The URL can be used to link to this page

2019-02-07 M ER I D I A N P L ANN I N G AND ZON I N G COMMI SSI ON M EETI N G A GENDA C ity Council Chamber s 33 E ast B roadway Avenue M er idian, I daho T hursday, F ebruary 7, 2019 at 6:00 P M 1. Roll-C all Attendance __X ___Lis a Holland __X ___And rew S eal __O ___R honda Mc C arvel __X ___R eid O ls en __X ___Ryan F itzgerald __X___Bill C assinelli 2. Adoption of Agenda Adopted __X ___ J essic a P errault - C hairp ers o n 3. Consent Agenda [Action Item] Approved A. Approve M inutes of J anuary 17, 2019 P lanning and Zoning Commission M eeting 4. Action I tems L and U se P ublic H ea rin g P rocess: After th e P ublic H ea rin g is op en ed th e sta ff rep ort will b e p resen ted b y th e a ssigned city plann er. F ollowin g S taff's report th e app licant has u p to 1 5 minutes to p resen t th eir applica tion . E a ch m emb er of th e public m ay p rovid e testimon y u p to 3 minutes or if they are rep resentin g a la rg er g roup, such a s a H om eown ers Association, they ma y b e allow ed 1 0 minutes. T h e applicant is then a llow ed 1 0 add itional minutes to resp on d to the public's com ments. N o additional pub lic testimon y is ta ken once th e public h ea rin g is closed . A. P ublic Hearing C ontinued fr om D ecember 20, 2018 for Alpina Townhouse S ubdivision (H-2018-0090) by A Team C onsultants, L ocated NE of W. Ustick Rd. and N. L inder Rd. Recommend Denial to City Council – Scheduled for March 19, 2019 1. R equest: P reliminary P lat consisting of 15 multi-f amily building lots and 7 common lots on 3.99 ac res; and 2. R equest: C onditional Use P ermit For a multi-f amily development consisting of 60 multi-family residential units within 15 multi-family structures on 3.99 acres of land in an existing C -C zoning district; and 3. R equest: Modification of an E xisting D evelopment A greement to change an existing development agreement to change the previously approved concept plan with a new concept plan B. P ublic Hearing C ontinued fr om J anuary 17, 2019 for P ine F our- Plex (H-2018-0135) by Amanda Blackwell, neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located 645 W. Pine Ave. Approved 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi -family family development consisting of 4 units on 0.29 of an acre of land in the R-15 zoning district C. Public Hearing for Razzberry Villas (H-2018-0130) by Ed Bowman, Located 1434 and 1492 Star Dr. Recommend Approval to City Council — Scheduled for March 19, 2019 1. Request: Rezone of 1.86 acres of land from the R-8 and L-0 zoning district to the R-15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 1.43 acres of land in a proposed R-15 zoning district D. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility H-2018-0087 by Horizon Tower/Verizon Wireless C/0 Powder River Development Services, Inc, Located at the southeast corner of E. Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd Approved 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a wireless communication facility in and R-8 zoning district E. Public Hearing for Excalibur Metal Design (H-2018-0139) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located 1322 E. Watertower St. Approved 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a light industry use on 0.83 acres of land in the C -G zoning district Adjourned at 8:54pm All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing should contact the City Clerk's Office at 208-888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting February 7, 2019. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of February 7, 2019, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Jessica Perreault. Members Present: Chairman Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Andrew Seal and Commissioner Reid Olsen. Members Absent: Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel. Others Present: C.Jay Coles, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Stephanie Leonard and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland ___X___ Reid Olsen __X___ Andrew Seal ___X___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Rhonda McCarvel ___X___ Bill Cassinelli ___X___ Jessica Perreault - Chairman Perreault: Okay. I think we are about ready to start. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Before we do roll call I would like to welcome our new commissioners, Mr. Andrew Seal here to my left and Mr. Reid Olsen down here at the end. Fitzgerald: Welcome, guys. Perreault: We are excited to have them, so try to go easy on them this evening. Okay. Let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Perreault: Okay. Next is the adoption of the agenda. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Perreault: Madam Chair, I moved we adopt agenda for January 17th -- or, I'm sorry, February 7th. I'm looking at the wrong thing. Excuse me. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 69 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 2 of 61 Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of January 17, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Perreault: Next on the agenda No. 3 is the Consent Agenda to approve the minutes of the January 17th, 2019, Planning and Zoning meeting. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent -- Consent Agenda as presented? Cassinelli: So moved. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Perreault: So, next we are going to explain the public hearing process and share a little bit about how this evening's meeting will go. 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 the Uniform Development Code, with the staff's recommendations. After the staff have made their presentation, the applicant will come forward to present their case for the approval of their application and respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to make their presentation. After the applicant has finished we will open up for public testimony . There is a sign-up sheet in the back -- and, actually, we now have those on iPads there on the back table for anybody who wishes 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 the 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 an opportunity to come back and respond if they desire to do so. We will, then, close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council or a final decision if necessary. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing Continued from December 20, 2018 for Alpina Townhouse Subdivision (H-2018-0090) by A Team Consultants, Located NE of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 15 multi-family building lots and 7 common lots on 3.99 acres; and 2. Request: Conditional Use Permit For a multi-family development consisting of 60 multi-family residential units Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 70 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 3 of 61 within 15 multi-family structures on 3.99 acres of land in an existing C -C zoning district; and 3. Request: Modification of an Existing Development Agreement to change an existing development agreement to change the previously approved concept plan with a new concept plan Perreault: So, at this time we will open the public hearing that has been continued from December 20th, 2018, for the Alpina Townhouse Subdivision, H-2018-0090, and we will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. This project has been in front of you a couple times now, so, hopefully, we will get some resolution this evening. I just want to get everyone reoriented with the project and kind of as to what they have proposed since it's been several months since you have heard the whole -- entire -- this application in its entirety. So, the site's located on the southeast corner -- or, excuse me, the northeast corner of Ustick and Linder Roads. It's approximately 3.99 acres of land that's currently zoned C-C in the city. As you recall back in 2014 the city did annex this property in. As part of the annexation of that property there was a development agreement that required -- showed a concept plan that had commercial uses on this particular property and that's currently the recorded DA that governs the development of the site. As we mentioned to you back when we first brought this to you in November, the applicant is processing a DA modification before City Council on this application. You are not taking action on that particular application , but in order for that use to move forward on the site that DA does need to be amended and that concept plan tied to that development agreement needs to be amended. So, keep that in mind as you deliberate on this application. So, back on the 20th I provided a staff memo to you and gave you a quick update as to what had transpired. If you recall during that hearing the Commission was concerned that although this is a small piece, the applicant was proposing quite a bit -- they had some multi-family. They came back to you on the 20th, went the opposite direction and took off the commercial component and made it all residential with the plan that's before you now. So, this does consists of a 15 build -- so, they are asking for a conditional use permit and a preliminary plat to develop 60 residential units on the site, a mixed use community designation. As testified at the last hearing we informed you that mixed use community designations required a minimum of three land use types. Again, in my memo that I prepared for you I had stated that if you're -- in your purview to find this being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. If you feel that this site is appropriate for single use that's certainly within your purview, but based -- looking back through the record it -- there was the -- my -- from my perspective in looking back at the records it was the intent of this Commission to have at least two land uses on this particular property and some commercial and that would happen with -- in conjunction with the property to the north and so the -- the applicant was here on the 20th testifying to that affect. You heard from the new owners of the land, they said they wanted more time to work with the applicant and bring back another revised plan. So, that's what the applicant's done, he's -- and that's part of the public record that I provided to you. So, this is the exhibit that staff received early in the week. So, you can see here the applicant still is depicting the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 71 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 4 of 61 single family -- the single use on their particular project, the four-plex units at a total of 60 units to the acre, transitioning was some multi -- 55 and older multi-family and commercial along Linder and, then, some townhomes along the north boundary. To the east we have some commercial along the Ustick frontage and, then, transitioning to single family homes. I would mention to you that this isn't ideally the typical way that we see the mixed use developments. We usually have commercial transition to higher density and, then, feather out to single family. So, I also wanted to point out to you that the plan here -- you can't tie the applicant to this concept or this layout. Your purview is really the 3.99 acres and trying to determine whether or not that single use is right for this particular property. So, I at least wanted to get back and at least refresh your memory on what was discussed and what you wanted the applicant to come back with . I would also mention to you that the access points that are showing on -- at least the properties to the north and to the east are conceptual in nature as well, so they will have to go back through the process, get ACHD's approval. So, if you can see my cursor here, you're seeing three access points, these are -- these are best guesses at this point. There is no certainty that ACHD or the city would approve that many access points for this particular development. Now, what I recall as part of our conversation when we were here is the Commission was amenable to floating that mixed use designation when the property to the north came in for annexation. The way I heard things was -- if you can see my cursor -- I thought you wanted them to strip out commercial along some of their frontage on the Linder side and float that up to the north, so the commercial node would be right at the intersection and, then, transition to their -- their residential and, then, float to single family and the plan that's before you isn't portrayed that way. So, I would remind Commission that when we came back before you in November we did recommend denial and at this point that's where staff's recommendation stands is for denial. I will go ahead and conclude my presentation and I will stand for any other questions -- additional questions you may have. Perreault: Any questions for staff? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Bill, do you under -- my understanding is this -- the single family, multi-family section that is around it is single owner; is that correct? Or is that multiple owners? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I'm -- I'm not sure the -- when I looked at the record back on the 20th it sounds like there is multiple owners that own the northern property and, then, a single owner to the east, if I'm correct. Fitzgerald: You have two to three owners is my understanding. Parsons: That is correct. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 72 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 5 of 61 Perreault: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Please state your name and address for the record. Arnold: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, for the record my name is Steve Arnold. I'm with A Team Land Consultants. Business address is 1785 Whisper Cove, Boise. 83709. I will kind of give you a rough recap for the new Commissioners here, kind of, of our project. We started out originally with two uses on the site with the -- an office building and, then, the multi-family and at our last hearing one of the directions from the Commission was to go work with the neighboring property on a circulation plan. So, we have -- we have -- at that time we agreed to table the site, so that we could meet with them. We have had that chance to meet with them and the developer has had communications with them. We prepared this map and it's my understanding that they are in agreement with what we are proposing as a circulation plan. I have put these access points on here based on my experience with ACHD. ACHD requires a minimum of 660 feet from the intersection before you can get full access and that was what we were presenting to the Commission that, you know, this -- this site had been a retail office use and it was -- it's been for sale for the last five, six years with no outcome, because of the concerns -- the issues that people had with buying something with limited access. We started out showing an access point on Linder and, then, we -- after discussion with the Commission that we were going to -- the direction from this board was to go with the single use, because the -- the two uses didn't seem to blend very well and it was really difficult to make something like that on such a small site that mix in there. So, the direction first to go around was to eliminate that and, then, we -- when we eliminated that use we also got rid of the access point onto the Linder. We were working with the neighbors to the north and we decided at that point that, you know, the access onto Linder would best shifted further to the north, thus, getting further away from the intersection and that would be right-in, right-out. The middle one I think, you know, based on ACHD's policies we could have that, you know, granted, you're not acting on that tonight , but I laid this out based on my best knowledge with ACHD and, then, we also continued cross-access to the east, so that that could eventually be connected to a public street. I put the public streets all on intersections where there is already public streets on the other side of the road or where those other intersection s will most likely end up. So, that's kind of the -- the thought behind this circulation plan. For those new Commissioners as well, this site we have got just about an acre of open space. So, we are providing three amenities, a putting green, dog park -- actually, there is four. And, then, we have got a community garden area and, then, at the hard corner we are doing, you know, another sitting area with some open art at that -- at the intersection. We don't have that completely figured out right now, but we have got an area reserved for that. Unlike a lot of other multi-family, we are providing quite a bit of additional parking spaces. We have got 134 showed -- shown, 120 is required by code. The building -- I don't know if -- the building is fairly unique. This developer has done several of the projects in the valley. They have -- in Meridian. We have gotten the Shadow Creek, Timber Grove and Stone's Throw and the -- the unique part about this building is you have got an apartment -- a townhouse feel, but it is an apartment building. Each of the units -- it has its own -- there is no one living above you, so there is an entrance on all four sides of the building. So, it's not your typical, you know, garden style walk up. They are a very attractive building that is -- that Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 73 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 6 of 61 rents out very well and they get a very good rent for them. So, the product type that we are putting in there is a higher quality than most apartments that you see. I know when working with Bill earlier that was some of the thoughts with our amenities and buildings was to create kind of that premier multi-family project. So, it was my understanding -- and maybe I'm confused with this, but the staff, based on some of the direction from the Commission and the changes that we did in the plan, gave us conditions that could be conditions of approval and I -- I thought at our last hearing when I asked the Commission, you know, if we eliminated the office use was this something -- a direction that the Commission would go towards and I thought at the time that we had staff recommendation of approval at that time. So, Bill, correct me if I'm wrong, we went from the recommendation for denial to working here with the Commission showing how things would circulate in the area, showing how we could float that commercial component and that was the last direction I understood. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I don't want to take too much of the applicant's time here, because he does get 15 minutes, but I did want to go back to the memo that I did prepare. If you recall, staff's recommendation has always been denial on this project. The way I -- I said in -- in -- in the staff's memo that I prepared for you is that we were supportive of the revised layout for the single use, but it's predicated on this Commission body to determine whether or not a single use is appropriate for this site and we prepared some traffic conditions in case you felt inclined to approve th is use on this particular property. So, no way has staff changed their recommendation. What we have done is set you up to feel like if the applicant has provided enough justification or argument for a single use for this particular property, it was trying to set you up if you felt swayed that his -- his -- he was more persuasive than staff's stance on it, then, you had an opportunity and we had the ability for you to look at some conditions and move this forward to our City Council. That was the intent behind that. So, it wasn't staff -- staff did not change their recommendation on the project. Arnold: Thanks, Bill, for the clarification. So, for the new commissioners, again, the reason that we were coming in with a single use we couldn't get access to pencil with the proposed commercial we would need to get cross -access to the neighboring properties in order for that to work and, frankly, the way ACHD's policies have changed -- this property was originally approved with full access onto Ustick and right-in, right-out on Linder. ACHD has since changed their access policies, which restricted both to right-in, right-out. So, in our opinion, it makes more sense to put a commercial use and what you have in front of you is what was -- previously is what has been approved, but that use with those access points right now is no longer feasible. So, what we are asking the P&Z -- the Commission to do is to float -- if their desire is to have commercial here further to the north or east to where there is better access points. I guess with that I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 74 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 7 of 61 Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I got a couple of questions I guess. Looking back at that -- can you pull up that -- that new drawing, Bill. Thank you. The property to the east, the commercial there, have you talked to that -- to the owner there or you just drawing that out as -- as that -- Arnold: Commissioner Cassinelli, no, that -- we have not had communications with that owner. The owner to the north of us has been the most vocal . That cross-access to either say -- or, you know, if they develop in the future and they want just all single family use or they come in with a use that's not compatible with the -- the multi-family, that process doesn't need to be extended for our use or theirs. I just put it in there as an example of how that would work. I showed the commercial up front on Ustick there, because, there again, you have got the future intersection of a road that will eventually go north and tie into the stub and that location the commercial use would have full access to Ustick Road. Cassinelli: Okay. But you haven't -- you haven't had any communication -- Arnold: No. No direct communication. Cassinelli: Okay. The other thing -- and I will just -- I will -- my understanding -- so, just kind of -- I -- I don't know if everybody else is on the same page here with me , but my understanding from the last time that we were together was not to have a -- come back with just a circulation plan, but I was -- I was thinking that the communication you were going to have with the owner to the north was really to develop -- to come back with a -- it was with a plan for full development and really turning that entire area into -- into the multi-use with -- you know, with, hopefully, three -- three different types of uses there and not just a circulation plan. I don't know -- kind of see what others think, but that was my -- that was my thought, but you came back and you're saying that your takeaway from last time was to come back with a circulation plan; is that correct on that? Arnold: Yeah. So, the -- at the last meeting that we had we had the representative of the owner -- of the buyer to the north, he said, you know, basically timeout, we want to look -- we are buying this property, we want to make sure that this works for our site and that's when the Commission tabled it at that time. We, then, met with them and said, look, you know, we could float this either way, the cross-access point, on any, you know, part of our north boundary and, you know, they just haven't -- I think they are a long ways away from submitting the development, but it was -- at that time I don't think the Commission was directing them to submit application or to come up with a specific plan , I think the direction was for us to go work with them to make sure that they were accepted -- acceptable with the location. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 75 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 8 of 61 Fitzgerald: And I -- I will somewhat echo what you said, because I think -- you know, I appreciate all the work you have done and the circulation plan was -- one of the concepts was where the access points are going to be. I think the concept of we are going to float this multi-use up into that -- we have to have more than I think -- I think what we are seeing. Maybe that's what -- I think what -- I think we are trying to get across. I think we are -- what's highest and best use versus what was already approved versus what you guys are bringing to us now and how does -- this is a hard corner, it is a commercial corner somewhat that's already been approved and wha t is -- fits best there -- and I understand the access points -- component you're -- you're talking about. I think my thought was access points also, but also what are you bringing up there and I think that the heat map -- or I mean the bubble map is -- is helpful, but I'm not sure it gives us all the pieces we were looking for. Perreault: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Arnold: If I may, the problem with doing that is we are -- we are -- we have submitted an application. I could show you whatever you want on that and there is not a real application on that piece of property. What you have before you tonight is 3.9 acres of what we are proposing and even though you see that, I mean it's -- you're not acting on that and that's why I -- I tried to leave kind of a loose bubble concept of how things would work . When you get into the specific -- specific commercial buildings, I mean you will have different layouts for all that and, you know, that -- that could be, you know, years down the road before that ever gets defined with an end user. So, that's why I didn't -- I mean I -- I can't -- it would -- it would be deceiving to you guys if I did it just to show you something that worked and I'm not about that. Perreault: Questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Do we have anyone signed up to testify? Coles: Thank you, Madam Chair. We do have one. Denise LaFever. Perreault: Okay. Please come forward. LaFever: Hello. My name is Denise LaFever and I live at 6706 North Salvia Way and my mom actually lives in the neighborhood right behind this and what we are looking at here is -- right there we -- we have already discussed it. It's zoned commercial. This is a hard corner. It -- right across here you have -- on Ustick that has been expanded to four lanes. We are going to be expanding Linder to four lanes. They are -- they are talking -- it was just in the Mayor's address that they are looking at putting a bridge over Ustick. What a sweet, sweet corner this is for commercial. Access all the way to Kuna, all the way to Eagle. You have got rooftops. You have got traffic counts. Let's see if I can figure out how to change this. You already saw that. That's what was proposed. It has been proposed as commercial. Right here back in 2014 when this applicant -- application went through there was a lot of holes in here that didn't have rooftops. Since then those have also been developed. Sawtooth is done. White Castle is done. I can go on with lists of houses that are in these blank spaces from back there. We just talked about Linder, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 76 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 9 of 61 Ustick and the expansions and where it's going to go and how far that road is going to go from Kuna all the way to Eagle. It's a great sweet hard corner in an area that is desperate for commercial. Try to find a restaurant. Go up to Rudy's. It's busy all the time. Go to Gino's. It's busy all the time. Homestead -- there is just not enough commercial in this area to service the area that's there. Right here -- I'm not sure if everybody's already seen this or not. These are the permits that have already been pulled from multi -family. There are a lot of permits that have been pulled, especially last year, 1,128 units permitted. This year alone over 300 permitted. That doesn't even count the number of annexed that haven't been permitted yet. We have a lot of multi -family properties on the north side of I-84. Furthermore, this development fails to get some of the things that we like to see in multi-family development. One, it's not located near a park. Nearby definition when you talk to folks it's a quarter of a mile. This isn't near a park. It's not near an employment center. That's another area that we like to locate those at. In addition, we are right in the middle of a Comprehensive Plan. The area that's right around that is open. It's a prime area to go back through and do a backage road and actually allow even more commercial to go in there. Once again you have got rooftops now that -- that didn't exist back in 2014. You have got lanes. You have got property to the north that's now available for redevelopment where the owner in the past didn't want to sell , he liked having his sheep there. I would like you to deny this application. I think the conceptual plan is not well put together. It isn't in consensus with the other owners. If you don't deny it today, at least give the applicant an opportunity to withdraw and come back with a co - application with the other owners around it. Perreault: Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room that would like to testify? Okay. Excellent. Please come forward. State your name and address for the record. Naumann: Matt Naumann. 6202 South McDermott in Nampa. Perreault: Okay. Naumann: But I worked for Cushman Wakefield. I'm actually the selling broker on this land and so I just wanted to respond to her comments a little bit . I also have the land to the south for sale and so I have been working on these two parcels for over two years. I have talked to CVS, to Walgreens, to every gas station in the town, to fast food, to retail strip center people -- no retail wants to be here. Everyone wants to be at Ten Mile and Chinden, you know, Linder and -- Linder and Chinden, Ten Mile and Chinden, Ten Mile and McMillan. That's where all the retail is going, that's where all the strip center is going. We tried to sell this land to every retail user we can find and there is none that want to be on this corner and so, you know, your, in my opinion hurting the landowner, basically saying you can't sell your land, because there is no retail that wants to be there and so I'm not disagreeing that it would be a good retail corner if you could find some retail that wants to be there and there is not. You know, for two years I reached out to everybody I can reach out to and so, you know, I just ask that you take that into consideration when you're trying to decide what to do with this parcel and, then, go from there. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 77 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 10 of 61 Perreault: Thank you. What -- what have been the reasons they have given for not being interested in that corner, if I may ask? Naumann: Well, so the gas station -- you got Fast Eddy's just down the way and, then, Maverick just built a huge one down the other way, so they don't feel there is a need for gas stations. In terms of a CVS and Walgreens -- Walgreens has one a mile away and CVS has no desire to be that close. They feel like Walgreens has saturated that area. You know, fast food, they just -- they want more traffic counts. They want to be in a different area. And so, you know, the strip centers with your Costcos and your Wincos and everything going on at Chinden, it's just more synergy and so there is just not the desire for the retail to be in this area and so, you know, due to -- there may be some niche, you know, a dentist or a doctor's office that you could put in there potentially, but outside of that you're not going to get your high end retail or your -- your strip malls and your -- those sorts of things are not going to end up on this corner. So, if it's going to be commercial, the only commercial you're going to get to go there is going to be, you know, a dentist or a doctor's office that, you know, wants to be in that location. Perreault: Thank you. Naumann: Thank you. Perreault: Is there anyone else in the room that would like to testify? Reynolds: Good evening. My name is Sally Reynolds. I reside at 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian. So, I am actually on the new steering committee for the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian and I just wanted to stand as a member of that Comprehensive Plan committee and remind everyone that we are in the middle of redoing that and there have been so many changes since the last comp plan that we -- we are making some -- some really big changes to it right now. So, for this corner to be changed into residential from commercial at this time I don't think it is the right time to do that. I do understand that sometimes it can be a struggle to have commercial entities who are interested in the land, but I think that we do have the rooftops and I think that with the expansion of Linder Village we will have the traffic counts and I think that with Costco and Winco both being approved with this corner being as hard as it -- as it is, I think that the commercial will come forward. It might not be in the timeline that the applicant wants, but I think that it will happen. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. If there is no one else here to testify, would the applicant like to come forward? Do you have anything else to share with us? Arnold: Well, I guess, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, what I would add to that, you know, there has been a statement about the demand for the commercial and retail and you have got another -- a commercial broker up here telling he has worked on it for several years and it just hasn't worked. Increased traffic -- it's not going to increase access and the -- the key there is access. You have got a proposed for multi-family that doesn't need that high -- high level of access that both commercial or retail will need. So, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 78 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 11 of 61 if there ever is the demand or the traffic increases, that doesn't increase ACHD's ability to grant this parcel access. There was a statement about the number of multi-family, the number of permits and that there -- you know, there is too much. We are at a 2.3 percent vacancy in Ada County. You know, a normal vacancy's rate is around four to five. There is a huge demand right now for that type of living and that location, although it's not good for retail or commercial, it will work fine for multi-family. That's all I have to add and I will stand for questions. Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. Arnold: Thanks. Perreault: At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I move we close the public hearing on H-2018-0090. Cassinelli: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Alpina Townhouse Subdivision H-2018-0090. All those in favor say aye. None opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Perreault: Who would like to begin? Cassinelli: Let the new guys go. I will throw it out there. I -- I'm definitely inclined to go with staff's recommendation on this. I know that, you know, what -- what we have heard that, you know, retail doesn't want to go in there right now and I -- I get that. I don't think this is a bad plan for the corner, but I believe it has to interact with that to get that -- that mixed use. It's got to work with the -- with that property to the north and possibly even that little -- that little sliver to the east and it may take -- it may take a long time. It may take a couple years to finally get that whole -- that whole parcel together, but I think it's got to be done right and maybe ultimately what will be built there are -- you know, is this -- are these four-plexes to fit in with everything else there, but I just -- as it stands on its own it, it -- it just doesn't work by its own without integrating those other pieces. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: And, Steve, I give you a ton of credit for being patient with us. The challenge I have is similar to what Commissioner Cassinelli said. I -- we have a pretty singular shot to do that area well and I think without having an understanding of how to float that north with mixed use, I'm not sure if it fits, right, individually and is the highest and best uses what's already there or if we have to wait a little bit longer to make sure we do it right. So , Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 79 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 12 of 61 I'm kind of going along with staff as well, but I would love to hear my other commissioners' comments. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: You know, I want to thank the applicant, too, for coming back. This is the third time we have -- we have heard this application and I think they have been trying to be very flexible and trying to work with the property owners up north. As far as the -- the site plan itself, if we could just pick it up and move it into a high densit y subdivision I think it would be a great fit. I like the site plan. I think they have done a very good job of bringing additional amenities, having plenty of parking, having lots of green space. It's -- it's very creative, it looks nice, it's a different kind of product than we have from a lot of the other multi-family projects. So, I'm torn because as a site plan -- I mean if I look at this just by itself I really like the concept of it and I think it fits in Meridian. Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Holland: I wish it was a ten acre parcel, so that we couldn't have to worry about the -- the access issues, but it is a real concern for this parcel developing in the future. I wish that we could have a joint application where -- where they can work together to do a really nice master planned section of town, because it is a corner that -- it's a high visibility corner, it's going to only continue growing invisibility, especially with some of those roadway improvements coming up. The challenge, too, is, you know, we could approve it and hope for the best with what happens with the property to the north, but that site plan hasn't got in front of us and we can't consider it really as part of this application and that's where I'm stuck, too, because I really like this -- I like the layout of it and that's -- it's a tough spot to be in. I think I agree with the other comments that have been made. Cassinelli: She said it best. Fitzgerald: Yeah. She did it very articulate. Perreault: Any additional -- Olsen: Madam Chair, I'm -- I'm sorry, but -- Perreault: Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: -- I don't have any comment I could make that would add to the conversation at this time. Perreault: Well, this is where our position becomes difficult, because we -- we are always wanting to balance what is best for the applicant with what's best for the community and that's what we are here for and so I -- I do completely agree with my fellow commissioners Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 80 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 13 of 61 and -- and I think Commissioner Holland says it very well that -- that the applicant has done a beautiful job with the development as it is and I don't -- I think it will be a great addition to a larger -- a larger mixed use community and -- and I also am in agreement with staff, not because of the individual project itself, but just because it's single use in a multi-use area and we have to just take into account this specific piece and it will be fantastic to know what was going on in the surrounding properties , but we don't at this time. So, that being said, do we have a motion? Holland: Madam Chair, one other thought just to throw out before I make a motion. I know in the first site plan we got on this project there was some commercial initially proposed on the west side for a small office unit. Not that I want the applicant to come back another time, but I'm wondering if that's something we want to offer up is another alternative if they wanted to reconfigure it one more time to add commercial back in or if we think that we are just in a spot where we need to -- Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I will comment. I think that didn't -- for me it didn't work. I -- I know we went from a six-plex to an office to a -- and I think it didn't flow well. I think this -- this site plan looks great. It was -- it has the open space we were looking for. It's just -- it's the piece that -- if I could slide it up and site a commercial piece underneath it, I would do it in a heartbeat. It's just that I don't think that would fit either. It's just -- and that's my personal opinion. Perreault: The challenge, then, becomes if there is an additional commercial that goes into the north, how -- how that site's going to have access because the -- it's going to be so much further north -- the full access will be so much further north than the pad -- than the commercial pad. Okay. Anyone else have anything? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to City Council of file number H-2018-0090 as presented during the hearing date on February 7th, 2019, for the following reasons is it does not fit current zoning. Fitzgerald: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to deny the application Alpina Townhouse Subdivision, H-2018-0090. Holland: Madam Chair? Can I just note that you're recommending denial, rather than -- Perreault: Correct. That is right. Thank you, Commissioner Holland. We are recommending denial to City Council. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 81 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 14 of 61 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Public Hearing Continued from January 17, 2019 for Pine Four- Plex (H-2018-0135) by Amanda Blackwell, neUdesign Architecture, LLC , Located 645 W. Pine Ave. 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family family development consisting of 4 units on 0.29 of an acre of land in the R-15 zoning district Perreault: Next we will open the public hearing continued from January 17th, 2019, for Pine Four-plex, H-2018-0135. Let's begin with the staff report. Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the next application before you is a request for a conditional use permit. This site consists of .29 of an acre of land. It's zoned R-15 and located at 645 West Pine Avenue. Adjacent land use and zoning are single family residential and multi-family residential users in the R-15 and R-4 zoning districts. There is currently one single family residential property on this site. The Comprehensive Plan future land use designation is medium density residential , which is three to eight units per acre. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a multi-family residential development, consisting of four units on .29 of an acre of land in the R-15 zoning district. The site is proposed to develop with one two story multi-family four-plex structure, with each unit containing two bedrooms. Access is provided via West Pine Avenue. A cross-access easement is required to be granted to the adjoining property to the west for future shared access of the driveway via Pine. Off-street parking is proposed in accord with the minimum UDC standards. Based on four two bedroom units a minimum of eight spaces are required with two of those being in a covered carport or garage. A total of nine spaces are provided with four of those in a covered carport. On-street parking is also available for guest parking along Pine Avenue. Private, as well as common open space is proposed in accord with UDC standards. A piece of public art to be selected in the future and a barbecue area of tables and seating are propose d as amenities for this development. Concept building elevations were submitted as shown with materials consisting of board and batten and horizontal lap siding with stone veneer accents and stained wood trim and facia, with architectural asphalt shingles on the roof. Written testimony has been received from Amanda Bidwell, the applicant's representative. She is in agreement with the staff report and staff is recommending approval of the requested conditional use permit as the application is in compliance with UDC standards for the use. Stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 82 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 15 of 61 Fitzgerald: Sonya -- and maybe I can't count, but I -- so are we counting -- so I thought there was eight spaces. Allen: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Fitzgerald: Okay. So, we -- okay. The handicapped site on this -- okay. Maybe I'm losing my mind. Okay. Thank you. Allen: The southern four spaces are covered. Fitzgerald: Got it. Okay. Allen: Carports. Fitzgerald: Thank you for the clarification. Perreault: Okay. Would the applicant, please, come forward. Bidwell: Thank you, Madam Chair, Commissioners. Thank you, Sonya. My name is Amanda Bidwell. Yeah. Sorry. My name is Amanda Bidwell with NeUdesign Architecture at 725 East 2nd Street in Meridian. 83686. As Sonya mentioned, we are looking at putting a four-plex in on this property. We do have nine parking stalls, which is above the code minimum and I know that parking can become an issue in a lot of these areas , so we were trying to fit in as many as we could. We are providing two amenities for the site. There is going to be a barbecue area to the south with -- in conjunction -- in conjunction with an open area -- open grass area. In addition, we are proposing some public artwork be presented on the site as our second amenity. We looked at doing patios and private open space that was generous as well, meeting and exceeding code minimum. The units inside our two bedroom, two bathroom units and we are just hoping to bring some variety to the area and with that I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Do we have anyone signed up to testify? Coles: We do not, Madam Chair. Perreault: Is there anyone present in the room who would like to testify? Okay. Well, if the applicant doesn't have anything further to add , I will call for a motion to close the public hearing. Holland: So moved. Fitzgerald: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 83 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 16 of 61 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Just to go on the record, I was looking at the original site plan that has eight parking spots, so I can count first. Second thing. The revised site plan is what I was not -- I was looking at my computer, not yours. Sorry, Sonya. I -- I think we have done this down Pine Street several times. I think we are getting close to Old Town. I think it's a nice design. It matches within the neighborhood. I think that's -- there is several of these redevelopment type plans down there. I think it looks nice. The architecture looks good. I have no problems, ma'am. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Stay on this side. I will echo those comments for the most part. My -- my only concern is the parking. One of the comments in there from ACHD was that -- that the on- street parking could eventually go away if ACHD decides to do something different with Pine down the road. So, while it -- while it's there now, we may -- we may lose that. So, that would be my -- that would be my only concern, but I do -- I do like it. I think it -- it fits in there with -- with some of the things that are going in there. I don't have any major concerns other than that and the other thing I wanted to say is, Amanda, I don't know if you remember me, but -- how are you doing? Good to see you. But that's -- those are my comments. Perreault: Okay. Any other thoughts, Commissioners? Okay. Who would like to make a motion? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: After considering all staff, application, and public testimony, I have to approve file number H-2018-0135 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 7th, 2019. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to approve the conditional use permit for H- 2018-0135. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 84 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 17 of 61 C. Public Hearing for Razzberry Villas (H-2018-0130) by Ed Bowman, Located 1434 and 1492 Star Dr. 1. Request: Rezone of 1.86 acres of land from the R-8 and L -O zoning district to the R-15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 1.43 acres of land in a proposed R -15 zoning district Perreault: Next on the agenda is the public hearing for Razzberry Villas, H-2018-0130, and we will open with the staff report. Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the next applications before you are a request for rezone and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 1.43 acres of land. It's zoned R-8 and L-O and it's located at 1434 and 1492 Star Drive. Adjacent land use and zoning are single family residential uses, zoned R-8 and R-4, office and assisted living facility, zoned L-O. This property was annexed back in 2003 with R-8 and L-O zoning districts. Mostly L-O. Just a sliver of R-8 zoning. And was part of a planned development that anticipated office uses developing on this site. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation -- there is actually two for this property. The first is medium density residential, which is three to eight units per acre, and that consists of .078, approximately, acre -- of an acre and mixed use neighborhood with a neighborhood center overlay, which consists of approximately .65 of an acre of land. The applicant is proposing a rezone of 1.86 acres of land from the R-8 and L-O zoning districts to the R-15 district for the development of 16 attached and detached single family residential homes , at a gross density of 11.2 units per acre, consistent with the density desired in the mixed use neighborhood designated area of six to 12 units per acre. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown. That is a resubdivision of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision and it consists of 16 building lots and four common lots on 1.43 acres of land. Parking is proposed for each lot in accord with the minimum UDC standards. Access is proposed via East Star Drive and North Bright Angel Avenue. So, if you see here there is actually a common driveway that these units will be accessing Star Drive from and, then, there is also another common driveway here that these units back here will be accessing Bright Angel from. These units here that front on Bright Angel would be directly accessing the street . Because this site is below five acres in size, qualified open space and site amenities are not required. However, the applicant is working with the Razzberry Crossing Homeowners Association to potentially include this development in the existing homeowners association, which would provide residents with access to existing common areas and site amenities and provide the HOA with additional dues that could be used to maintain those areas. The original concept elevations submitted with this application were not consistent with the building footprints depicted on the proposed plan. Since that time the applicant has submitted revised elevations as shown that are consistent with the footprint shown on the plat. All attached structures are required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. Written testimony has been received from Marilyn Cox. She is against the proposed density. Feels it's too high. And, then, also due to traffic Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 85 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 18 of 61 concerns. Also from Stanley Stinson, Senior. He's against the proposed zone change due to all of the extra cars, children, and animals in a small confined space on a busy street and the proposed homes don't blend in with those in Alexandria Subdivision across the street. Staff is recommending approval. Staff finds the proposed development meets the minimum UDC standards for a development. Staff will stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Seal. Seal: As far as them -- the -- well, I might wait on this question, but them being part of the HOA -- the existing HOA, is there anything that they will offer up in order to make that something that's -- you know, something that they can coexist together with , basically meaning will they offer up a -- you know, a portion of their -- their plat here in order to make a common area that will work for both? Allen: Chairman Perreault, Commissioner Seal, I'm unsure of that, but I'm sure the applicant can answer that for you. Seal: Okay. Perreault: Sonya, can you share the significance of the NC overlay in relationship -- I -- I am not familiar with that. Allen: Well, we are looking for more pedestrian oriented development, more density in those areas. Perreault: Okay. Allen: Short version. Fitzgerald: And Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Sonya, there is a daycare right across the street. Is my understanding correct? Allen: Yes. To the south. Uh-huh. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Perreault: Okay. If that's all the questions for staff, will the applicant, please, come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 86 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 19 of 61 Graham: Good evening, Madam Chair and Members of the Commission. My name is Corinne Graham with Civil Site Works. 921 South Orchard, Suite 200, Boise, Idaho. 83705. Sonya, do you have my PowerPoint? Allen: Corinne, did you give us one? Graham: I e-mailed one to you. I have a flash drive as well. Allen: Yeah. I'm sorry. Graham: Sorry about that. Also I'm here tonight on behalf of the applicant for a rezone request and preliminary plat application for Razzberry Point Villas Subdivision. The project site is located on Star Drive and Bright Angel Avenue, just west of Locust Grove Road, between McMillan and Ustick Roads. The project site is currently Lots 1 through 3, Block 6, of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision, with zoning designations of L-O and R-8. The requested zoning is for R-15, medium high density residential. The Comprehensive Plan is a combination of MDR, medium density residential, and MUN, mixed use neighborhood, with an NC, neighborhood center overlay. Here is a map of the project site with its current zoning designation. The R-8 lot is a common lot as part of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision that was formally created to buffer the residential and proposed office uses. This is a blow up of the future land use map in the vicinity of the project. The project site is marked in blue. As you can see it is located at the transition between medium density residential and mixed use neighborhood designations. We believe this project meets the following goals of the mixed use neighborhood comp plan designation for the following reasons. It provides higher density residential development at 11.2 dwelling units per acre. It provides a transitional use between the existing office and medium density residential uses that are adjacent to the project, but it provides an additional land use to the neighborhood. That it provides a variety of residential categories. And that urban services can be reasonably provided and development is contiguous to the city. In addition to our rezone request, a preliminary plat application has also been submitted. The pre-plat proposes 16 single family dwelling units. Eight of those are detached units and eight of those are duplex or attached units . Our minimum lot size is 2,009 square feet and our average lot size is 3,150 square feet. There are four common lots in the subdivision. Two of those are common drives and two of those are landscaped common lots. Here is our proposed preliminary plat. The lots in brown at the north and along Bright Angel are these proposed duplex units. Those in yellow are the single family detached units. Gray are our common drives and, then, green is our landscape open space. The site plan proposes two common drives for the following reasons: They provide access to 12 total dwelling units, but they also limit drive access to Star Drive. Star Drive is classified as a local street, but it functions as a collector roadway for traffic calming from Razzberry and Havasu Falls Subdivisions out to Locust Grove. So, limiting drive access to Star was important to both ACHD and city staff. It eliminates the need for internal streets on such a small site. And it also faces the garages away from Star Drive. Setbacks are also oriented to match rear yards together, both within the subdivision and to the neighboring residential uses . In the site plan that we submitted you can see the garage pads. They face the common drives, with the exception Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 87 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 20 of 61 of two duplex, or four total units that take direct access from Bright Angel. The landscape plan provides berming and landscaping at Star Drive and Bright Angel as a focal point for entrance into the neighborhood. It also screens homes at the intersection from headlights. You can see on the landscape plan we have got some berming at this intersection point. As I mentioned before, the project lies within the existing Razzberry Crossing Subdivision, which was platted in 2005. The project will remain part of the existing HOA, which will provide access to already existing open space and pressure irrigation for the residents and the dues -- the dues from the new homeowners will go to improve the existing park spaces. This is an aerial view of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision. The project site is highlighted in blue and the neighborhood open spaces are marked with a green dot. Both are located within a quarter mile of the site . The building design for the subdivision utilizes contemporary materials and appealing architectural features. It provides primarily two story elevations with stepped roof lines at the garage. The garages are also recessed from the living space and from the street. The plans will focus on efficient floor plans and contemporary finishes. It will provide an affordable housing option to Meridian residents. This is the elevation for the single family detached units. Got a single story garage with a small storage space above. Two story living space and the garage is recessed from the living space. The elevation for the duplex units on the north boundary of the property. Got lots of modulation, stone accents, a split roof. Eaves on the roof lines. Variation in siding materials. And, again, that -- that garage is set back from the street and the final elevation for the units along Bright Angel. Footprints within the subdivision will typically range from 1,700 to 2,100 square feet. So, in summary, we believe that the rezone request complies with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. That the preliminary plat complies with R-15 zoning designation requirement. That this project provides affordable housing options to Meridian residents and is compatible with neighboring uses. These parcels have been sitting vacant since 2005. We believe the product will provide a pleasing and compatible addition to the neighborhood, while providing needed housing and additional tax revenues to the City of Meridian. The applicant is in agreement with all conditions of approval and respectfully request approval from the Commission tonight. I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Corinne, I have got a couple questions. Number one, is -- you did -- you talked about being included in the HOA for Razzberry. Is that a -- in our notes here you're -- it says potentially include, but is that a done -- is that pretty much a done deal? Graham: So, the HOA president is here tonight as well and so he will speak on behalf of them and their interest in -- in having us and I believe that these lots are most likely a part of the HOA as is, because they were part of the overall subdivision. I haven't read to see if they were specifically included, but we will I guess kind of clean that up during -- during the final plat process in the CC&Rs. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 88 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 21 of 61 Cassinelli: Okay. The other -- the other question I had is you -- you commented at one of -- one of your bullet points there was that it would create affordable housing. Are these -- are these -- these are not planned on being rental units, these are -- are -- Graham: They are for sale units. Cassinelli: They are sale units. I don't know if you can kind of give a ballpark of estimated price at this point in time with the market? Graham: So, it keeps going up and so it just -- part of it depends on construction costs. I don't know if I could -- Cassinelli: You don't have -- there is not a -- there is -- is there a target? Graham: Below 300. Hopefully closer to the -- maybe the 280 range. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Perreault: Any questions? Thank you very much. Graham: Thank you. Perreault: Do we have anyone signed up to testify? Coles: Thank you, Madam Chair. We do have one. Derrick Eisenbeis. Perreault: Sir, please, state your name and address for the record. Eisenbeis: My name is Derrick Eisenbeis. I live at 1329 East Star Drive. I am also the current HOA president of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision. As HOA president of the association I would respectfully request more than the three minutes allotted time, as I am representative on the majority of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision. Perreault: Would anyone here who would like to have him represent you raise your hand , please. You know, I think we will just try to stick to the three minutes and, then, if -- if she would like to come share that would be great. Eisenbeis: I will try to read -- read my bullet points. Perreault: Thank you. Eisenbeis: Okay. Again, my name is Derrick Eisenbeis. I'm the current HOA president of Razzberry Crossing Subdivision. Ed Bowman has been in contact with me and the subdivision concerning this development starting around November of 2017. I feel that the rezoning of the currently L-O slash R-8 to R-15 would benefit the community by allowing for more selection of housing opportunities, which would complement Meridian's Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 89 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 22 of 61 current vision of creating diverse and premier housing that provide s varied lifestyle choices. This type of housing proposed by Mr. Bowman will provide economically competitive choices for those we seem to move -- or remain in the City of Meridian, which, in turn, stands to benefit the city and the community as a whole. I have attended the neighborhood meetings sponsored by Mr. Bowman and have listened to the concerns of those who expressed them. The majority of its residents reside in Alexandria Subdivision, which is next door adjacent to Razzberry Crossing. The main concerns as I see them being traffic and parking, safe and sufficient common area, property and home values. On the topic of traffic, East Star Drive is a common access road to at least four separate subdivisions, Havasu Creek, Copper Basin, Heritage Commons, as well as Alexandria. We currently have two commercial lots, Ashley Manor, as well as a daycare in our subdivision -- part of our subdivision. Those commercial lots have parking for around two dozen vehicles. If you consider that there would be two commercial entities replacing this residential -- planned residential, that alone would provide about 48 vehicle spaces. Therefore, being more than what would be -- assumed to be part of the residential, therefore traffic I don't see as an issue. As this main access road services about four to five hundred residential homes in those four subdivisions, the addition of 16 homes is a modest three to four percent increase in traffic onto East Star Drive, which would end well before actually the -- the road narrows. Also, the current layout of the proposed development has the residential garages and driveways off street. This would limit any additional parking on East Star, which should not be a concern. About the common areas. Razzberry Crossing currently has two main common areas servicing 32 residential homes. The common areas do not currently have playground equipment or any other sports activity amenities, yet they are used for picnicking, including our annual HOA meeting slash barbecue. So, there is three minutes. So, I request a little bit longer. I'm about halfway done. Perreault: We will give you one more minute to wrap up. Eisenbeis: Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Eisenbeis: So, basically, the addition to the homes would add to the Razzberry Crossing financial means to provide more amenities, not only just for Razzberry Crossing, but as well as the -- the planned Razzberry Villas. Speaking on property and home values, a conversation with Mr. Bowman and the HOA board it was agreed upon that this planned development would be owner occupied homes and be constructed to compliment the neighborhood. It is noted that while Alexandria was established for empty nesters , the subdivisions that adjacent Alexandria were not, including Razzberry Crossing, which was established well before Alexandria and Razzberry Village -- will be incorporated into Razzberry Crossing. Having said this, it should be noted that conceptualized elevations of these types of homes proposed most certainly should not decrease values of surrounding homes, specifically those of Alexandra, while, as mentioned before, was built for different demographic than those of Razzberry Villas. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 90 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 23 of 61 Perreault: Okay, sir. So, we understand that you personally are in favor of this development. Can you comment on the HOA's willingness to -- to bring this development in? Eisenbeis: Sure. Perreault: I understand from the applicant that that was something you were going to share with us. Eisenbeis: In our last meeting as an HOA we had voted unanimously to approve this addition to our subdivision. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for him? Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Yes, Commissioner Seal. Seal: Have you worked out the details of exactly what improvements will be to the open sites or is it just something that you are hoping that the extra money will allow for that? Eisenbeis: Sure. It -- it is a -- a discussion in the works. Obviously, we have to have this approved and, then, we are going to discuss more options as far as giving more amenities to the neighborhood. Seal: Thank you. Perreault: Thank you very much. Eisenbeis: Yes, ma'am. Perreault: Is there anyone else here who would like to testify? Okay. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing? Well, would the applicant -- does the applicant have anything else to add? Do we have any additional questions for her? Fitzgerald: Corinne, can I ask you one quick question? Perreault: Please come forward. Fitzgerald: While you're walking up -- the -- the one thing I don't quite understand -- there is a buffer that that R-8 zone that's -- Graham: Uh-huh. Fitzgerald: So, that's not owned by the neighborhood to the west, but it was landscap ed like it was a buffer or was that being maintained in the same setback requirement? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 91 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 24 of 61 Graham: It's not -- it's actually being replatted as part of the subdivision. Fitzgerald: Well, I understand that -- Graham: Okay. Fitzgerald: -- size wise. Because I think you have a -- houses that are used to having that kind of landscape buffer behind their homes. Graham: Right. And it's -- well, I guess they are used to having a larger vacant lot behind that. Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Graham: So, if you look at -- I don't know if Sonya has an aerial up or not, but they have got quite a bit about lot depth -- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Graham: -- behind them and, then, we have got a 12 foot -- we have lined up all of our rear setbacks to match theirs. So, we have got three on three. We have got a 12 foot setback on our side. None of them came to speak at the neighborhood meeting, so I don't think that there is any concerns. Fitzgerald: So, that -- that one sliver is a 12 foot step back, is that the plan for those homes facing the -- or their rear backyard is just heading west? Graham: Their rear yards are heading west. Yes. Fitzgerald: That's a 12 foot setback? Graham: It is. Yeah. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Graham: Yep. Perreault: Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Seal: So moved. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Razzberry Villas, H-2018-0130. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 92 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 25 of 61 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I have a question for staff. Sonya, do you know if incorporated into Razzberry Villas what the overall open space would become? You don't have that figure? Allen: Chairman Perreault, Commissioner Cassinelli, no, I do not have those calculations. Cassinelli: Do you happen to have what it is on the existing Razzberry Villas? Allen: No, I don't. Cassinelli: Okay. That would -- my concern on this is that incorporating that into the HOA as part of Razzberry Villas would -- would it meet the minimums. Obviously, I would like to see -- it doesn't sound like they have very many amenities in Razzberry Villas, so that's -- I think it would be hard to condition amenities to be added, but if we -- you know, as far as conditioned to have that open space as it stands, I guess I will just comment now keep it as it stands in and of itself there is -- there is not a whole lot of open space there and it doesn't -- you know, it -- to me it's -- there's a tiny -- two tiny little pieces of open space, so taking this as a standalone project, I'm not wild about it. I wouldn't be in favor of changing it from the office. I'm not concerned about traffic. I think it's a -- I think it's almost a wash, if you were to look at this as office, I think you're going to have as much, maybe even a few more cars per day than what's going in here. My only concern is that is -- is the open space in this project. That's why I would be concerned about if we can condition for it meeting. If this adds into Razzberry Villas, becomes part of the HOA there, that -- that -- that this entire project would have to meet the minimums would be my -- that would be my biggest concern. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Since Commissioner Cassinelli didn't talk about it, one of my concerns is actually parking on this. I think each unit has the two car garage and has the driveway with it, too. But if you have guests over and they are 2,100 square foot houses, roughly 1,700 to 2,100, you may have extra cars coming over for visits and it's always hard when you have got a couple of common drives, because you can't really park as -- as well on the street on those. That would be one of my concerns I guess. I wonder if after hours they couldn't use the parking at the daycare or any other surrounding commercial. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 93 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 26 of 61 Fitzgerald: Sonya, Bright Angel is a local street; right? We have no problem with having housing fronting onto Bright Angel? Allen: That's correct, Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: And they can park along there as well; correct? Allen: As along as the street width allows, I believe it does. Fitzgerald: Okay. So, I -- I have said this for -- probably a broken record wise. I see in- fills differently than I think others might. This looks to me like an Orchard type project or a product. I very much compliment applicant for matching up lot lines, because I think that's a big deal when you're looking at back doors matching those lot lines up, so we don't have houses -- you know, three houses on one property to a different side. So, I appreciate that. I'm -- I'm less concerned about the open space, but I understand your concerns. I -- I know where you're going. So, I -- I don't have a problem there. I think we need these types of houses. I -- zero lot line product I think is the diversification that we don't have always and I think they sell pretty well, but I will kind of keep my comments and thoughts until we have further discussion on whether I'm -- which way I'm leaning. Perreault: I agree with Commissioner Fitzgerald. I think there is -- I think this is a good location for this type of -- of home. It's a good transition to -- to the surrounding area. There is Settlers Park that's just to the south of that as well. So, that's a great option for folks for green space. I understand Commissioner Cassinelli's thoughts and concerns on that and in this particular location, because the park is there, I have less concern about the combination of -- of open space with the other sections of Razzberry. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I didn't mention some of the -- the good things when I started talking to you. I -- I do like the layout of the buildings, because it's a little higher density, but it's not traditional multi-family where you have got a three-plex in someone's backyard, so -- Perreault: Yeah. Holland: -- I like seeing that it's something that looks more like a residential neighborhood that's tied in a little higher density. So , I think they have done a good job with the way that they have laid that out. I'm not as concerned about the open space , because there are single units that have kind its own grass area around it and that there is a park nearby. I'm most concerned with that as well. I like the idea that they are willing to work with the neighborhood association to add some amenities. If we were to make an approval -- or recommend approval on this application, I would probably ask that they could define what those amenities would be before it comes to Council. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 94 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 27 of 61 Fitzgerald: That's a good compromise. Perreault: It's a great suggestion. Any other thoughts and comments? Cassinelli: I -- overall I'm -- I'm for an in-fill project. It's good. I just -- I really want -- I really want to see that -- that this project, when you look at it as part of Razzberry Villas, that it does -- if -- if this were to have been built all at once as part of Razzberry Villas that it meets the -- the minimum open space requirements. I don't know -- it does -- because it doesn't sound like -- from what the -- the HOA president was saying, they don't have the amenities. I don't know that there -- I mean if there are -- if they are just at ten percent where they are at, you add this as total -- as total acreage, you're going to be below and that's my -- that's my concern is that -- so, I mean if they are -- if they have to strip away a lot to -- to meet it, that's -- that's where I would stand on this project. I think as a whole, as part of Razzberry Villas, it's got to meet that minimum open space requirements. Allen: Madam Chair, if I may, Commissioner Cassinelli, I -- I did look that up. Razzberry Crossing provided 12.5 percent of the gross land area in qualified open space. They -- they did come through as a planned development and that does require a minimum of ten percent qualified open space. So, there is 12.5. Cassinelli: That's -- that's as it is right now, not including -- Allen: That's Razzberry Crossing. Cassinelli: Okay. I see if I can do quick math and -- how many acres is there? Allen: This project is an acre and a half at 1.4. So, they are -- they are above the -- this -- this project in itself doesn't require a minimum -- Cassinelli: Correct. Allen: -- of site amenities. But, yes, if you add that to the amount, then, it would -- Cassinelli: If we add it all together would it -- as one project would it meet -- would we meet the ten percent? Okay. That's my hang up. Fitzgerald: And Madam Chair? Cassinelli: I have parking this time. I don't know why. I guess because -- Holland: I had to throw it in there. Cassinelli: I'm glad you did. I wasn't thinking about it. But that's -- that one street -- what's that side street -- what's that -- Fitzgerald: Bright Angel. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 95 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 28 of 61 Cassinelli: Bright Angel. I think that can handle -- that can handle some -- some overflow. This may be more geared towards -- it may be empty nesters, too, in this project with zero lot lines. I don't think big families are going to move -- are going to be looking for this when there is not -- there is not the space for the kids, so -- Perreault: Potentially not with the two story element. Fitzgerald: That's true. Cassinelli: True. Perreault: You know, in general I'm not a fan of common drives, but I -- the width on these are -- is better than -- than we often see with the common drives and I think in this situation it actually works with trying to keep the parking off of Star Drive, so -- and I think in this scenario it -- it works well. I'm very -- I think that -- that you have done a great job making this an original and -- and good use of space and design. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Sonya, I know we were suggesting or in the -- in your staff report that this has a DA as we roll into a different -- if we go that direction, which I would fully agree with, and that the elevations go with it. Is that your suggestion? My understanding. Allen: Yes, it is. Uh-huh. Fitzgerald: Okay. If there are not additional comments I will make a motion, Madam Chair. Perreault: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Anybody else? Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2018-0130 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 7th, 2019. Do you want to have them have amenity conceptual before -- before they go to Council? I don't have a problem with that. Holland: I think it would be nice if they could come up with some -- at least suggested conversations that they have had of what they could put forward. I didn't frame that well, but -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 96 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 29 of 61 Fitzgerald: With the following modifications: That the applicant has conceptual amenities that you would be adding to Razzberry Subdivision before Council. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval to City Council of the rezone and preliminary plat for H-2018-0130. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. D. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility H-2018-0087 by Horizon Tower /Verizon Wireless C /0 Powder River Development Services, Inc, Located at the southeast corner of E . Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a wireless communication facility in and R -8 zoning district Perreault: Get to move forward. Does anybody need a break? Okay. Next we will open the public hearing for Hill Century Farm Wireless Communication Facility, H-2018-0087 and begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application is a conditional use permit. This site is part of a larger 39.71 acre property. It's zoned R-8 and is located off the southeast corner of South Eagle Road and East Amity Road. There is an Idaho Power substation directly north of this site at the corner of Eagle and Amity. The surrounding area has been conceptually approved for single family residential uses as you can see there on the concept plan there at the upper left-hand corner. That is included in the development agreement for this site. A single family residence exists at the southeast corner of this property that is proposed to remain . This site was annexed with R-8 zoning and single family residential uses were approved to develop on this site originally. The development agreement, like I said, was recently amended to allow the development of a wireless communication facility on this site. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed use neighborhood. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for a stealth wireless communication facility in the R- 8 zoning district. A site plan was submitted with this application as shown that depicts how the northwest corner of this site is proposed to develop with a 20 foot by 70 foot , 1,400 square foot fenced lease area with a one hundred foot tall mono pine cell tower and associated equipment for Verizon Wireless. The tower will be co-locatable for a total of up to four carriers and will support panel antennas. Ground mounted equipment will be located within the fenced enclosure. The proposed facility will add to Verizon's existing network and provide improved services to customers and improved calling and data capacity, improving overall system performance in this area. Maintenance visits only occur about once a month. Therefore, traffic to the site will be minimal. The applicant Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 97 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 30 of 61 submitted a vicinity map showing locations of existing towers. There are five within 2.3 miles of the site with the nearest being one mile away. That map is there on your left. Propagation maps are shown on the right. They were submitted showing the current coverage area and that's on top there with the coverage area af ter the proposed tower is constructed on the bottom. There are several specific use standards that are applicable to the proposed use that are detailed in the staff report , one of which is the new towers may not be approved unless the decision making body finds the telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved structure and/or tower at a height necessary to function reasonably as documented by a qualified radio frequency engineer. The applicant's network engineer submitted a letter stating that the existing towers in the area do not meet all requirements in regard to hide and/or location to function reasonably to address their coverage gap in this area. Because this site abuts a future residential area, the facility is required to be set back a distance equal to the height of the tower. In this case one hundred feet. Therefore, staff recommends the subject site area is expanded to the west, east and south a minimum of one hundred feet from the location of the tower to accommodate the required setback. If the land use to the adjacent area changes to a nonresidential use in the future, the site area could be reduced per the setbacks of the zoning district. A landscape buffer at least five feet in width is required along the outside perimeter of the compound. The applicant did request alternative compliance to this requirement due to a storage facility being planned surrounding the project site. This request was denied by the director because a storage facility has not been approved in the surrounding area . Residential uses are currently approved surrounding the site, necessitating the provision of a buffer. If at some point in the future the adjacent land use changes to a nonresidential use a subsequent request for alternative compliance may be approved, but not at this time. Written testimony has been received from several folks. I will go through those real quick. Caleb and Mary Bennett. Laddie and Andrea Tlusec. Susan Karnes. Dean Kidd. Robin Willeman. Helen and Kent Tjemsland. They all object to the proposed tower. Some of the reasons are due to the close proximity of other cell towers within a mile of the site. Too close to nearby residences and risk for families to develop health issues and close proximity of a public school. David Palumbo submitted testimony. He feels that the city is in violation of state code in regarded noticing. Feels a larger area should have been noticed due to the impact of the proposed use on residents beyond the 300 foot radius notice. Staff is recommending approval as the proposed use complies with UDC standards. Perreault: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Olsen: I do have one, yes. Perreault: Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: What's -- what's our response to the noticing question? Allen: Madam Chair, I will let our city attorney address that. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 98 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 31 of 61 Pogue: Actually, this is the first time I'm learning of this issue. I'm not sure if the individual is here and could provide a reference. We can get to that during the public testimony. Allen: Madam City Attorney, the letter is in the public records if you would like to reference it. Perreault: Okay. Would the applicant, please, come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Williams: Madam Chairman, Commissioners, my name is Zach Williams. Address 408 South Eagle Road, Eagle, Idaho. 83616. I'm here for you today on behalf of Powder River and Horizon Tower. We are looking to do a cell tower. As staff stated, it's a 20 by 70 compound. Per staff's comments on the landscape buffer, as well as being -- as the proposed is by residential use we changed our fence to not be a chain link fence , to put -- to be a vinyl fence to block out equipment, as well as agreeing to placing the landscape buffer around the outside of the compound , since it's not planned and not approved, we felt like, you know, it's needed as to be prohibited in the area. We are proposing a hundred foot mono pine tower. This is simply due to the fact that we want to have as many co-locators as possible. We don't want multiple towers throughout the area , we want to try to get as many co-locaters or carriers on the tower as possible. So, the hundred foot tower we are doing a mono pine plan design. With a residential use in the future we felt like it would be the best design with future trees and future landscaping that tends to be put in residential areas, can help blend in with those areas over time. Currently right now Verizon and AT&T are wanting to go on this tower. The propagation map shown here is Verizon's propagation. You can see how there is a coverage -- there is a coverage hole right in the center. Verizon is actually located on both of the towers closest to the site already, so that's kind of why those two sites wouldn't work as far as co-locating. They are already on them. They need this additional tower to help fill the gap in coverage that you can see that inhabits everything southwest of the site and all the homes and development that's being done out there, it's going crazy. So , they are trying -- they are trying to keep up with that and make sure that they maintain their coverage. AT&T had the same issues with the other two areas, based off where the new homes are being developed and where they have a gap in coverage , they felt that this site would provide the most adequate height for them to co-locate on. They will be the top RAD center and, then, Verizon will be below them at 85 feet. We -- Horizon just recommend that you follow staff's recommendation of approval. We have met all the requirements of the code and with -- in regards to the residential setbacks of a hundred feet, agree to meet that as well, working with Brighton, as they are the developers of the future property. And stand for questions. Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 99 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 32 of 61 Cassinelli: Do you happen to have a current picture of -- of one of these -- you know, the pine tower, whatever -- because I know I have seen some of them around. It's a matter of, you know, a couple branches right at the very top. Williams: Yeah. Cassinelli: Will it be fuller than -- Williams: Yes, sir. Typically Horizon Tower -- and I know there is all kinds of different kinds. Usually their towers -- like the one behind Lowe's have one branch every foot in height. Cassinelli: That's the one I'm thinking of. Off Eagle Road there. Williams: Yes. And, then, you have the one at the Eagle Hills Golf Course that's really tall, that's two branches for every foot in height. Horizon Tower actually -- they are a northern California company, so they do a lot of, obviously, pine towers up in northern California. They prefer to do three branches for every foot in height as far as the spacing, so that way it does look a lot fuller. They propose that for all of their cell towers locally and in northern California, the three branches, to make it aesthetically pleasing. Cassinelli: Do you have an image of one of those? Williams: Not -- not handy. They -- it's a new directive, just simply because we -- they have had so many requests for that as far as having more fuller trees. We haven't had any of them built yet. Cassinelli: Does it come down further? Will it come -- will the branches come down further than -- Williams: So, per the code where the branches are only allowed to be -- we have to leave the bottom 20 foot -- 20 feet of the tower clear. That way nobody can climb the tower, obviously. We have to leave it clear of pegs and that kind of stuff. With a hundred foot tower they typically like to start the branches at about 30 feet. That way, you know, it's the top 70 feet of tower that has the branches, instead of the whole hundred feet. When you start to have it going 80 feet and proposing to wind loadings and those kind of things, that really limits how much structural capacity you can have with multiple carriers. Cassinelli: Okay. But it's not the top 15 feet? Williams: No. No. It would be, you know, 30 feet up -- from 30 feet all the way to the top. Cassinelli: Okay. And, then, as the second question, the -- that propagation map, just curious, in terms of where they are -- where your -- where the existing towers are at on that map. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 100 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 33 of 61 Williams: Yeah. So -- Cassinelli: Is it a matter of -- is it a matter of the -- the number of users in that area? It's not a matter of the distance that that the signal will go . Williams: It's a -- it's a little of both. So, it is the amount of users, since there is an uptick in the amount of users and homes being built there. The capacity in that area is diminishing and the distance as well does have a factor into how it can propagate to those areas. That's why, you know, you can see the little black dots in the center of the green -- I don't know if you can see that part. But the little black dots in the center are actually where those proposed towers are. They are kind of hard to see. Over a mile away in this whole center area, you know, with the Eagle Road intersection, I know that north piece is owned by Albertsons. Not sure what they are developing there. But this whole intersection -- this whole area with Brighton is being developed really fast. YMCA going in and that kind of stuff. So, the capacity is the major issue here. Sorry. Touched the microphone. Is a major issue here, but it does affect coverage to -- with having all the new users in there. Cassinelli: Thank you. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Do you have anything that you could say to the concern about the public health issues. Williams: All I have is per the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Cell towers are not allowed to be denied for health reasons. It's a federal mandate by the FCC. That's the only -- I mean that's the -- really the comment. I mean there are studies to and for. You see them everywhere. All opinion based. But the FCC has ruled per the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that no decision , local or judicial courts can be made based off health effects of cell towers. Perreault: So, I understand your -- that the applicant is in agreement and compliance with this -- with staff's request for the hundred foot on the east, west and south; correct? And also with the landscape buffer you said? Williams: Yes, ma'am. Perreault: What is the plan for irrigation to that -- to water the landscaping? Williams: That will be worked out with Brighton and, then, development. We will provide irrigation to make sure that, obviously, all our landscaping doesn't die. That's kind of a big thing. But we will be working with Brighton as we have at least with them , so we will go over -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 101 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 34 of 61 Perreault: Okay. Williams: -- the whole outside of the compound and what kind of shrubs and trees and I get staff approval on that, because I have to go through a design review -- Perreault: A design review. Williams: Yep. And a CZC before this will be formally approved for building permits. Perreault: Okay. Any additional questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. Williams: Thank you. Perreault: Is there anyone signed up to testify? Coles: Yes, Madam Chair. But before we get to that, I would like to respond to the Commission's question about the noticing if I may. So , my office is responsible for executing noticing for public hearings. I think Mr. Palumbo referenced 300 feet. Because of this type of application it's required that 1,000 feet is the radius notice requirement, which our office executed. W hen this was first in front of the Commission in 2018 in August I think we executed that notice. We executed an additional notice when this came -- was scheduled to come back before the Commission. We asked the Planning Department to rerun the list to make sure that the list was accurate and up to date , because in those four months there could have been change of -- in property ownership. So, we did do that. In addition, we put it out on NextDoor, as we do with all of our other public hearing notices. So, as far as the city code goes, we executed it effectively and accordingly. His reference to state code, I don't know if Ms. Pogue has any comment there, but as far as city code goes we did follow what is required for noticing. Pogue: Madam Chair. And I would follow up with the clerk that pursuant to UDC 11-5A- 6, Section E, which is the mailing and publishing of the public hearing notice, the clerk is correct that the thousand feet radius was proper and appropriate as required by the UDC. As the city clerk just advised the Commission, that was followed out and occurred. Coles: We do have a sign-up. Susan Karnes has signed up this evening. Perreault: Please come forward. Is she still present? Allen: I don't believe she is here tonight. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, can I ask a question while the -- Perreault: Yes. Fitzgerald: Sonya, we keep saying setback. Are we having a fall circumference, too? Is that what the setback is or -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 102 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 35 of 61 Allen: Yes. Potentially, yes. Fitzgerald: It's a fall ratio. And that -- in your looking at Century Farms, we are not close to their backyards in that section right there? I mean that seems -- a hundred feet seems like a lot of tower to come down and not touch a house that's in Century Farms. Do we have a plat or overlay? Allen: Madam Chair and Commissioner Fitzgerald, there are no homes in this area right here, but the only home on this parcel is located right here at the southeast corner of this parcel. Fitzgerald: Currently. Allen: But these are all designated and conceptually approved for single family residential. That -- that's why staff recommended that they expand the site, just to ensure that residential uses wouldn't be built up to that property line. Fitzgerald: Makes sense. Okay. Allen: Madam Chair, if I could just clarify my earlier statement. I misspoke when I said 300 feet and -- anyway, he clarified the record that a thousand feet was required, but I just wanted to clarify my statement as well. Perreault: Thank you very much. Allen: Thank you. Coles: Also, Madam Chair, Sally Reynolds signed up as well. Perreault: Thank you. Please come forward. Reynolds: Good evening. My name is Sally Reynolds. My address is 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian, Idaho. And I am -- actually Susan Karnes was not able to be here, so I am standing in for her in her behalf this evening and representing the Meridian Southern Rim Coalition. So, it has several hundred members and, therefore, I respectfully request ten minutes for testimony. Perreault: I think all of the Commissioners are familiar with the Meridian Southern Rim Coalition. Are we in agreement with the ten minutes? Okay. Thank you. Reynolds: Thank you. And, Bill, do you have my -- thank you. So, firstly, as you are aware from our previous appearances before this Commission, the coalition objects to any substantial changes to land use in this city while we are in the process of creating a new Comprehensive Plan. Our members strongly believe that the city should strictly adhere to its comp plan FLUM and the intent that it's asking us as stakeholders to participate in this very important process. For that reason alone we oppose this Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 103 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 36 of 61 conditional use permit due to the substantial deviation from normal land use in a residential district. The City of Meridian is very clear and its language about cell towers near residential communities. Encourage the location of wireless communication facilities in nonresidential districts and/or where nonresidential uses are allowed. It also says protect existing residential uses. Cell towers are not allowed without a conditional use permit and for good reason. This is the proposed site. As you can see it is clearly a residential area. In good faith the Century Farms residents and nearby neighborhoods purchased their homes with the understanding that this land would be an R-8 and as you have heard staff say it still is or medium density residential community. The City of Meridian is also very clear in its language regarding aesthetics. Encourage construction of stealth communication towers, which are compatible with their surroundings and do not detract from the overall visual quality of the city. This is a photo of a cell phone tower one mile away at Amity and Locust Grove. Note the stand of mature trees that effectively screen the tower and note the location, just one mile from this site. Our members strongly object to the close proximity of another tower in this area. The City of Meridian also strives to, quote, minimize the adverse visual effects of communication towers and other similar structures through thoughtful, careful design standards. This proposed site, with the exception of the heavily -- the heavily screened substation, is flat, raw land. A one hundred foot pine tree will create a distraction and detract from the overall visual quality of the area. We applaud the director for requiring landscaping and appropriate fencing, but that's not enough justification for placing a cell tower in a residen tially zoned district. When residents purchased homes in this area the substation at Amity and Eagle was in place and, as you can see, well shielded through berms and foliage. It is disrespectful to residents of Century Farm to allow a cell tower in a residential district adjoining their homes, especially when there are alternative locations, like nearby undeveloped commercial parcels owned by the developer. Our residents are concerned about their property values, the detrimental impact of cell towers on property values is well documented. Peer review studies find that values declined by 20 percent near cell towers and here is just one. Homebuyers in a survey indicated they would pay from ten percent to 19 percent less to more than 20 percent less for a property in close proximity to a cell phone base station and the results were, then, confirmed by a market sales analysis. Price of properties were reduced around 21 percent after a cell phone base station was built in the neighborhood. So, our members have expressed additional concerns. Before allowing a one hundred foot cell tower one mile from an already existing one, especially in a residential district, we believe that the city should require the opinion -- the opinion of an independent expert, not the applicant 's network engineer, regarding the need for a tower here and not in a nearby commercial district. So, this was run in the news just two days ago. The Idaho Statesman carried a cover story about a new cell technology, accompanied by a photo of a wireless transmitter attached unobtrusively to the top of a light pole in downtown Boise. So, why not use this technology in our neighborhoods . Place this one hundred foot cell tower where it belongs in a commercial or an industrial district and utilize this new discrete technology in our neighborhoods. In closing, we believe that there is no compelling reason to approve this conditional use permit. Instead, there are numerous reasons to deny this CUP, which would set a terrible precedent for cell towers in residential districts in our cities, or to further the study of options that would provide cell service, while respecting our residents and neighborhoods. Please respect Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 104 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 37 of 61 our residents who are opposed to this site for a cell tower. Let's adhere to the UDC that encourages the location of wireless communication facilities in nonresidential districts. Thank you. And I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Any questions? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Is Century Farms -- is that considered part of the Southern Rim district? Reynolds: Of the -- you know, to be honest, I'm not -- I believe it is. I believe so. I'm not the head of that. Susan does chair that. But I could -- I would assume the -- Cassinelli: Staff, do you know the -- what the northern boundary is on that? Okay. Thank you. Reynolds: Yeah. Oh, you're saying the actual -- the geographical boundaries? Cassinelli: Uh-huh. Reynolds: Yeah. That I'm not sure. But they do participate in the Southern Rim's Coalition as far as communications and getting surveys from the coalition and notifications of different properties and hearings that are coming up. Perreault: Thank you. Reynolds: Sure. Perreault: Anyone else here who would like to testify? Step forward. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, while she's coming up -- Sonya, they have -- we have significant Idaho Power lines that run down Amity Road. Do we have any idea how tall those are? Is it -- just with that substation. I mean there is -- there is a significant amount of -- of tall power lines that go along that road. So, I'm just -- Allen: Madam Chair. No, I don't. Fitzgerald: Okay. Perreault: On that note I do have one more question for staff while she's preparing. Do we know what the distance is from this property to the boundary line -- the north boundary of Century Farms across the open space? Allen: To the south, Madam Chair? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 105 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 38 of 61 Perreault: To the south. Allen: A quarter mile. Perreault: Quarter mile. Allen: Just a little under. Perreault: Okay. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Quick Google search those, they can typically be between 60 and 120 feet on major roadways. Power poles. Perreault: Okay. Please state your name and address for the record. LaFever: Denise LaFever. 6706 North Salvia Way, Meridian, Idaho. First of all, let -- let's just put aside the fact that it was Hill and Brighton that are coming forward with the application in the first place, but I do object to the fact that this application for a cell tower to be in this residential area -- it says right in there it's either prohibited or a conditional use. So, it required two things to come forward. One is a DA -- a development agreement change and a conditional use change. Okay. When City Council approved the development agreement it was conditional that you guys approve the CUP. So, therefore, the development agreement doesn't mean anything, because it still requires a CUP. But the fact that they were decoupled I have an issue with . They should have been put together and brought forward as one package. Putting that aside, it's still in a zoned R-8 area and 11 --11-4-3-4E as already discussed, discourages placement of a wireless tower in a residential area. In addition, there are lots of other -- other techniques that are available that are coming out with the 5G that just broke the news that are far more aesthetic to the area. Putting it on a top of a light pole or a telephone pole, far more appealing. In addition, the property right next door , based on Sonya's information that she brought forward, right to the east Brighton and Ahlquist plan on doing a rezone and making that commercial, which if it has to go anywhere, putting it over on the commercial plotted land would make sense, because, then, it's not an issue. Barring all of that, that one cell picture that came up, there are a lot better ways and a lot nicer looks over a -- a tree. There is artwork and other disguises that's far more attractive that could go up and if you have that -- did it come down? It locked. Oh, my phone locked. We will show you a picture of some other disguises that are far more attractive and if -- and if for some reason you decide that it goes on a corner, I would strongly suggest that we look at other alternatives besides a tree. I mean that -- that actually looks nice and there is -- there is several other art pieces that are out there for disguises that they have access to and there is lots of other areas throughout different cities that do require them to disguise their towers and they are not all trees. So, I will close and say I would like to see you deny the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 106 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 39 of 61 CUP. That developer has the opportunity to locate it during the rezone process right to the east. If not, I would like you to consider putting a much nicer disguise on that, so -- Perreault: Is there anybody else in the audience interested in testifying? Okay. Coles: Madam Chair, if I may make one comment. Perreault: Yes. Coles: I would like to apprise the Commission -- Susan Karnes did send in written testimony late yesterday evening that was -- that I just actually added to the public testimony folder, if the Commission is interested in looking at her written testimony that she submitted, since she wasn't able to be here this evening. Perreault: Thank you very much. Allen: Madam Chair. If I may just clarify the record. Cell towers are either a principal permitted or a conditional use in all zoning districts in the city. They are not prohibited. So, just to clarify that. Perreault: Thank you. Allen: Depending on the specific use standards whether they are conditional or not. Perreault: Appreciate that. Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Williams: Madam Chairman, Commissioners, just want to touch a -- touch on a few topics. Sonya did it perfectly with talking about how it's -- it's a permitted use or a conditional use permit. It's not prohibited. As long as we meet the standards of the code, which we have done on this application, for a conditional use permit. If I would have done a shorter tower that would have been, you know, and the residential would have already been in place, I could have actually done it permitted, but based off my proposed application it -- it falls under a conditional use permit. Just based off the needs of the carriers and the height they need in order to get adequate coverage in the area . And talks about this being an R-8 lot. It is an R-8 lot currently with what Brighton has. You can see how they kind of carved out our cell tower on their DA modification there. They are still working on what they want to do with the rest of the property. They are talk -- when we originally were working on this they were talking of doing a storage facility and that's why we had proposed a chain link fence and no landscape buffer around it. That has since changed -- well, not totally changed. As of right now it's changed based off the development agreement. In the future it may change where we can take that away as Sonya stated earlier. So, based off the way it's currently done, meeting all the setbacks and all that stuff, with the landscape, we are more than willing to do. And it follows the residential code. We have met everything required by the City of Meridian, by the local jurisdiction, in order to have the facility located here. There are alternative tower types, but that -- it makes it more noticeable as we are talking about galvanized poles, light -- electrical lines. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 107 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 40 of 61 I mean those -- those towers are between 90 to 120 feet. I worked on those in the past and as they mentioned with small cells, I actually -- working on a lot of the small cells in the city of Boise and they are a great design, so thank you. Appreciate that. But the -- small cells do not work unless they have a macro facility. Basically what the small cell is is an amplifier to help offload capacity. We are doing them generally right now in the downtown areas, just because there is so much capacity, business traffic down there that the macro sites actually need additional help at the street level. Those are -- typically range from 25 to 40 feet in height, but out in this area where it's actually a coverage and capacity need, the small cell -- I mean it wouldn't work for what the needs are of the carriers. And that's all I have. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? Holland: A couple of questions for you. In installing these poles in other locations that you have done, what's the longevity of the poles? Do they need to have replacements over time? Do they need a lot of maintenance on them? Williams: It depends on how well you do it. On how well you build anything. Typically it's every five years they get all the branches kind of updated and redone, just to make sure that nothing's falling off. They check the whole tower. They do a tower climb , kind of an inspection thing on the branches, because the last thing we want is them falling down. But you also have tower crews that will be going up there when they do co- locations and that kind of stuff, that when they are up there they will be installing branches as needed or if stuff falls off, replacing them as needed as well, since they are installing on the tower they will need to do that. They will also be installing -- like antenna socks, which will help camouflage the antennas where you won't be seeing just white antennas on this tower, they will be screened, as well as the radios and stuff behind. They just put a little sock over it to help camouflage it within the existing tree. Perreault: Are you able to share with us any other locations that the applicant may have considered and why they were eliminated? Williams: Yeah. We actually -- I contacted the property directly east. A very nice lady I met with over there. She was looking to do future -- or west. Sorry. I said east. She -- she was not interested simply because she wants to -- she owns quite a bit of property there and wants to sell to a developer and have a subdivision or something like that. She's waiting for them to write her a check with as many zeros that she wants is what she told me. So, I can't argue with her there. It's her property. We also talked about going on the northwest corner, but there -- they have a lot of commercial stuff planned there and didn't have an adequate spot that they were willing to give up or release to us . Part of our -- part of our whole looking is we have to find a site that leasable, zonable and buildable. We also went across the street to where there is actually an elderly community. I forget the exact name of it. But they had some open space there as well. But we just -- from -- from a design standpoint we didn't like the design, didn't think it would be Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 108 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 41 of 61 beneficial for the area. You know, I have -- I tried to go into the YMCA and those areas down there, but they didn't want it there. Simple fact they don't want it anywhere near the school, and which that's one of the West Ada County School District's requirements that they don't require it on -- or allow them on elementary schools or middle schools. Only high schools. And since we don't have any high schools in this area, there was really no other area for us to go. Perreault: And if you locate the tower farther south, north, east, west it -- it doesn't accomplish what you're attempting to accomplish? Williams: Correct. It doesn't meet the coverage objective. Perreault: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. Williams: Thank you. Perreault: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2018-0087? Holland: So moved. Cassinelli: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Hill Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility, H-2018-0087. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Perreault: Who would like to start us off? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I will start us out. Cell towers are always interesting, because no one ever really wants them anywhere, because they are -- they are tall and they are noticeable. They do service the need of most communities as technology continues to increase. Just because I'm a visual person I need to understand what the height looks like, an average two story house is around 20 to 25 feet tall. This is about four times the height of an average two story house. That puts it in perspective. The one good thing about this location is that it's located behind the Idaho Power substation, so if you're going to put it somewhere where there is already infrastructure, I see that being maybe a benefit to tie it in with that, because it's something that they have already planted some trees around. So, that helps mask some of that. It's still going to be a tall structure and I appreciate that -- that they have shared they are working with someone who likes to add more branches to the top to try and blend in a little bit nicer. I'm still conflicted, because it's a cell tower and there Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 109 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 42 of 61 is, obviously, lots of concerns and positives on both sides of it. So , that's where I will start. Perreault: Okay. Fitzgerald: Shall I go or do you want to go? Cassinelli: I will jump in. I -- I was interested -- I was -- had a look at something to confirm it, but you mentioned that was West Ada -- the applicant I should say, talking with my fellow Commissioners, mentioned that the West Ada doesn't want them at middle schools, yet there is one at Sawtooth or -- yeah. At Sawtooth Middle. So, that I -- I don't understand that one. And, you know, I do -- nobody wants them, but everybody wants the -- kind of thing. It is -- it is a Catch 22 with it. With that substation there -- I think nothing's uglier than a substation -- Fitzgerald: Agreed. Cassinelli: -- personally. I don't care, you know, what you put around it and from a health standard the -- the -- you know, the voltage coming off of a substation is -- is tremendous. I don't know if they could. If it could be put it in the substation in closer or -- Idaho Power won't even discuss that or if there is too much interference there. I guess my thought is to -- would be to -- I would lean towards the cell tower. As far as the property, the value issue, those homes aren't in there yet, so if it will be -- I think it would be a different topic if we were -- if the homes were there and they were looking to locate one . But the tower would potentially go in there first. So, any homes around there, you're going to be buying or not buying knowing that there is a -- there is that tower right there. So, those are -- those are my thoughts on it. I think I would probably tend to -- it's necessary. The -- you know, just like those 120 foot or whatever they are transmission lines are going up and down Amity and that substation, those aren't pretty, but they are necessary. And the cell tower is not necessarily pretty, but it's -- it's necessary and everybody in those -- everybody in those -- in that surrounding neighborhood if they don't have cell coverage they are not going to be happy. I mean it's -- everybody wants it. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Oh, go ahead. Perreault: Commissioner -- well, I was going to say on that note, you know, Brighton is not only a developer, but they are a home builder as well and I'm sure they have taken into account the effect it will have on their bottom line when they do put residential in there and -- and if it was significant enough for them -- if they were that concerned about their values they would not have agreed to lease that -- that property to -- to a cell tower. So, I agree with you in the -- in the sense that the homes are not there yet, that the public will be aware that there is a cell tower in that area and if they choose not to purchase there for that reason that -- at least they will have that knowledge. They will be aware of it. Commissioner Fitzgerald. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 110 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 43 of 61 Fitzgerald: Madam -- I think -- I echo your exact comments. I think both on the west side where you have a substantial chunk of property and Turnbull owns -- or the Brighton Corporation owns the property that is around it. Perreault: Right. Fitzgerald: If it was -- if we were talking about a cell tower right there with houses there I would be opposed. I think I'm with Commissioner Cassinelli, I think the substation makes it the right place to put it and those -- I mean looking at the -- I just brought up Google Maps, just to look at the -- the visual landscape down Amity Road and it -- those towers are long and they are all along the road and that's -- it's not going to change. It would add one more component to the -- what's already there and I think it's -- we can't shut down the city's like useful structure just because we are in the middle of the comp plan. I mean, I'm sorry, that doesn't work for me. I -- we have to continue to move forward in certain ways. I understand where we are coming -- making good decisions, but we have to be able to function as a city as we are going through that process as well. So, I -- to a couple points that got -- that were said in testimony, that we have to make good decisions to be able to make sure we are offering -- offering proper services to our citizens and it sounds like this is where it needs to be, so -- Olsen: Madam Chairman? Perreault: Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: The picture right there, the cell tower is leasing land from the developer that owns the land. Perreault: That's correct. That's my understanding. Olsen: Okay. Thank you. Perreault: And I do have -- I understand why residents have concerns, that I echo Commissioner Holland in that regard. I understand that being in -- in the real estate industry I do have those conversations with real estate clients in that regard and there is an -- an awareness of it. However, in this situation it's not a scenario where they would not be aware that the -- the tower is there and make that choice and -- and, again, I have no doubt that Brighton has analyzed that as part of their decision to -- to lease that property, so -- are there any other thoughts, comments? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I would just note for the Commission that because they are requesting condition -- conditional use permit, we are the deciding body on this application. So, it won't go Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 111 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 44 of 61 forward to Council. But one other note I have is -- I agree with the staff that they should have the additional buffer. Fitzgerald: Agreed. Perreault: And it's my understanding the applicant is in agreement with that. It doesn't sound like there was anything about the staff report that they were interested in modifying. Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Seal. Seal: One thing I would like to add is -- I mean as new generations move in -- I mean almost the opposite is being seen sometimes where somebody can see a cell tower and they are -- they are thinking, hey, I have got good connectivity here. So, as somebody that's not in that generation -- and I have had a cell phone tower in my backyard and moved out of that neighborhood, I don't fit that demographic. However, I do know that that's something that as we attract younger buyers into our communities that's something that they are actually looking for. Perreault: And this is not necessarily in our purview, but something to consider that several homes are now moving towards self service for their web access and that's probably affecting capacity in a big big way and people are streaming, using their cell service and -- and I would imagine that that's creating a significant demand for towers, so -- Seal: They all want it and nobody wants it in their backyard. Perreault: That's right. Are we at a point of making a motion? Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Are we going to make -- I mean is part of this going to be conditional on what kind of landscaping is approved? Are they going to have to, basically, provide detailed -- some details on that and how that will be maintained? Perreault: Right. So, that will be reviewed by the staff as part of the zoning compliance process, so those specifics the staff will review and make sure that the applicant's in compliance with that. That's a great question. And as Commissioner Holland mentioned, just so that you're aware, on conditional use permits we are the final decision makers. So, this does not move on to City Council. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 112 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 45 of 61 Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: One -- one additional question for staff. Is Brighton still moving forward with a storage unit on that or -- or not? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, I'm not sure what Brighton is doing. They were looking at that site for a storage facility, but I'm unsure if they are going to go forward with that for sure. Cassinelli: So, there is still -- there is still a possibility of a storage facility -- Allen: There is. However, it's -- it's not allowed in the current zone. Cassinelli: Oh. Okay. Allen: So, they would have to go through some additional approvals to make that happen, as well as possibly a comp plan map amendment. Cassinelli: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Are you done? Okay. Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Make me do it. I see how you are. After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2018-0087 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 7th, 2019. Cassinelli: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to approve Hill Century Farm Wireless Communication Facility, H-2018-0087, conditional use permit. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing for Excalibur Metal Design (H-2018-0139) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located 1322 E . Watertower St. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a light industry use on 0.83 acres of land in the C-G zoning district Perreault: Thank you all in the audience for hanging in there. We have one more application. Public hearing for Excalibur Metal Design, H-2018-0139. We will start with the staff report. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 113 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 46 of 61 Leonard: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The last item before you this evening is for a conditional use permit. The site consists of 0.83 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and it's located at 1322 East Watertower. To the north is a machining supply company, zoned I-L. To the south is East Watertower Street and the Meridian Police Department, which is zoned C-G. To the east is South Atkins Way and -- and an equipment supplier here, which is also zoned C-G. And to the west is a computer recycling company, which is zoned C-G. The property was annexed in 2000 and it was rezoned from R-8 to C-G in 2002. A CUP is being requested to construct an approximately 11,000 square foot, two story light industrial facility to be used for a metal design company. The facility is proposed to include a showroom and production area so customers will be able to view the fabrication process and custom order wholesale or retail products. It will also contain employee offices and warehouse space. The building will house a service bay, intended to contain the majority of fabrication processes to mitigate sound and any industrial characteristics of the intended use and that is going to be kind of in this area. Access is proposed via East Watertower Street and South Atkins Way. Typically staff tries to limit the number of access points from collector roadways. In this case we are actually kind of allowing them to just keep the two access points, because there is an outdoor storage use that will abut the industrial property to the north and there is also -- also a -- sorry. Excuse me. There is also a storage yard that they were proposing in the northern part of the site. So, that would limit their ability to be able to do those things and change the site design. There are 22 parking spaces proposed, which is in compliance with UDC standards. A secure parking area is also proposed along the northern part of the site. The gates will be kind of located right here . Access to these parts -- or this part of the parking lot should be coordinated with the Meridian Fire Department and Republic Services. A walkway is proposed to connect the front entrance with the outdoor patio area, which connects to a sidewalk along East Watertower and South Atkins Way right here. The applicant has applied for alternative compliance to allow for trees and grates, which were these three right here and pavers along the southern part of the site abutting East Watertower Street. Staff is approving the alternative compliance request as it will create a pedestrian oriented space for customers, employees and pedestrians. Staff does recommend that the applicant provide greater detail regarding the seating options with the CZC and design review application. Conceptual elevations have been submitted for the building. Building materials consist of glass storefront and metal awnings on the south and metal siding -- a perforated metal accent screen and steel entry on the northeast and west. Staff is recommending that the north, east and west elevations be revised to include two distinct field materials in compliance with the architectural standards manual for commercial districts . The future structure is also required to comply with the ESM in the UDC. So, elevations will be reviewed with this CZC and design review application by staff. With that I conclude my presentation and I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Any questions for staff? Stephanie, can you go over the -- the parking space issue again. Is the applicant proposing to fence the entire property or just that -- that north section of the -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 114 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 47 of 61 Leonard: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, they are proposing secured parking with a gate that is proposed here and here. So , it's going to be, I think, roughly seven spaces. There is a parking space here, trash enclosures there, and, then, I think there are five or six spaces there. So, I believe that's intended to be employee parking. Perreault: And the staff is recommending that they talk to the Fire Department and make sure there is correct access for -- Leonard: Madam Chair, yes. We are recommending that they just coordinate however far that needs to be from -- specifically South Atkins Way, just to make sure they have enough room to get in and out if they are sitting there trying to get it unlocked or access the area. Perreault: Okay. Leonard: And also with Republic Services to make sure that they can get in to get the trash. Perreault: Okay. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. Any other questions for staff? Would the applicant, please, come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Hatch: Jeff Hatch with Hatch Design Architecture. 6126 West State Street, Boise, Idaho. Representing Excalibur Metal Designs. Good evening, Commission Chair Perreault and fellow commissioners. Thank you for your time this evening in consideration of our conditional use application. For almost a decade Excalibur Metal Designs has been operating in Meridian. They have been serving Meridian and growing their business here in Meridian and with that success this application is a continuation of the success of their business. The intended use is to have a showroom that enhances and helps sell their products and so they not only do metal stair railings and metal, you know, fences, but they also do artwork, they do custom furniture, they do a range of very unique, distinct architectural features to buildings, both internally and externally and so with that it's really hard to describe in images how and what their capabilities are, because it's very diverse and so with that, the showroom is intended to help engage the general public and help show them what they have done and what they can do and, in addition, will have a fabrication area and so part of that they will have a viewing mezzanine where you can actually go up and see the employees working on these . They all have CNC machines and welding going and so you can actually use it as an educational piece or we can have, you know, the public come in and actually learn about welding and learning about artwork and how you -- you can engage the public more with this type of business. In addition, during our neighborhood meeting -- let's see. Can this move forward? It does. Okay. During our neighborhood meeting we received some positive support and we also have one of our adjacent neighbors here in support of the project and so in addition to the conditional use, we also have our alternative compliance and so with that we feel that we achieve that by -- on the eastern side of the property we are actually enhancing the density of the trees that we have along there and tying those in with the architectural Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 115 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 48 of 61 language of the building on that east face side. So, we are creating more of an aesthetic appeal, but also adding density to the landscaping. On the south we are proposing to do the south entry in more of an urban street frontage and so with that it will be pavers, instead of sidewalk and landscaping, and so in lieu of that we are going to have a series of tree grates, so that we can still shade that south facing side , but, ultimately, we feel that this approach is going to be more engaging to the public, which is what our intent is and it's also going to be more friendly. We want something that engages the neighborhood and says come in, come see what we do, and so that's what we feel like we are achieving. In general, we are in agreement with the conditions of -- for this project, but we did want to elaborate a little bit on Item G, which is what Stephanie had mentioned slightly, which is about the aesthetics of the exterior of the building. So, to the direct north of us we have a tilt-up concrete building that has two painted colors. One in cream and one in like a maroon color, but -- but the -- the same concrete material and glazing. To the east of us we have concrete and masonry building that has kind of a split face texture and, then, also to the east of us we have a building that has a little bit of different characteristics of masonry, but it's all still one material. Masonry. It's just different textures of that product. And, then, also to the east of us we have a masonry building that has a slight offset or jog in their facade to create kind of a column or pil aster effect, but, again, still all the same material. And so with that we are -- we are showing in our conceptual renderings some of the features of this building to the south where we are proposing basically an entire glazed southern facade to create a dramatic effect that really engages the public, but also showcases a lot of the transparen cy of the space and showcases their work. Also with that on the Atkins side the intent is to have an undulation in our metal facade, so that we are creating something that creates shadows and really engages that elevation. So, as a concept of these, to the -- to the south, if you look at the top left, that's, essentially, the type of glazing that we are -- we are looking at doing for this facility. Along the eastern side on the top right, you know, that's all done in metal, but you get a lot of distinction, a lot of characteristics, a lot of uniqueness that we feel enhances and meets the intent of the architectural standards manual, but is all achieved in metal. To the bottom left this is a concept that we are working with for our covered canopy, which is on the western side, and this would be something that, again, is architecturally distinct and unique and does not feel industrial even though it's made out of metal. And, then, lastly we have the -- the bottom, which kind of shows, again, that transparency of the staircase to the left. You can see the canopy awnings and you can see the tree grates, so you can see the feel of that urban street frontage that we are trying to achieve. So, in conclusion, we are requesting approval of our conditional use permit with the alternative compliance and the consideration to either amend or potentially remove Item G based on if you feel that our architectural intent is successful and I will stand for questions. Perreault: Any questions for the applicant? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 116 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 49 of 61 Holland: One quick question. The closed-off parking area that you have got, the gated parking, is there an intent to have storage or anything or is it mostly just for employee parking? Hatch: Mostly for employee parking. A lot of the trash that we have is actually quite expensive. Metal can be reused, recycled. Copper in particular is something that is very precious and so before those can be recycled they need to be stored in -- in the trash dumpster and so we would -- would also have that for security, so people aren't coming in and stealing the products before recycling. Holland: Thank you. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Can you -- can you elaborate on -- on that? My concern there is that it would be, you know, drive by, then, looking in there would look a little bit like a scrap yard. So, can you elaborate on how that metal will be stored out there? Hatch: The -- the metal that is to be recycled? Cassinelli: That or any -- any metal that's, you know, a fresh metal that's brought into be reworked. Hatch: The metal that's intended to be worked, if we go back to the site plan, on the very northern end of the facility we have a roll-up door and so the intent is is that we can have vehicles that are delivering the product to be able to pull up alongside -- side of the facility, roll up that door and be able to trans-load that into the facility. Rain affects the architectural characteristics of all of these products very distinctly and it's something that they need to control and so the intent in all likelihood is not to store product outside , to keep it inside, especially with, you know, your coppers and your stainless steel and stuff that's affected by the weather. Cassinelli: So, is there -- in that plan is -- in that site plan is there a designated area, then, where the recycled material will be kept? Hatch: So, the recycled material would be in the dumpster typically. Cassinelli: Okay. Hatch: Or it's going to be stored inside and -- and, then, recycled. Cassinelli: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 117 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 50 of 61 Perreault: So, I have a few questions about the exterior. I would anticipate that color will be a significant -- if there is going to be a large metal plain and you're not asking to have a second distinct field material that the color -- that the applicant chooses to use is going to be significant, is there any conversation about that at this point, considering that the buildings surrounding the area are in a very different material? Hatch: You -- to -- Perreault: What colors will -- will they be using the colors that you have in the rendering or will it -- will it look like that or is that just an example of the structure size and -- is it actually going to be gray with brown accent? Hatch: Gray is actually more of a white and so it's a little bit lighter and , then, the black is sort of a black charcoal color and so those are things that are welcome to -- to work with, but as far as like field accents, the screen walls that we are using, like on that eastern facade, are going to be a decorative perforated metal that's a distinctly different color as well. And, then, in addition versus having a solid color facade, even like the tilt-up panel to the north of us, we are going to have that banding that ties in with the -- the rigid frame archway and that will carry along as well and so we will have some distinctive ribbing along the corners of the building as well to help frame this. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: If staff were okay with it and there was still a requirement for an additional material, could it be something that were just a -- like a -- a band down at the base level? So, for the first five feet. I don't know if that's something that fits the design standards. Leonard: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, are you speaking of like a band along the base to kind of like anchor it to the ground or are you -- Cassinelli: Correct. I was just looking right down the street is -- is Danik Gymnastics. Leonard: Okay. Cassinelli: And looking at that building that's what -- it looks like -- it appears that that's what is around that building, maybe in the first three -- three, four, five feet there is -- there is a stone material. Leonard: Yeah. That, actually, is one of the requirements in the architectural standards manual for commercial districts, so that would be something that we would find acceptable. Bill and I were actually just talking to an option -- since this is all administratively reviewed anyway with a design review, you technically don't approve the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 118 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 51 of 61 elevations -- you can say whether you can have an opinion, obviously, but it would be up to staff ultimately to determine whether it's appropriate with the architectural standards manual or not. We do have a design review kind of exemption that you can apply for or that we can talk about and for stuff like the -- the elevation that's up on the left-hand -- upper left-hand side, I think we could work with you and -- and call something more of a distinct field material, if it's varying enough from the other metal materials, if that makes sense. That was directed toward Jeff and the entire commission. Hatch: Yeah, we -- we prepared this presentation based on the dialogue that we were saying about it. Perreault: I'm sorry, would you repeat that? Hatch: We prepared this presentation with the intent to engage you on it, because that's what our understanding was. Perreault: Okay. Parsons: Madam -- Madam Chair, Member to the Commission, when we -- when we pre- app with the applicant that elevation in the left-hand corner I think was the one that they presented to us and we were supportive of that. We said, yes, it doesn't meet the -- it doesn't comply with all the standards of the design manual -- the architectural standards manual, but through the administrative process they -- they have the option of applying for the design exception and it's just like it's -- we treat it almost like an alternative compliance. So, it's -- there is no fee, it's just in his -- his narrative to staff he has to explain why this design and these materials are equal to or better than what's in our design manual -- or design standards and we have done that on -- on occasion. So, we didn't want to give Jeff the impression that you had the ability to approve something oth er than what's allowed to the design -- or the architectural standards manual. So, if that's something that you are supportive of and you think you can support the design , just amend the condition to say apply for the design exception as allowed in the architectural standards manual and we can -- and give us some of that feedback where you want to see a block or something grounding the base of the building per those standards, but we can work on the materials through that ASM process, if you'd like the exception. Perreault: Okay. So, for clarification I think I heard you mention about alternative compliance and just wanted to clarify that that's specific to the plaza , the trees and the grates and the pavers, it is not specific to the distinct field materials, that is part of what is already written in the staff report and the Commission's decision will be whether we will require -- or that we will uphold staff's recommendation for the two distinct field materials or not. So, I just wanted to clarify that they are two different -- the -- the alternative compliance will be decided by the planning director and not by the Commission ; is that correct? Leonard: Madam Chair, that's correct. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 119 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 52 of 61 Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Seal. Seal: In looking at the designs on the upper right corner, is -- is that something that you're proposing on -- my understanding is you were proposing on putting that on the side of the building? Hatch: Correct. And something of that nature would be proposed along Atkins. Seal: So, that's something that will just go on the east side of the building. Is tha t something that you have considered doing as an educational piece or an art piece with a local facility -- you know, local educational facilities, schools, shops? Hatch: With all very sincere respect, Commissioner Seal, everything about this building is an educational piece. Seal: Right. I understand. I just wanted to try to make sure that I understand the concept of that -- that going up and you had alluded to the educational prospects of the building and being able to provide that, were just trying to understand if there has been some kind of outreach that's been done on that in order to provide an educational opportunity that, then, would help provide, you know, the conditional aspect of -- not the conditional, but get to what we are trying to provide as far as the aesthetics of the building. Seal: So, the majority of the metal screening on that side is going to be fabricated -- one, custom, but also with CNC and various technical means and so each of those panels as they are created are something that can be showcased and -- and -- and used for education to the general public and it's my understanding in talking with the owners that they are intending to engage elementary schools, high schools and, you know, basically anybody who would want to tour the facility and with that, not only things with inside the facility, but also the exterior of the facility itself would be elements that they can teach and educate how those were achieved. Perreault: Would you share with us about any noise factors? In the application it mentioned that it was going to be consistent with commercial areas, but that -- that's -- I mean there is a huge variety of -- of -- you know, of possible concerns in that regard. So, can you talk to us about what that -- what's involved with the noise? Is there going to be an issue for any of the neighboring properties? Hatch: The neighboring properties are commercial uses and -- and want to kind of recap with those are again? Perreault: I believe the -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 120 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 53 of 61 Leonard: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, it's industrial to the north and, then, there is -- I think it's like a machinery supply company to the west. Commercial. So, it's all C-G surrounding to the west, south and east and, then, to the north it's industrial and I believe this company is -- and this one are like 8:00 to 500. So, standard business hours. I don't -- Hatch: Yeah. So, based on those industrial and more commercial uses, we feel that we will be right in line with the rest of them as far as sound production. Perreault: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Hatch: Thank you. Is there anyone signed up to testify? Coles: No, Madam Chair. Perreault: Is there anyone in the room who would like to speak? Please come forward. Good evening. Snyder: Madam Chair, Commissioners, it's been painted all night at how I'm supposed to address you. Perreault: Please state your name and address for the record. Snyder: Okay. My name is Matt Snyder. My address is 125 West Taylor in Meridian. I own Forward Movement Training right across the way from Excalibur. So, for the last five years I have been a neighbor of them and so I can talk to a couple of things that came up tonight. I actually would have brought some of the stuff that they have designed and made for us as gifts along the way, but they are entirely too heavy, but they are amazing. So, the first thing I would say is that I come from a law enforcement background. I have been with Ada County Sheriff's Office since 2006, so I'm always a little bit skeptical of people, especially in industrial areas, and what I came to find right away is Jeremy's team are -- are some of the most -- the best business owners that I think the city really has to offer. They are legitimately ninjas and artists when it comes to work. It's -- it's pretty crazy. So, the -- I have -- over the last five years I have seen just a -- just a ton of stuff come out of their shop that if you go on and you see any of the Parade of Homes you will see their -- their stuff. Their stuff is featured in the Parade of Homes and have been for several years all throughout the -- the city and they -- the way they treat their clientele and the way they treat people is -- is really pretty incredible. As it pertains to this project, though, the Commissioner Cassinelli -- came up as far as like the waste and stuff goes. So, they are -- they use virtually everything, but what they don't use they -- like right now as it stands that there is a dumpster outside of our spot and their excess stuff goes into that and they have some recycle company come and take it. So, at no point in the last five years have I ever seen anything that was outside of that space or was not like this. You know, there was -- there has never been an issue, it's all been contained to that and I have never heard any of our neighboring companies having any issues either. So, you can't see -- it looks like a dump -- dump for space and that's where it goes. As far as the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 121 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 54 of 61 noise goes, I oftentimes like to go over there, just to see what it is they are doing, because they have got this sweet CNC machine that does this amazing stuff and you can have a conversation, right, as they are working and crafting their stuff. So, the noise is actually very -- very minimal. The last thing I would say is that what -- what they are looking to design -- there has been lots of stuff where I -- I have tried to wrap my mind around what it is that he said he sees in his mind's eye and a lot of times it's very difficult, but what comes out is an absolute masterpiece. So, what they are proposing I have no doubt, as a Meridian citizen, as Meridian -- I live here, I work here, own a business here, I have no doubt that it will be an absolute masterpiece when it comes to what is featured in the city. We may not be able to see it necessarily in the mind's eye, but what I would ask is that -- that the board and the Commission is to not let something like a rule about, you know, two different colors or whatever that is -- stand in the way from the artwork. I think of it like that art. Art piece. That's right at the intersection Main and Meridian. You know, it kind of splits off right there. It's all one piece; right? Or one color. But it's just -- it's a -- it's a piece of work, a piece of art. So, that's what I have to say to it. It's -- they do incredible work. They are legitimate artists and I am excited to see what they come up with in the city. And I will eat lunch there in the patio if they serve it. So, I will stand for questions. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Is there anything else the applicant would like to add or any additional questions for the applicant? Oh, yes. Would you like to speak? Please come forward. Adams: Thank you. My name is Jeremy Adams. Owner of Excalibur Mills and I live at 5953 North Channing Way in Meridian. Thanks, Matt, for that. That's awesome. We are -- we do very unique stuff. It's very hard to explain . People ask us all the time what we do and we don't know what to say. We just do stuff with metal and so someone will come to us and say have you ever built this before and we will say no, but we say no problem, because we will get it done. So, our whole process with this building and our whole idea is is to have something very unique and different and bring it , because we -- my wife and I moved to Meridian, like Jeff said, almost a decade ago. We live in Meridian . We are very happy for things like Costco and Winco, because we can walk to them. You know, we love, you know, the way Meridian is going. We want to just add something that's different and new and it kind of, you know, shows what we can do and if you want to know who works with us -- every one of us is here. So, we are all very happy. We are a family. We are team. My son and my wife are here as well. But this is all a learning thing for us. I mean we -- we know how to do metal. You can come and ask us to make something from metal and we will do it. But this is all new. I didn't know what to expect and I really appreciate all your guys' time. But I think I could ask -- answer some of the questions, just like Matt did, that you guys had. So, the dumpster that would be out would be enclosed as well, because it's a requirement for dumpsters and so all that scrap steel, which is very minimal, because we use 99 percent of the stuff and we rarely throw anything away, but it would be enclosed and the most noise we would have is maybe a forklift unloading a truck. Everything else is done interior and so we have very minimal noise in our production process as well. But I also did have a question for Commissioner Seal if I -- to ask what you -- what you're requiring -- or what you were -- it's very interesting Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 122 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 55 of 61 to me the educational outreach, because we want to be an educational outreach facility where people can come in and we can teach them, but to have something educational for the site, I'm very interested in that and we are very interested in coming up with something like that, but did you have something in mind for that? Seal: Well, I mean as it pertains to the project, not necessarily, but just, you know, always advocating for education in our communities and the ability to reach out , especially to a shop program or something like that. I mean shop programs, FFA, things like that are kind of diminishing in the schools, where your business can bring something to us. To a school, to a -- you know, not -- not necessarily a school, an educational facility that might help partner with making the -- you know, basically the artwork that would go on the side of the buildings that might substantiate, you know, altering the -- you know, the outlay in the building or the look of the building that would be something that, you know, is a win for everybody. Adams: Absolutely. We are looking into that. And anything we can do that can outreach to education -- to alternative education we want and that's why we have designed our building to have that community feel. I mean we want people to just walk in and say what -- what are you guys doing today and go up in the observation deck or -- we are going to have an observation room that we call a classroom that you will be able to just sit in and watch what we are doing and nothing that we do we feel is proprietary to the City of Meridian, because we work here and we want people to come in and see what we do and we are very proud of it. But -- I mean that being said, we have reached out -- people have reached out to us. We have had some apprentices come in as well to apprentice with us, but most times in our industry it seems that people go to work for a trailer manufacturing company or are building heavy machinery and they get burned out. We are looking for people, young and early. Every one of us that work here are artists and we all love our job and it's really hard to find people that love their job like we do and it seems to get burned out really easy and so we want our facility to bring in and start early, high school, college, you know, the CW I, we have been working with as well apprenticeships wise to bring people in before they get burned out and say, hey, this -- I can have a lot of fun doing this. It's not just a welding job. We are fabricators and we enjoy it. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you so much. Your passion shows through -- Adams: Thank you. Perreault: -- and it's wonderful to have -- have someone come and make a presentation that is excited about -- about what you are doing. It's great. I -- yeah, you're making me excited about it. I hope we get an invitation. We -- you know, part of what we do is -- is talking about what's great for the community and also, of course, this whole technical side of what we do, too. Just one more little technical question about the deliveries. What -- what kind of delivery hours do you have and I assume that your facility will be set up for the trucks to -- to be able to move around easily. How often are deliveries? What kind of -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 123 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 56 of 61 Adams: Yeah. So, we like the banker hours. We like, you know, not working too much sometimes, which burns us out. But we tend to get deliveