundary of the site which also serves as an emergency
access is proposed similar to that in previous phases. A minimum of 121 parking spaces are required; 145 spaces are proposed for a
total of 24 spaces beyond the minimum required.
A 20’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along Records Ave.; an attached sidewalk already exists along Records.
Conceptual building elevations & a rendering were submitted for the proposed structure; building materials are proposed to consist of
stucco with either cement or wood siding and metal accents. The final design is required to comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
Written Testimony: [name(s)] - [issue(s)]
Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2017-0071, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions). I
further recommend Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are prepared for the next Commission meeting on September 6th.
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2017-0071, as presented during the
hearing on August 16, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2017-0071 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 1
STAFF REPORT
HEARING DATE: August 16, 2018
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: Verraso Village North – CUP (H-2018-0071)
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant, Chad Olsen, has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a multi-family
development consisting of 64 dwelling units on 1.7 acres of land in the C-G zoning district as
required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. This is the 4th phase of the Verraso Village development. See
Section VIII, Analysis, for more information.
Note: Since the original application submittal, the applicant submitted revised plans that reduced
the total number of units from 68 to 64.
II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP application with the conditions of approval 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-
0071 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, with the following
modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) I further recommend Staff to prepare Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law & Order for the hearing date of September 6, 2018.
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0071,
as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state
specific reasons for denial.)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0071 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 subject property is located at 3471, 3513, 3543 and 3561 E. Tecate Ln., in the northwest ¼ of
Section 4, Township 3 North, Range 1 East.
B. Applicant:
Chad Olsen
12790 W. Telemark Street
Boise, ID 83713
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 42 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 2
C. Owner:
Una Mas, LLC
1717 E. Chisholm Drive
Nampa, ID 83687
D. Representative:
Same as applicant
E. 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 which requires a public hearing before the
Planning & Zoning Commission, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: July 27, 2018
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: July 20, 2018
D. Posted on Next Door: July 24, 2018
E. Applicant posted notice on site by: August 3, 2018
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s) & Zoning: This site consists of vacant/undeveloped land, zoned C-G.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
North: Commercial property (Culver’s restaurant and Les Schwab Tires), zoned C-G
South: Multi-family (Verasso Village No. 3), zoned C-G
East: Church, zoned R-8
West: Developed commercial property, zoned C-G
C. History of Previous Actions:
The subject property was annexed (AZ-05-061, Ord. #06-1251) in 2005 with a C-G zoning
district. A development agreement was recorded as a provision of annexation (Instrument No.
106137048).
A preliminary plat (PP-08-007) was approved in 2008 for Una Mas Subdivision.
A final plat (FP-09-002) was approved in 2009 for Una Mas Subdivision and was later
recorded in 2011 (Bk. 103, Pg. 13894). The subject property was included in the plat as a
portion of Lots 4-7, Block 1.
A modification to the development agreement (H-2015-0016, Inst. #2016-106279) for Una
Mas subdivision was approved by City Council in 2015 that removed the requirement for
future structures within the development to comply with the building elevations previously
approved by Council with the annexation and only requires future buildings to obtain design
review approval.
A property boundary adjustment (A-2016-0287, ROS #10612) was approved in 2016 that
reconfigured the southern boundary of this property.
A modification to the previous development agreement (H-2016-0132, Inst. #2017-056982)
was approved for Una Mas subdivision in 2017 to allow a reduced buffer width from 25 to 5
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 43 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 3
feet on the C-G zoned property to residential uses.
D. Utilities:
Location of sewer: A sanitary sewer main intended to serve the subject site currently exists in E.
Tecate Lane.
Location of water: A water main intended to serve the subject site currently exists in E. Tecate
Lane.
Issues or concerns: None
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Staff is unaware of any open ditches that cross this site.
2. Hazards: Staff is unaware of any hazards that may exist on this site.
3. Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the floodplain or flood way.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
This site is designated Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map (FLUM).
The purpose of this designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings
and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together,
including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail
center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses
that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. Fox example, an employment center
should have support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as
support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive
neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive
for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the
developments. The developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-R
plan depicted in Figure 3-5 of the Comprehensive Plan.
This site is proposed to develop with high-density multi-family residential uses at a gross density of
37.65 dwelling units per acre (d.u./acre). The proposed development consists of 64 dwelling units on
1.7 acres of land; the structure is proposed to be 3 or 4 stories in height. The proposed multi-family
development should contribute to the mix of uses in this area adjacent to retail, employment and
restaurant uses near major intersections (Eagle & Ustick Roads and Eagle & Fairview Roads),
consistent with the plan for MU-R designated areas.
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to
the proposed use (staff analysis in italics):
“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, pg. 56)
The proposed multi-family units will contribute to the variety of rental options available within
the City.
“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, pg. 45)
City services will be provided and extended with development of this site.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 44 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 4
“Require appropriate landscaping and buffers along transportation corridor (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)
A 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer is required along N. Records Avenue, a collector street.
“Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels.” (3.06.01F, pg. 53)
The proposed multi-family development should be compatible with existing multi-family
residential units to the south.
“Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D)
Access is proposed via E. Tecate Ln., a previously approved private street along the site’s north
boundary.
“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 high-density development is located near major access thoroughfares [N. Eagle
Road (State Highway 55) and E. Ustick Road & E. Fairview Ave. (both arterial streets)] and is
within walking distance of Kleiner Park, a 60 acre City park, and The Village at Meridian
shopping center to the south.
VIII. ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP): A conditional use permit is requested for a multi-family
development consisting of 64 dwelling units on 1.7 acres of land in the C-G zoning district in
accord with UDC Table 11-2B-2. This is the 4th phase of the Verraso Village multi-family
development.
The development is proposed to consist of (14) 1-bedroom and (50) 2-bedroom units. The gross
density for the development is 37.65 units per acre consistent with that desired in MU-R
designated areas. The applicant would like the flexibility to construct either a 3- or 4-story
structure; the number of units would stay the same either way – the amount of common area
would increase if a 4-story structure is built.
The property consists of 4 lots in Una Mas Subdivision. A property boundary adjustment
application should be submitted prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application to combine the lots into one property.
Specific Use Standards: The specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC
11-4-3-27 apply to development of this site as follows:
A minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space is required to be
provided for each unit. Private patios or balconies are proposed for each unit that meets
this requirement.
Development with 20 units or more are required to provide a property management
office, maintenance storage area, central mailbox location (including 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 property management and leasing office and maintenance storage
area is located within the first phase of development to the south of this site. The site
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 45 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 5
plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict the
location(s) of the directory & map of the development.
At a minimum, 250 square feet (s.f.) of outdoor common open space is required for each
unit containing more than 500 and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area. All of the proposed units
are within this range. Therefore, a minimum of 16,000 s.f. (or 0.37 of an acre) of
common open space is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11 -4-3-27C.
The applicant proposes an internal courtyard on the 2nd floor, common area along the
west boundary which also doubles as an emergency access, and common area along
Tecate Lane consisting of a total of 16,146 square feet (or 0.37 of an acre) in accord with
this requirement.
For multi-family developments between 20 and 75 units, three (3) amenities are required
to be provided with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D.1. A total
of 64 units are proposed, which requires a minimum of 3 amenities to be provided. The
applicant proposes a pedestrian walkway and fountains through the interior courtyard on
the 2nd story (1st floor living area); 5’ x 5’ storage spaces in the center of the parking
area, an office and a recreation room on the 1st floor, which qualify as quality of life,
open space and recreation amenities. A clubhouse/meeting area with a veranda was
provided with the first phase of development and serves this overall development. These
amenities satisfy this requirement. Note: Staff is concerned about the lack of visibility of
the 3’ wide walkway area between the 5’ x 5’ storage spaces; the applicant should
consider an alternative design that would allow more visibility of the walkway from the
parking area.
Landscaping is required to comply with UDC 11-4-3-27E. All street facing
elevations shall have landscaping along their foundations 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 plans. Landscaping is required in
accord with this requirement and should be depicted on the landscape plan submitted
with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
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 shall submit documentation of compliance
with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance.
Dimensional Standards: The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional
standards of the C-G zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and for multi-family
developments listed in 11-4-3-27.
The setbacks for the C-G district are 0; however, the 20-foot required street buffer along Records
Way will serve as a setback on the east side of the development. UDC 11-4-3-27B.1 requires a
minimum building setback of 10 feet unless a greater setback is otherwise required. The
building setback along the southern boundary of the site is only 5 feet; the site/landscape
plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance should be revised accordingly -
or, a property boundary adjustment application could be submitted to shift the property
line to the south to accommodate the setback.
Access: Access is depicted on the site plan via E. Tecate Ln.; no access via N. Records Ave., a
collector street, is proposed or approved.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 46 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 6
Parking: The UDC requires off-street vehicle parking to be provided on the site in accord with
the standards listed in Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family developments. Based on (14) 1-bedroom
units and (50) 2-bedroom units, a minimum of 64 covered and 57 uncovered spaces are required
for a total of 121 spaces; a total of 145 covered spaces are proposed on the 1st floor under the
dwelling units for a total of 24 additional spaces beyond those required for guest parking. The
number of proposed parking spaces complies with UDC standards. Compact stalls are
discouraged but may be used for any parking above the number of required parking
spaces; compact stalls may be reduced in depth by 2’ (i.e. 17’); there are a few compact
stalls depicted that are under 17’ in depth that must be revised.
The UDC (Table 11-3C-5) requires one-way drive aisles with 90-degree parking spaces to be
a minimum of 25-feet wide; the site plan should be revised accordingly (note: 45-degree
spaces only require a 13’ wide drive aisle and 60-degree spaces require a 17’ wide drive
aisle).
One bicycle parking space is required to be provided for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces or
portion thereof, per UDC 11-3C-6G. Based on a total of 145 proposed parking spaces, a
minimum of 6 bicycle parking spaces should be provided for the development. The site plan
depicts a 13’ x 17’ area for bicycle parking at the northeast corner of the building; if this is
exclusively for residents, a bicycle rack for visitors should also be provided.
Multi-Use Pathway: There is not a multi-use pathway designated on this site in the Master
Pathways Plan.
Landscaping: A minimum 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer is required (as proposed) along
N. Records Avenue, a collector street, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.
Common Open Space & Site Amenities: Because this site is below 5 acres in size and in a
commercial district, the open space and site amenity requirements listed in UDC 11-3G-3 are not
applicable. However, common open space and site amenities are required per the specific use
standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 as noted above.
Sidewalks/Pathways: A five-foot wide detached sidewalk exists on this site along N. Records
Avenue in accord with UDC 11-3A-17.
Lighting: All outdoor lighting shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. A
lighting plan for the parking area should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance application to ensure lighting is adequate for safety.
Fencing: All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3A-7.
Waterways: There are no open waterways on this site.
Building Elevations: The applicant submitted conceptual elevations for the proposed structure
(see Exhibit A.4). Building materials are proposed to consist of stucco with either cement or
wood siding and metal accents. Final design of the multi-family structure is required to comply
with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual, and
the conditions listed in Exhibit B of this report. The applicant would like the flexibility to
construct a 3- or 4-story building on this site to be determined in the future.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted for
approval of the new use and to ensure that all construction complies with the provisions of the
UDC and the conditions contained in this report listed in Exhibit B.
Design Review (DES): An Administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted
for approval of the proposed structure, per UDC 11-5B-8. Development should comply with the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 47 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 7
design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual or any updated
provisions thereof.
The DES and CZC application(s) may be submitted concurrently.
Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions included in Exhibit B.
IX. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings/Other
1. Vicinity/Zoning Map
2. Proposed Site Plan (dated: 8/13/18)
3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 8/10/18)
4. Conceptual Building Elevations
B. Agency & Department Comments/Conditions
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 48 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 8
Exhibit A.1: Vicinity/Zoning Map
Kleiner Park
The Village
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 49 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 9
Exhibit A.2: Proposed Site Plan (dated: 8/13/18)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 50 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 10
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 51 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 11
Exhibit A.3: Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 8/10/18)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 52 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 12
Exhibit A.4: Conceptual Building Elevations
Note: This structure may be constructed 3- or 4-stories in height but shall not exceed 65’ in height.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 53 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 13
B. Agency & Department Comments/Conditions
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1.1 Development of the site shall substantially comply with the site plan, landscape plan, and
conceptual building elevations included in Exhibit A, the conditions of approval listed herein, the
provisions of the development agreement (Inst. #106137048) and amended development
agreements (H-2015-0016, Inst. #2016-106279; H-2016-0132, Inst. #2017-056982). If a 4-story
structure is proposed with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application, it shall be deemed to
be in substantial compliance with the elevations shown in Exhibit A.4.
1.1.2 The architectural character of the proposed structure shall comply with the design standards listed
in the Architectural Standards Manual.
1.1.3 The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for multi-family developments listed
in UDC 11-4-3-27, including but not limited to the following:
a. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and
transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall
be fully screened from view from a public street.
b. 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 shall submit
documentation of compliance with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance.
1.1.4 A minimum of 16,000 s.f. (or 0.37 of an acre) of common open space is required to be provided
within the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C as proposed.
1.1.5 The applicant shall provide amenities as proposed in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D, including an
interior courtyard/plaza with pedestrian walkways and fountains, an office and recreation room. A
clubhouse with a veranda was provided with the first phase of development which will be used by
this phase.
1.1.6 Any fencing constructed on the site shall be consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-
3A-7.
1.1.7 The parking area shall comply with the required stall and drive aisle dimensions listed in UDC
Table 11-3C-5.
1.1.8 Submit a request for alternative compliance to the parking lot landscaping requirements listed in
UDC 11-3B-8C as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5, with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application.
1.1.9 The site plan included in Exhibit A.2 shall be revised with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance application as follows:
a. Depict the location(s) of the 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.
b. Depict bicycle parking as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3C-5C; a minimum of 6 bicycle parking spaces should be provided for the development.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 54 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 14
If the bicycle parking area depicted on the plan is only for residents, a bicycle rack should be
provided for visitor parking.
c. A minimum setback of 10’ is required unless a greater setback is otherwise required per UDC
11-4-3-27B.1; the building needs to be shifted in 10’ along the southern boundary of the site – or,
a property boundary adjustment application may be submitted to shift the southern property line
to the south to accommodate the required setback.
d. Staff is concerned about the lack of visibility of the 3’ wide walkway area bet ween the 5’ x 5’
storage spaces; the applicant should consider an alternative design that would allow more
visibility of the walkway from the parking area for surveillance purposes.
e. The internal drive-aisles/parking is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed
in UDC Table 11-3C-5; revise accordingly.
f. Compact parking stalls are required to be a minimum of 9’ x 17’.
g. The grass-crete area along the west boundary of the site shall be a minimum of 20-feet wide.
1.1.10 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A.3 shall be revised with submittal of the Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application as follows:
a. Landscaping is required along the east side of the building foundation facing N. Records Ave.
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 (UDC 11-4-3-27E). Spirea magic
carpet is not an evergreen shrub.
b. Include a calculations table that demonstrates compliance with UDC standards per the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance checklist.
c. Revise the plan consistent with the changes required above in condition #1.1.9.
1.1.11 A property boundary adjustment application shall be submitted prior to submittal of a Certificate
of Zoning Compliance application to combine Lots 4-7, Block 1, Una Mas Subdivision, into one
property.
1.1.12 A lighting plan for the parking area shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application to ensure lighting is adequate for safety.
1.2 General Conditions of Approval
1.2.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC
Chapter 2 District regulations.
1.2.2 Comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches, laterals, canals and/or drainage courses, as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-6.
1.2.3 Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11.
1.2.4 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.
1.2.5 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 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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 55 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 15
1.2.8 Construct the required landscape buffers consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-
7C (streets).
1.2.9 Construct storm water integration facilities that meet the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-
11C.
1.2.10 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.
1.2.11 Bicycle parking spaces shall be consistent with the design standards set forth in UDC 11-3C-5C.
1.2.12 Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12.
1.2.13 Construct all required landscape areas used for storm water integration consistent with the
standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C.
1.2.14 Comply with the structure and site design standards, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19 and the
guidelines set forth in the City of Meridian Design Manual.
1.2.15 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 conditional use may only be transferred or modified consistent with the provisions as set
forth in UDC 11-5B-6G. The applicant shall contact Planning Division staff regarding any
proposed modification and/or transfer of ownership.
1.3.2 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.
1.4 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 conditional use approval shall be null and void if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use
within two years as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F1 or 2) gain approval of a time extension as set
forth in UDC 11-5B-6F4.
1.4.3 The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application
and Design Review from the Planning Division, prior to submittal of building permit
application(s).
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
2.1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. The plan will need to
include the installation of Type 1 lighting along Records Road. 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.
2.1.2 The adequacy of available fire hydrants will be evaluated during the building permit review
process. In the event that it is determined that additional hydrants are necessary to provide fire
protection, the applicant shall be responsible for their installation.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 56 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 16
2.1.3 This site is currently provided with multiple water mainline stubs. Any stubs that are not utilized
for this project will need to be properly abandoned per Meridian Public Works Department
Standards.
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.
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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 57 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 17
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.
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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 58 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 18
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 Submit a lighting plan for the parking garage with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application.
4. FIRE DEPARTMENT
4.1 Based on the size of new construction and the location of the sprinkler room in relation
to the address side of the structure, the AHJ may require separate Fire Department
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 59 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 19
key box locations. One being at the main, address side entrance and the other at the
entrance to the sprinkler riser room. Knox Boxes can be ordered from www.knoxbox.com.
4.2 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.
4.3 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.
4.4 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department or
their designee 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 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.
4.5 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).
4.6 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.
4.7 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.
4.8 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 Buildings over 30’ in height are required to have access roads 26’ in width minimum in
accordance with the International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105.
4.10 Provide a Fire Department Key box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy
as set forth in International Fire Code Section 506.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 60 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 20
4.11 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.
4.12 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.
4.13 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.
4.14 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.
4.15 The Fire Department will require Fire Department locking Connection caps on all FDC
inlets. IFC 102.9. Caps can be ordered at www.knoxbox.com.
4.16 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.
5. PARKS DEPARTMENT
5.1 The Parks Department has no comments on this application.
6. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 61 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 21
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 62 of 106
Verraso Village North - CUP (H-2018-0071) PAGE 22
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed
conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find
evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish:
1. 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 if the site is designed in accord with the site plan in Exhibit A and the conditions
of approval in Exhibit B, the site will be large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet
the dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district and the specific use
standards for multi-family developments.
2. 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 multi-family development in the C-G zone meets the objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan and UDC.
3. 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 the general design, construction, operation and maintenance of the multi-family
development will be compatible with other residential and commercial uses in the general
neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely
change the character of the area.
4. 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 the proposed development should not adversely affect other property in the
vicinity if the applicant complies with all conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this staff
report and constructs all improvements and operates the use in accordance with the UDC
standards.
5. 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 and irrigation can be made available to the subject
property. Please refer to comments prepared by the Public Works Department, Fire Department,
Police Department and other agencies.
6. 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.
Staff finds that the applicant will pay to extend the sanitary sewer and water mains into the site.
No additional capital facility costs are expected from the City. The applicant and/or future
property owners will be required to pay impact fees.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 63 of 106
7. 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 that the proposed development will not involve uses that will create nuisances that
would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area.
Staff recognizes the fact that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this
development; however, whenever undeveloped property is developed the amount of traffic
generation does increase.
8. 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 the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any
natural feature(s) of major importance.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 64 of 106
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Date: August 16, 2018
Agenda Item Number: 4C
Project File Number: Public Hearing H-2018-0077
Item Title: Zions Bank Drive Through by Matt Nuffield, Located at
1767 West Island Road
1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a Drive -Through
Establishment within 300 Feet of Existing Residences
Meeting Notes
I TEM SHEET
C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.C.
Presenter:
Estimated Time f or P resentation:
Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Zions Bank Drive T hrough (H-2018-0077) by M att Huffield
L ocated at 1767 W. Island Grove Rd.
C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials
C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing
AT TAC HM E NT S:
Description Type Upload D ate
S taff Report S taff Report 8/7/2018
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 65 of 106
Hearing Date: 8/16/2018
Hearing Type: PZ
Item Number: 4-C
Project Name: Zions Bank Drive Through (H-2018-0077)
Project Number: H-2018-0077
Signature NameAddress City-State-ZipFor Against Neutral I Wish To TestifySign In Date/Time
Andrew Lawrence1685 W Brandt LaneMeridian Id 83646 X X ########
Item #4C: Zions Bank Drive Through (H-2018-0077)
Application(s):
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.082 acres of land, zoned C-C, located at 1767 W. Island
Green Drive.
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:
1. North: Island Green Drive and residential property zoned RUT (Ada County)
2. East: Vacant commercial property (future vehicle washing facility, zoned C-C
3. South: W. Chinden Blvd and commercial property in the Knighthill Center Sub., zoned C-G
4. West: Einstein’s Oilery, zoned C-C
History: In 2014 the subject property was granted preliminary plat approval for a 9 lot commercial subdivision (PP-14-011; a
development agreement modification to terminate the three existing development agreements and to enter into one new agreement
(MDA-14-008)(Inst.# 2014-088001); and final plat approval for the 9 commercial lot subdivision (FP 14-041).
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C
Summary of Request:
Conditional Use Permit (CUP): The applicant is proposing to construct a 4,200 square foot financial institution with associated drive-
through. All access points were approved with the subdividing of the property. Access to the site is a shared access with the adjacent
property. The applicant shall record a cross access agreement in favor of the property to the west.
Staff’s analysis of the proposed development includes the internal site improvements and the site circulation of the drive-through.
The UDC requires a conditional use permit if the drive-through establishment is within 300 feet of a residential district or another drive-
through subject to specific use standards listed below.
Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11, Drive-Through
Establishment. Staff has reviewed these standards and found the site plan to be in compliance with those standards.
A. A drive-through establishment shall be an accessory use where the drive-through facility (including stacking lanes, speaker and/or
order area, pick up windows, and exit lanes) is: 1) not within three hundred feet (300') of another drive-through facility, a residential
district, or an existing residence; or 2) separated by an arterial street from any other drive-through facility, residential district or existing
residence; or 3) not within the O-T zoning district. Otherwise a conditional use permit is required.
The drive-through is required to obtain a CUP because it is within 300 feet of another approved drive-through and within 300 feet of a
residential district.
B. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, menu and speaker location (if applicable), and
window location on the certificate of zoning compliance or the conditional use permit. Speakers are prohibited in the O-T zoning district.
C. A site plan shall be submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between
adjacent properties. At a minimum the plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following standards:
1. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles, and the public right of way by
patrons.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
2. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes
may provide access to designated employee parking.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
3. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
4. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement. Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 5
5. The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes.
The site plan shall be revised to call out the speaker location(s), and any window(s) for the drive through.
D. The applicant shall provide a six foot (6') sight obscuring fence where a stacking lane or window location adjoins a residential district
or an existing residence. (Ord. 15-1663, 10-20-2015)
1) The pedestrian connection across the proposed parking lot to the existing sidewalk along W. Island Green Drive shall be
scored concrete or pavers to delineate the walkway in accord with UDC 11-3A-19(B)(4).
2) Provide a detail of the trash enclosure with the submittal of the CZC application.
3) Per UDC 11-3B-8C, the applicant is required to install a 5 foot landscape buffer along the west boundary of the property.
4) The applicant shall widen the sidewalk on the north side of the building to 7 feet and remove any wheel stops from the plan.
Parking: Based on the overall square footage (s.f.) of the building, approximately 4,200 s.f., a minimum of 9 vehicle parking spaces are
required to be provided on the site. A total of 23 parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds the UDC requirements.
Landscaping: Staff has reviewed the submitted landscape plan for compliance with UDC 11-3B. The landscape plan as submitted
complies with the UDC. The 35-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd is existing and meets the requirements of the
UDC. Except the 5-foot wide buffer on the west boundary (currently depicted as 3 feet), the parking lot landscaping complies with the
standards of UDC 11-3B-8C. With the certificate of zoning compliance application, the applicant should revise the landscape plan and
widen the buffer width form 3 feet to 5 feet.
Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted sample elevations of the building. The applicant is proposing several building
materials including brick, concrete, metal and metal roofing. The elevations appear to generally comply with the standards set forth in
the Architectural Standards Manual.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review (DES): A CZC and DES application is required to be submitted prior to
issuance of building permits. The applicant must comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines
contained in the Architectural Standards Manual.
Written Testimony: None
Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
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-
2018-0077, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 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-2017-
0077, as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0077 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 1
STAFF REPORT
HEARING DATE: August 16, 2018
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Josh Beach, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: Zions Bank CUP – H-2018-0077
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant, Matt Huffield, has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a drive-through
establishment within 300 feet of an existing drive-through establishment and within 300 feet of
existing residences.
See Section VII, VIII & IX for more information.
II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP application with the conditions of approval 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 approve File Number H-2018-
0077 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, with the following
modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0077
as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 2018, for the following reasons:
(You should state specific reasons for denial.)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0077 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 1767 W. Island Green Drive in the SE ¼ of Section 23, Township 4 North,
Range 1 West.
B. Applicant/Representative:
James Huffield, Cole Architects
1008 W. Main Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
C. Owner:
Chinden and Linder, LLC
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 66 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 2
2700 W. Airport Way
Boise, Idaho 83715
D. 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 and Zoning Commission on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11,
Chapter 5.
B. Newspaper notifications published on: July 27, 2018
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: July 20, 2018
D. Applicant posted notice on site by: August 3, 2018
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s): The property is vacant commercial property, zoned C-C.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Island Green Drive and residential property zoned RUT (Ada County)
2. East: Vacant commercial property (future vehicle washing facility, zoned C-C
3. South: W. Chinden Blvd and commercial property in the Knighthill Center Sub., zoned C-G
4. West: Einstein’s Oilery, zoned C-C
C. History of Previous Actions:
In 2014 the subject property was granted preliminary plat approval for a 9 lot commercial subdivision
(PP-14-011; a development agreement modification to terminate the three existing development
agreements and to enter into one new agreement (MDA-14-008)(Inst.# 2014-088001); and final plat
approval for the 9 commercial lot subdivision (FP 14-041).
D. Utilities
1. Public Works:
a. Location of sewer: A sanitary sewer main intended to provide service to the subject
property currently exists in W. Island Green Drive.
b. Location of water: Water for this property is provided by Suez.
c. Issues or concerns: None
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities exist on this property.
2. Hazards: NA
3. Flood Plain: This property is not within the flood plain.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
This property is designated “Mixed Use Community” on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map. The purpose of this land use designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and
dwellings are integrated into the urban fabric. The vacant commercial property is surrounded by a
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 67 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 3
mix of office, retail and residential uses as envisioned in the mi xed-use standards of the
comprehensive plan. Therefore staff is of the opinion; the site is developing in the context of a mixed-
use development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
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 landscape street buffers for new development along all entryway corridors.” (2.01.02E)
A 35-foot wide landscape buffer exists adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd. in accord with UDC 11-3B-
7C.
2. “Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and
along streets.” (2.01.04B)
All parking lot landscaping must comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.
3. “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 services are readily available to serve the proposed commercial development.
4. “Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Area of City Impact.”
(3.05.01J)
This area of Meridian is rapidly transitioning with urban development. To accommodate the
needs of the residents in the area, the City approved C-C zoning on this property to serve the
area. Staff believes additional retail and the drive-through uses will complement the existing
residential developments in the area.
Based on the above analysis, staff is supportive of the proposed development as it is generally
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
A. Purpose Statement of Zone(s):
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS (C-C) - The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for
the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Six Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures
accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of
the district in proximity to streets and highways.
B. Schedule of Use: Table 11-2B-2 lists the principal permitted (P), accessory (A), conditional (C),
and prohibited (-) uses in the C-C zoning district. Any use not explicitly listed, or listed as a
prohibited use is prohibited.
C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site shall comply with the dimensional standards
listed in UDC 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district.
D. Landscaping:
Parking lot landscaping: All parking lot landscaping must comply with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3B-8C.
E. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC 11-3C-6B for the proposed
commercial development.
IX. ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 68 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 4
Conditional Use Permit (CUP): The applicant is proposing to construct a 4,200 square foot
financial institution with associated drive-through. All access points were approved with the
subdividing of the property. Access to the site is a shared access with the adjacent property. The
applicant shall record a cross access agreement in favor of the property to the west.
Staff’s analysis of the proposed development includes the internal site improvements and the site
circulation of the drive-through.
The UDC requires a conditional use permit if the drive-through establishment is within 300 feet
of a residential district or another drive-through subject to specific use standards listed below.
Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC
11-4-3-11, Drive-Through Establishment. Staff has reviewed these standards and found the site
plan to be in compliance with those standards.
Site Plan: Staff has reviewed the submitted site plan and requires the necessary revisions prior to
the submission of the certificate of zoning compliance (CZC) application.
A. A drive-through establishment shall be an accessory use where the drive-through facility
(including stacking lanes, speaker and/or order area, pick up windows, and exit lanes) is: 1)
not within three hundred feet (300') of another drive-through facility, a residential district, or
an existing residence; or 2) separated by an arterial street from any other drive -through
facility, residential district or existing residence; or 3) not within the O-T zoning district.
Otherwise a conditional use permit is required.
The drive-through is required to obtain a CUP because it is within 300 feet of another
approved drive-through and within 300 feet of a residential district.
B. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, menu and
speaker location (if applicable), and window location on the certificate of zoning compliance
or the conditional use permit. Speakers are prohibited in the O-T zoning district.
The site plan shall be revised to call out the speaker location(s), and any window(s) for the
drive through.
C. A site plan shall be submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and
circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. At a minimum the plan shall
demonstrate compliance with the following standards:
1. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive
aisles, and the public right of way by patrons.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
2. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access
and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
3. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or
existing residence.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
4. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an
escape lane.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 69 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 5
5. The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for
surveillance purposes.
The proposed site plan appears to comply with this requirement.
D. The applicant shall provide a six foot (6') sight obscuring fence where a stacking lane or
window location adjoins a residential district or an existing residence. (Ord. 15-1663, 10-20-
2015)
1) The pedestrian connection across the proposed parking lot to the existing
sidewalk along W. Island Green Drive shall be scored concrete or pavers
to delineate the walkway in accord with UDC 11-3A-19(B)(4).
2) Provide a detail of the trash enclosure with the submittal of the CZC application.
3) Per UDC 11-3B-8C, the applicant is required to install a 5 foot landscape buffer
along the west boundary of the property.
4) The applicant shall widen the sidewalk on the north side of the building to 7 feet
and remove any wheel stops from the plan.
Parking: Based on the overall square footage (s.f.) of the building, approximately 4,200 s.f., a
minimum of 9 vehicle parking spaces are required to be provided on the site. A total of 23
parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds the UDC requirements.
Landscaping: Staff has reviewed the submitted landscape plan for compliance with UDC 11-3B.
The landscape plan as submitted complies with the UDC. The 35-foot wide landscape buffer
adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd is existing and meets the requirements of the UDC. Except the 5-
foot wide buffer on the west boundary (currently depicted as 3 feet), the parking lot landscaping
complies with the standards of UDC 11-3B-8C. With the certificate of zoning compliance
application, the applicant should revise the landscape plan and widen the buffer width form 3 feet
to 5 feet.
Lighting: Outdoor lighting is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. If
any fixtures are proposed that have a maximum output of 1,800 lumens or more, a photometric
report is required to be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application to ensure
light trespass does not encroach on the adjacent residences to the south.
Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted sample elevations of the building. The
applicant is proposing several building materials including brick, concrete, metal and metal
roofing. The elevations appear to generally comply with the standards set forth in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review (DES): A CZC and DES
application is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant must
comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
Summary: In summary, staff finds the proposed project complies with the applicable policies of
the Comprehensive plan and is conditioned to comply with the applicable development standards
in the UDC. Based on the aforementioned analysis, staff recommends approval of the subject
application.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 70 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 6
X. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings/Other
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed CUP Site Plan (dated: July 12, 2018)
3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: July 12, 2018
4. Proposed Building Elevation (dated: July 12, 2018)
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 71 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 7
Exhibit A.1: Vicinity Map
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 72 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 8
Exhibit A.2: Proposed CUP Site Plan (dated: July 12, 2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 73 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 9
Exhibit A.3: Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: July 12, 2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 74 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 10
Exhibit A.4: Proposed Building Elevations (dated: July 12, 2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 75 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 11
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DIVISION
Conditional Use Permit
1. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of previous approvals (AZ-06-005, PP-14-011,
Inst#2014-088001, MDA-14-008, FP-14-014).
2. The applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards for the drive-through establishments.
3. The site plan is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall revise the site plan
as follows:
a. Provide a detail of the bike rack.
b. The drive-through area shall be striped one-way as depicted on the submitted site plan.
c. The pedestrian connection across the proposed parking lot to the existing sidewalk along W.
Island Green Drive shall be scored concrete or pavers to delineate the walkway in accord with
UDC 11-3A-19(B)(4).
d. The site plan shall be revised to call out the speaker location(s), and any window(s) for the
drive through.
4. The landscape plan is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall revise the
landscape plan as follows:
a. With the submittal of the CZC application, all parking lot landscaping must comply
with the landscape standards set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C. The landscape buffer on the
west boundary shall be widened from 3 feet to 5 feet in accord with UDC 11-3B-
8(C)(1)(a).
5. Development of this site shall substantially comply with the site plan, landscape plan and
building elevations included in Exhibit A and the conditions of approval in this report.
6. The applicant is required to submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Administrative
Design Review (DES) application to the Planning Division for approval of the proposed use and
final site layout and building designs prior to submittal of a building permit application.
7. The proposed site layout and structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in
UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM).
8. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does
not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance.
9. The applicant shall have a maximum of two (2) years to commence the drive-through use as
permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the use has not begun within
two (2) years of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation or a
time extension must be requested in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.
10. The applicant shall complete all required improvements prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy. It is unlawful to use or occupy any building or structure until the Building Official
has issued a Certificate of Occupancy.
11. The applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11.
12. All signage for the property is subject to the standards set forth in UDC 11-3D.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 76 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 12
2.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
2.1.1 Public Works has no comments on this application.
3. POLICE DEPARTMENT
3.1 The Police Department has no comments related to this application.
4. FIRE DEPARTMENT
4.1 The Fire Department has no comments related to this application.
5. REPUBLIC SERVICES
5.1 Republic Services has no comments related to this application.
6. PARKS DEPARTMENT
6.1 The Parks Department has no comments related to this application.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (COMMENTS FORTHCOMING)
7.1 Pay a traffic impact fee. A traffic impact fee may be assessed by ACHD and will be due prior to
the issuance of a building permit by the lead agency.
7.2 Comply with all ACHD Policies and ACHD Standard Conditions of Approval for any
improvements or work in the right-of-way.
7.3 Obtain a permit for any work in the right-of-way prior to the construction, repair, or installation
of any roadway improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk, pavement widening, driveways, culverts,
etc.).
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 77 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 13
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS:
In consideration of a conditional use permit, the decision-making body shall make the
following findings:
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 financial
institution and drive-through uses and development regulations of the C-C district (see
Analysis Section VII, VIII & 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 MU-C 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 of the property 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 properties in the area.
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 the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and
services as applicable.
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 generate additional traffic in the area but should not involve
activities that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare of the area.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 78 of 106
Zions Bank Drive-through – H-2018-0077 PAGE 14
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 August 16, 2018 – Page 79 of 106
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Meeting Date: August 16, 2018
Agenda Item Number: 4D
Project File Number: Public Hearing H-2018-0074
Item Title: Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision by 4345 Linder Road, LLC
Located at 943 West McMillian Road.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 40.6 Acres of Land to the R-4
Zoning District; and
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of 128 Single Family
Residential Lots and 10 Common Lots on Approximately 40.6
Acres of Land in the Proposed R-4 Zoning District
Meeting Notes
I TEM SHEET
C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.D.
Presenter:
Estimated Time f or P resentation:
Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Whitecliffe E states Subdivision (H-2018-0074) by 4345
L inder Road, L L C Located at 943 W. M cM illan Rd.
C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials
C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing
AT TAC HM E NT S:
Description Type Upload D ate
S taff Report S taff Report 8/8/2018
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 80 of 106
Hearing Date: 8/16/2018
Hearing Type: PZ
Item Number: 4-D
Project Name: Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision (H-2018-0074)
Project Number: H-2018-0074
Signature NameAddress City-State-ZipFor Against Neutral I Wish To TestifySign In Date/Time
Jody McMillan 83646 X X ########
Item #4D: Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision (H-2018-0074)
Application(s):
Annexation and Zoning
Preliminary Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 40.6 acres of land, zoned RUT (Ada County), located at 943 W.
McMillan Road.
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:
1. North: W. McMillan Road and Single-family residential properties in Paramount Subdivision, zoned R-4.
2. East: Single-family residential properties in Cedar Springs Subdivision, zoned R-4; and undeveloped office lots, zoned L-O.
3. South: Single-family residential properties in Baldwin Park Subdivision, zoned R-4.
4. West: Single-family residential properties in Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision, zoned R-4.
History: None
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR/Office
Summary of Request:
Annexation & Zoning
The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of 40.6 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district.
Preliminary Plat
The proposed plat consists of 128 building lots and 10 common lots on 40.6 acres of land in a proposed R-4 zoning district. The
property is proposed to develop in 3 phases. The gross density for the subdivision is 3.15 d.u./acre. The minimum lot size is 8,000
square feet, with an average of 9,178 square feet. The applicant shall provide a revised plat that graphically depicts the 50-foot Lemp
Canal easement and the 60-foot Idaho Power easement.
Dimensional Standards: Development of this site is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2A-3 and
Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 district. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and with the exception of Lot 10, Block 1 which doesn’t meet
the minimum lot size for the R-8 zoning district, has found it to be in compliance with those standards.
Existing Structures: There is an existing residence and associated structures that the applicant is proposing to remove from the
property as part of this project .The applicant shall remove the structures prior to approval of the first final plat.
Block Length: The plat is required to comply with the block length standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3F. Staff has reviewed the
proposed plat and has concerns with the block length along the north side of Loretta Street. That block face measures
approximately 1,000 feet and code allows this length if a pedestrian pathway is provided as it is in this case. Although the
proposal meets the requirements of the UDC, staff has concerns with the long, straight roadway and believes that the
applicant should incorporate traffic calming measures into the road design.
Access: The applicant is requesting an exemption from Council to allow for direct access to W. McMillan Road. The applicant is also
proposing to provide access from the extension of four (4) other stub streets to the surrounding subdivisions. Staff is not in support of
the direct access to W. McMillan Road because of the ample access to the site from the four (4) existing stub streets.
Streets: The applicant is proposing public roads throughout the development. The public roads are a 33 foot road section with rolled
curbs within a proposed 50 foot right-of-way.
Common Driveways: Two common driveways are proposed in the development and are required to be constructed in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.
The UDC (11-6C-3E.7) requires any plats using a common driveway to depict the setbacks, building envelope, and orientation of the
lots and structure that are accessed via a common driveway on the preliminary plat and/or as an exhibit with the final plat a pplication.
A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, which shall include a requirement for
maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment, for the common driveways.
Landscaping: A landscape plan was submitted with this application for the area proposed to be platted as shown in Exhibit A.3.
A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along W. McMillan Road, an arterial street, per UDC Table 11-2A-6 and is required to be
landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The buffer width along W. McMillan Road should be measured
from the back of curb per UDC 11-3B-7C.1a (2); or, the ultimate curb location as determined by ACHD if future road widening
is anticipated; revise plans accordingly.
The section of the common lot adjacent to McMillan Road is approximately 60-feet wide due to the 50-foot wide Lemp Canal and the
60-foot wide Idaho Power easements. On the submitted landscape plan, the applicant is proposing to install a 25-foot wide landscape
buffer with the required trees. Since the required trees will be in close proximity to the overhead power lines, UDC 11-3B-5J requires
the installation of class 1 trees only. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the application must submit a revised
landscape plan that shows the class 1 trees only.
Along W. McMillan Road, the applicant shall provide a 10 foot compacted gravel shoulder from the edge of pavement and shall
landscape the remainder with lawn or vegetative ground cover in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.
Landscaping within the common areas is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.
Micropath(s): In order to link subdivisions together, staff is of the opinion that a micropath lot should be included in the plat to connect
to the Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision to the west. The micropath lot should be located between Lots 5 and 6 of Block 6 and the
applicant shall coordinate with Cobblefield Crossing HOA in order to link the pathways together.
Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: The Lemp Canal transverses the north property. Per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or
canals, exclusive of natural waterways and waterways being used as amenities, which intersect, cross or lie within the area b eing
subdivided shall be covered. The applicant is seeking a waiver from Council to allow the Lemp Canal to remain un-tiled due to the size
of the facility as allowed under UDC 11-3A-6A3b.
The Lemp Canal crosses a large number of parcels on the south side of W. McMillan Road. This is the last piece on the south
side of McMillan to develop and it is unclear whether the Settlers Irrigation District will require a 20 foot wide access drive on
the south side of the Lemp Canal. The applicant has not indicated an access road on their landscape plan, nor have they
included comments in their narrative. The Settlers Irrigation District has not submitted comments on this application, so staff
is unsure if an access road will be required. If an access road is required, it will greatly impact the site design. Prior to the
Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant shall obtain some indication from the Settlers Irrigation District on their
plans for an access road along the Lemp Canal.
Open Space: A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided for this development in accord with UDC 11-3G-3A.1.
Based on the area of the preliminary plat (40.6 acres), a minimum of 4.06 acres of qualified open space is required to be provided as
set forth in UDC 11-3A-3B. A total of 4.78 acres (or 10.05%) of qualified open space is proposed consisting of ½ the street buffer along
W. McMillan Road, and internal common open space areas which appear to comply with this requirement.
Site Amenities: All developments consisting of five acres of more are required to provide a minimum of one site amenity; one
additional site amenity is required for each additional 20 acres per UDC 11-3G-3A.2, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-
3C. Based on the area of the preliminary plat (40.6 acres), staff requires a minimum of 2 qualified site amenities be provided. The
applicant proposes to provide a children’s play structure, internal pathways and a shuffleboard court as amenities for the su bdivision.
As proposed the amenities meet the requirements of the UDC.
Fencing: All fencing should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6B and 11-3A-7. The applicant shall construct fencing as
proposed.
Open Water Ponds: As proposed the pond meets the requirement s of an amenity as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3 as it is under
the 25% threshold will have recirculated water as it is for irrigation water. The applicant shall provide details of the pond with
submission of the final plat application.
Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted some conceptual sample building elevations for future homes in this development.
Building materials appear to consist of a mix of stucco and stone with architectural shingles.
The applicant shall comply with the submitted home elevations attached in Exhibit A.4. The rear and/or side of structures that
face arterial or collector streets (Lots 3-10 of Block 2, and Lots 3-11 of Block 1), 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.
Design Review (DES): A DES application is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for the single family attached
homes. The applicant must comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the Meridian
Design Manual.
Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the applicant shall revise the plat in the following ways:
The applicant shall add a micropath between Lots 5 and 6 of Block 6 and shall work with the Coblefield Crossing
HOA to connect the pathways.
The applicant shall replace the proposed road access to W. McMillan Road with a pedestrian connection that meets
the requirements of UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-3B-12.
The applicant shall incorporate traffic calming in the design of W. Loretta Street.
Lot 10 of Block 1 shall be a minimum of 8,000 square feet in accord with UDC 11-2A-5.
Written Testimony: Richard Kepler – Traffic concerns
Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
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-
2018-0074, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 16, 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-
0074, as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0074 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
1 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date: August 16, 2018
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Josh Beach, Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
208-887-2211
SUBJECT: Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant, 4345 Linder Road, LLC, has submitted an application for annexation and zoning (AZ)
of 40.6 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district; and a preliminary plat (PP) consisting of 128
building lots and 10 common lots on 40.6 acres of land for Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision.
II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed AZ and PP applications in accord with the conditions of
approval in Exhibit B and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit D.
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-2018-0074, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August
16, 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-2018-0074, as presented during the hearing on August 16, 2018, for the
following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2018-0074 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 943 W. McMillan Road in the NW¼ of Section 36, Township 4N., Range
1W.
B. Owners:
Brinegar Investments, LLLP
P. O. Box 7156
Boise, ID 83707-1156
C. Applicant:
4345 Linder Road, LLC
13967 W. Wainright Drive, Suite 102
Boise, ID 83713
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 81 of 106
2 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
D. Representative:
Engineering Solutions, LLP
1029 N Rosario Street, Suite 100
Boise, ID 83642
E. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information.
V. PROCESS FACTS
A. The subject application is for annexation and zoning and 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 notification published on: July 27, 2018
C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: July 20, 2018
D. Applicant posted notice on site(s) on: August 6, 2018
VI. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The annexation area consists of agricultural property zoned
RUT in Ada County. There is a residence on the property and associated structures that will be
removed as part of this project.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: W. McMillan Road and Single-family residential properties in Paramount
Subdivision, zoned R-4.
2. East: Single-family residential properties in Cedar Springs Subdivision, zoned R-4; and
undeveloped office lots, zoned L-O.
3. South: Single-family residential properties in Baldwin Park Subdivision, zoned R-4.
4. West: Single-family residential properties in Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision, zoned R-4.
C. History of Previous Actions: None
D. Utilities:
1. Location of sewer: Sewer is available to this property from existing sewer mainline stubs
installed in adjacent developments.
2. Location of water: Water is available to this property from existing water mainline stubs
installed in adjacent developments.
3. Issues or concerns: None.
E. Physical Features:
1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The Lemp Canal traverses the north boundary of the site. The
applicant is requesting that the canal be left open in accord with UDC 11-3A-6B.
2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property.
3. Flood Plain: NA
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 82 of 106
3 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated “Medium Density Residential” and “Office” on the Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain between three and
eight dwellings per acre.
The most dominant land use designation on the property is medium-density residential, and the FLUM
Comprehensive Plan designations are not parcel specific. In this case because there is an undeveloped
office park on the east boundary, staff is of the opinion that additional office designated area is not
necessary, nor is the applicant proposing to add more office as part of this project.
The proposed preliminary plat includes 128 single-family lots on 40.6 acres for a total gross density of
3.15 dwelling units/acre and the net density is 4.03 dwelling units/acre which are both consistent with
the MDR land use designation.
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to
the proposed use (staff analysis in italics):
“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)
The proposed single-family dwellings will contribute to the variety of housing types available
within the City.
“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 services are available and will be extended by the developer to the proposed lots upon
development of the site in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
“Require common area in all subdivisions.” (3.07.02F)
The proposed plat depicts a total of 4.78 acres (or 10.05%) of qualified open space in accord
with the requirements listed in UDC 11-3G-3.
“Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect local roads and collectors
to adjacent properties (stub streets). (3.03.020)
As part of the proposed project, the applicant is proposing to extend 4 stub streets, one from
the Cedar Springs Subdivision to the east, one from the Baldwin Park Subdivision to the
south and two from the Cobblefield Crossing subdivision to the west.
“Support infill of vacant lots in substantially developed, single-family areas at densities
similar to surrounding development.” (3.07.02I)
The subject property is adjacent to existing medium density homes and similar lot sizes exist
to the north, south, east and west. The overall density for the project falls within the
parameters of the MDR land use designation and the surrounding residential developments.
“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)
The applicant is proposing 5-foot attached internal sidewalks and a 5-foot detached sidewalk
along W. McMillan Road. The proposed sidewalks will connect to existing sidewalks to the
north, south, east and west.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 83 of 106
4 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
“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)
The submitted plat depicts one access point to W. McMillan Road. Staff is of the opinion that
direct access to W. McMillan Road is not warranted in this instance due to the ample access
though the four (4) stub streets.
The proposed access to W. McMillan is predicated on Council’s approval.
“Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping,
signage, fences and walls, etc.” (3.05.02C)
Street buffer landscaping is required adjacent to W. McMillan Road in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Separate permits shall be obtained for fencing in
compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A.
“Coordinate with public works, police, and fire departments on proposed annexation and
development requests, and the impacts on services.” (3.04.01H)
Staff has coordinated with public works, police and fire and has incorporated their comments
and conditions in this report.
“Ensure development provides safe routes and access to schools, parks and other community
gathering places.” (3.07.02N)
The applicant is proposing to construct the entire frontage of W. McMillan Road with the
first phase of development.
“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)
In order to link subdivisions together, staff is of the opinion that a micropath lot should be
included in the plat to connect to the Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision to the west. The
micropath lot should be located between Lots 5 and 6 of Block6 and the applicant shall
coordinate witht that HOA in order to link the pathways together.
For the above stated reasons, staff finds the proposed project is consiste nt with the goals and
objectives in the Comprehensive Plan.
VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
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 allowable density of dwelling units per acre and
corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range.
B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2A-5 lists the principal permitted
(P), accessory (A), conditional (C), and prohibited (-) uses in the R-4 zoning district. Any use not
explicitly listed, or listed as a prohibited use is prohibited. The proposed use of the site for single-
family attached dwellings is a principal permitted use in the R-4 zoning district.
C. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district.
D. Landscaping:
Street buffer landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC
Tables 11-2A-5 and UDC 11-3B-7C for the R-4 zoning district.
Per UDC 11-3G-3, the plat is required to provide 10 percent open space and one amenity for
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 84 of 106
5 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
every 20 acres of development area.
E. Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards: The subdivision must comply with the
subdivision design standards outlined in UDC 11-6C-3.
F. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-
family dwellings.
IX. ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
1. Annexation & Zoning
The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of 40.6 acres of land with an R-4 zoning
district. As discussed above in Section VII, staff believes the proposed zoning designations are
consistent with the policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant proposes to develop 128 new single-family residential detached homes on 40.6
acres of land as shown on the preliminary plat included in Exhibit A.2.
The legal description submitted with the application, included in Exhibit C, shows the boundaries
of the property proposed to be annexed. The property is contiguous to land that has been annexed
into the City and is within the Area of City Impact boundary.
The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant
to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this
application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in
Exhibit B.
2. Preliminary Plat
The proposed plat consists of 128 building lots and 10 common lots on 40.6 acres of land in a
proposed R-4 zoning district (see Exhibit A.2). The property is proposed to develop in 3 phases,
(see Exhibit A.2). The gross density for the subdivision is 3.15 d.u./acre. The minimum lot size is
8,000 square feet, with an average of 9,178 square feet. The applicant shall provide a revised plat
that graphically depicts the 50-foot Lemp Canal easement and the 60-foot Idaho Power easement.
Dimensional Standards: Development of this site is required to comply with the dimensional
standards listed in UDC 11-2A-3 and Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 district. Staff has reviewed the
proposed plat and with the exception of Lot 10, Block 1 which doesn’t meet the minimum lot size
for the R-8 zoning district, has found it to be in compliance with those standards.
Existing Structures: There is an existing residence and associated structures that the applicant is
proposing to remove from the property as part of this project .The applicant shall remove the
structures prior to approval of the first final plat.
Block Length: The plat is required to comply with the block length standards listed in UDC 11-
6C-3F. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and has concerns with the block length along
the north side of Loretta Street. That block face measures approximately 1,000 feet and
code allows this length if a pedestrian pathway is provided as it is in this case. Although the
proposal meets the requirements of the UDC, staff has concerns with the long, straight
roadway and believes that the applicant should incorporate traffic calming measures into
the road design.
Access: The applicant is requesting an exemption from Council to allow for direct access to W.
McMillan Road. The applicant is also proposing to provide access from the extension of four (4)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 85 of 106
6 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
other stub streets to the surrounding subdivisions. Staff is not in support of the direct access to W.
McMillan Road because of the ample access to the site from the four (4) existing stub streets.
Streets: The applicant is proposing public roads throughout the development. The public roads
are a 33 foot road section with rolled curbs within a proposed 50 foot right-of-way.
Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required along all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. The
applicant proposes to construct attached sidewalks throughout the development, and a detached
sidewalk along W. McMillan Road in accord with UDC standards.
Common Driveways: Two common driveways are proposed in the development and are required
to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.
The UDC (11-6C-3E.7) requires any plats using a common driveway to depict the setbacks,
building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structure that are accessed via a common
driveway on the preliminary plat and/or as an exhibit with the final plat application.
A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, which
shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles
and equipment, for the common driveways.
Landscaping: A landscape plan was submitted with this application for the area proposed to be
platted as shown in Exhibit A.3.
A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along W. McMillan Road, an arterial street, per UDC
Table 11-2A-6 and is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-
3B-7C. The buffer width along W. McMillan Road should be measured from the back of
curb per UDC 11-3B-7C.1a (2); or, the ultimate curb location as determined by ACHD if
future road widening is anticipated; revise plans accordingly.
The section of the common lot adjacent to McMillan Road is approximately 60-feet wide due to
the 50-foot wide Lemp Canal and the 60-foot wide Idaho Power easements. On the submitted
landscape plan, the applicant is proposing to install a 25-foot wide landscape buffer with the
required trees. Since the required trees will be in close proximity to the overhead power lines,
UDC 11-3B-5J requires the installation of class 1 trees only. Prior to the Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting, the application must submit a revised landscape plan that shows the class 1
trees only.
Along W. McMillan Road, the applicant shall provide a 10 foot compacted gravel shoulder from
the edge of pavement and shall landscape the remainder with lawn or vegetative ground cover in
accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.
Landscaping within the common areas is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-
3G-3E.
Micropath(s): In order to link subdivisions together, staff is of the opinion that a micropath lot
should be included in the plat to connect to the Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision to the west. The
micropath lot should be located between Lots 5 and 6 of Block 6 and the applicant shall
coordinate with Cobblefield Crossing HOA in order to link the pathways together.
Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: The Lemp Canal transverses the north property. Per UDC 11-
3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways and waterways
being used as amenities, which intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided sh all be
covered. The applicant is seeking a waiver from Council to allow the Lemp Canal to remain un -
tiled due to the size of the facility as allowed under UDC 11-3A-6A3b.
The Lemp Canal crosses a large number of parcels on the south side of W. McMillan Road.
This is the last piece on the south side of McMillan to develop and it is unclear whether the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 86 of 106
7 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
Settlers Irrigation District will require a 20 foot wide access drive on the south side of the
Lemp Canal. The applicant has not indicated an access road on their landscape plan, nor
have they included comments in their narrative. The Settlers Irrigation District has not
submitted comments on this application, so staff is unsure if an access road will be required.
If an access road is required, it will greatly impact the site design. Prior to the Planning and
Zoning Commission, the applicant shall obtain some indication from the Settlers Irrigation
District on their plans for an access road along the Lemp Canal.
Tree Mitigation: If there are 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. The applicant shall
submit a tree mitigation plan with the final plat application.
Open Space: A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided for this
development in accord with UDC 11-3G-3A.1. Based on the area of the preliminary plat (40.6
acres), a minimum of 4.06 acres of qualified open space is required to be provided as set forth in
UDC 11-3A-3B. A total of 4.78 acres (or 10.05%) of qualified open space is proposed consisting
of ½ the street buffer along W. McMillan Road, and internal common open space areas which
appear to comply with this requirement.
Site Amenities: All developments consisting of five acres of more are required to provide a
minimum of one site amenity; one additional site amenity is required for each additional 20 acres
per UDC 11-3G-3A.2, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. Based on the area of
the preliminary plat (40.6 acres), staff requires a minimum of 2 qualified site amenities be
provided. The applicant proposes to provide a children’s play structure, internal pathways and a
shuffleboard court as amenities for the subdivision. As proposed the amenities meet the
requirements of the UDC.
Fencing: All fencing should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6B and 11-3A-7.
The applicant shall construct fencing as proposed.
Utilities: 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.
Street lighting is required to be installed within the development in accord with the City’s
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.
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.
Storm Drainage: A storm drainage system is required for the development in accord with the
City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best
management practice as adopted by the City in accord with UDC 11-3B-11.
Open Water Ponds: As proposed the pond meets the requirement s of an amenity as set
forth in UDC 11-3G-3 as it is under the 25% threshold will have recirculated water as it is
for irrigation water. The applicant shall provide details of the pond with submission of the
final plat application.
Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted some conceptual sample building elevations
for future homes in this development, included in Exhibit A.4. Building materials appear to
consist of a mix of stucco and stone with architectural shingles.
The applicant shall comply with the submitted home elevations attached in Exhibit A.4. The
rear and/or side of structures that face arterial or collector streets (Lots 3-10 of Block 2, and
Lots 3-11 of Block 1), shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the
following: modulation (e.g. – projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 87 of 106
8 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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.
Design Review (DES): A DES application is required to be submitted prior to issuance of
building permits for the single family attached homes. The applicant must comply with the design
standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the Meridian Design Manual.
Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the applicant shall revise the plat in
the following ways:
The applicant shall add a micropath between Lots 5 and 6 of Block 6 and shall work with
the Coblefield Crossing HOA to connect the pathways.
The applicant shall replace the proposed road access to W. McMillan Road with a
pedestrian connection that meets the requirements of UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-3B-12.
The applicant shall incorporate traffic calming in the design of W. Loretta Street.
Lot 10 of Block 1 shall be a minimum of 8,000 square feet in accord with UDC 11-2A-5.
In summary, Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation and preliminary plat request
for this site with a development agreement and the recommended conditions listed in Exhibit B of
this report in accord with the Findings contained in Exhibit D.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 88 of 106
9 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
X. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings/Other
1. Vicinity Map
2. Proposed Preliminary Plat and phasing plan (dated: 5/23/2018)
3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated: 5/14/2018)
4. Conceptual Building Elevations
B. Agency & Department Comments/Conditions
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Annexation Boundary
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 89 of 106
9 | P a g e
East Ridge Estates Subdivision – H-2016-0137
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity Map
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 90 of 106
10 | P a g e
East Ridge Estates Subdivision – H-2016-0137
2. Proposed Preliminary Plat (dated: 5/23/2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 91 of 106
11 | P a g e
East Ridge Estates Subdivision – H-2016-0137
3. Proposed Landscape Plan (dated; 5/14/2018)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 92 of 106
12 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
4. Conceptual Building Elevations
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 93 of 106
13 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 94 of 106
14 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
B. EXHIBIT B - AGENCY & DEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS
1. PLANNING DIVISION
1.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1.1 A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior
to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,
the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A final
plat application shall not be submitted to City until the agreement is executed.
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 be signed by the property owner and returned to the
City within six (6) months of the City Council granting annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,
incorporate the following provisions:
a. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the applicant shall revise the plat in
the following ways:
The applicant shall add a micropath between Lots 5 and 6 of Block 6 and shall work with
the Cobblefield Crossing HOA to connect the pathways.
The applicant shall replace the proposed road access to W. McMillan Road with a
pedestrian connection that meets the requirements of UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-3B-12.
The applicant shall incorporate traffic calming in the design of W. Loretta Street.
Lot 10 of Block 1 shall be a minimum of 8,000 square feet in accord with UDC 11-2A-5.
b. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat and
building elevations depicted in Exhibit A and the revisions noted in the staff report.
c. The applicant shall comply with the submitted home elevations attached in Exhibit A.4. The
rear and/or side of structures that face arterial or collector streets (Lots 3-10 of Block 2, and
Lots 3-11 of Block 1), 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. The site shall develop with a minimum of 10.05% open space (4.78 acres) and shall include
the following amenities: a children’s play structure, an internal pathway system and a shuffle
board court.
e. Lot 1, Block 3 with its associated amenities shall be constructed with the first phase of the
development.
f. The 5-foot detached sidewalk and 25 foot landscape buffer along W. McMillan Road shall be
constructed with the first phase of development.
g. The applicant shall remove the existing home prior to approval of the first final plat.
1.1.2 The preliminary plat included in Exhibit A.2, dated 5/23/2018, shall be revised as follows:
a. All properties that abut a common driveway shall take access from the driveway; however, if
an abutting property has the required minimum street frontage, that property is not required to
take access from the common driveway. In this situation, the abutting property's driveway
shall be on the opposite side of the shared property line; away from the common driveway.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 95 of 106
15 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways shall be prohibited, unless separated by a
minimum five foot (5') wide landscaped buffer.
Lots 9 and 10, Block 2 shall take access from common driveway as proposed. Since Lot
12 and Lot 8 Block 1 do not take access from the common drive, the lots are required to
comply with UDC 11-6C-2(D).
Lots 3 and 5, Block 10 shall take access from common driveway as proposed.
Since Lot 2 and Lot 6 Block 10 do not take access from the common drive, the lots
are required to comply with UDC 11-6C-2(D).
b. An exhibit depicting the setbacks, building envelope and orientation of lots and structures
shall be submitted a future final plat application. Include note on the final plat that addresses
access across the lots and the responsible party for maintenance of the common driveway and
5-foot wide landscape buffer.
c. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant shall provide a revised plat and
landscape plan that depicts the required 50-foot wide Lemp Canal easement and the 60-foot
wide Idaho Power easement.
d. As shown on the plat, Lot 10, Block 1 does not meet the minimum lot size requirements of
UDC 11-2A-5. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant shall revise the
plat and landscape plan to comply with the UDC.
1.1.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A.3, dated 5/14/2018, shall be revised as follows:
a. The buffer width along W. McMillan Road shall be measured from the back of curb per UDC
11-3B-7C.1a(2); or, the ultimate curb location as determined by ACHD if future road
widening is anticipated; revise accordingly.
b. If there are any existing trees on the site that are 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. Any existing trees proposed to be
retained on-site shall be noted on the landscape plan submitted with a final plat application.
c. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the application shall submit a revised
landscape plan that reflects the requirement that all trees within the 60 –foot Idaho Power
easement be class 1 trees only.
d. Along W. McMillan Road, the applicant shall provide a 10 foot compacted gravel shoulder
from the edge of pavement and shall landscape the remainder of the right-of-way with lawn
or vegetative ground cover in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.
e. The applicant shall provide details of the proposed pond with submission of the final
plat application.
f. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant shall receive approval from the
Settlers Irrigation District and Idaho Power on the proposed landscape improvements within the
dedicated easement area.
g. Prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission, the applicant shall provide information from the
Settlers Irrigation District on whether or an access road on the south side of the Lemp Canal is a
requirement of this plat. If an access road is required, the applicant shall revise the landscape plan
to comply with UDC 11-3B-7.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 96 of 106
16 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
1.1.4 The applicant shall comply with all condition of the Ada County Highway District.
1.2 General Conditions of Approval
1.2.1 Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the R-8 zoning district listed in UDC
Table 11-2-A-5.
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 and MCC 9-1-28.
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.
1.2.9 Construct all parkways consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17E, 11-3G-3B5
and 11-3B-7C.
1.2.10 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.
1.2.11 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 All common open space and site amenities shall be maintained by an owner's association as set
forth in UDC 11-3G-3F1.
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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 97 of 106
17 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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 A street lighting plan will be required with the submittal of development plans. Plan
requirements can be found in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting at
http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272
2.1.2 This development coincides with the 1/2 mile grid, which would normally require 12-inch water
main, however upsizing of water main at this location is not required.
2.1.3 The southern most storm water seepage bed located in Lot 10, Block 5 shall be relocated to the
east to avoid crossing the proposed sewer mainline crossing this lot.
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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 98 of 106
18 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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.
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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 99 of 106
19 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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.
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 The Police Department has no comment on this application.
4. FIRE DEPARTMENT
4.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3,600 square feet require a fire-flow of 1,000
gallons per minute for a duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two family
dwellings in excess of 3,600 square feet require a minimum fire flow as specified in Appendix B
of the International Fire Code. Fire Hydrant spacing shall be provided as required by Appendix C
of the International Fire Code.
4.2 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 the 4 ½” outlet face the main street or parking lot drive aisle.
b. Fire hydrants shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications.
d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits.
e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10’.
f. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18” above finished grade to the center of the 4 ½” outlets.
g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of IFC Section 509.5.
h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing
buildings within 1,000 feet of the project.
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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 100 of 106
20 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
4.4 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside and
have a clear driving surface of 20’ in width capable of supporting an imposed weight of 75,000
GVW, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.
4.5 Private Alleys and Fire Lanes shall have a 20’ wide improved surface capable of supporting an
imposed load of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D
Section D103.6 Signs.
4.6 Ensure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation as set forth
in International Fire Code Section 304.1.2.
4.7 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.
5. REPUBLIC SERVICES
5.1 Republic Services has no comments on this application.
6. PARKS DEPARTMENT
6.1 The Parks Department has no comment on this application.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
7.1.1 Improve McMillan Road with additional pavement widening to total 17-feet of pavement from
centerline plus a 3-foot wide gravel shoulder abutting the site.
7.1.2 Construct a westbound left-turn lane on McMillan Road at the Buckstone/McMillan intersection.
7.1.3 Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on the south side of the canal along McMillan Road
abutting the site and tie into existing improvements west and east of the site.
7.1.4 Provide a permanent right-of-way easement to 2-feet behind back of sidewalk for any public
sidewalk placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way.
7.1.5 Close the existing residential driveway on McMillan Road, located 496-feet west of the east
property line with 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
7.1.6 Continue the four stub streets into the site and construct the internal streets as 33-foot street
sections with curb, gutter, and attached 5-foot wide sidewalk within 47-feet of right-of-way.
7.1.7 Redesign the Bird Wing Drive onto Buckstone Avenue intersection to meet District policy.
7.1.8 Construct a new local street, Buckstone Avenue onto McMillan Road, located 710-feet west of
Fox Run Way and 640-feet from the east property line from the site.
7.1.9 Construct the internal local streets with minimum 125-foot offset.
7.1.10 Provide traffic calming on McKinley Park Avenue, Loretta Street, and Bryce Canyon Avenue.
7.1.11 Submit the bridge plans for the crossing of the Lemp Canal (Buckstone Avenue) for review and
approval prior to the pre-construction meeting and final plat approval.
7.1.12 McMillan Road is classified as a minor arterial roadway; direct lot access is prohibited to this
roadway and should be noted on the final plat.
7.1.13 Payment of impact fees is due prior to issuance of a building permit.
7.1.14 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 101 of 106
21 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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 August 16, 2018 – Page 102 of 106
22 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Annexation Boundary
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 103 of 106
23 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 104 of 106
24 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Annexation Findings:
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 annexation, the
Council shall make the following findings:
a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan;
The Applicant is proposing to annex the subject 40.6 acre property with an R-4 zoning
district and develop 128 new single-family residential homes. Staff finds that the proposed
map amendment complies with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and should be
compatible with adjacent residential uses (see section VII above for more information).
b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Staff finds that the proposed map amendment to the R-4 zoning district is consistent with the
purpose statement for 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 map amendment will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare. 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 annexing this property with an R-4 zoning district is in the best interest of the City
if the applicant revises the plat per staff’s recommendation and enters into a development
agreement.
2. 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
Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, transportation, and circulation. Please see
Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section VII, of the Staff Report for more
information.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 105 of 106
25 | P a g e
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – H-2018-0074
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 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’s or Council’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 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 significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on
this site.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda August 16, 2018 – Page 106 of 106
WHITECLIFFE ESTATES SUBDIVISION
AUGUST 16, 2018
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION
Public Hearing
Whitecliffe Estates Subdivision – Vicinity Map
Whitecliffe Estates – Aerial View
Whitecliffe Estates – Landscape Plan
Whitecliffe Estates – AMENITIES
A total of 4.11 acres of open space (10.12%
of project area)
Landscaped entrance parkway and
pedestrian pathways
Central common area
Playground equipment
Picnic gazebo
Pond
Second pocket park w/yard shuffleboard
Whitecliffe Estates – Landscape Plan
Whitecliffe Estates – Landscape Plan
Whitecliffe Estates – Preliminary Plat
Whitecliffe Estates – Sample Elevation
Whitecliffe Estates – Sample Elevation
Whitecliffe Estates – Sample Elevation
Whitecliffe Estates – Landscape Plan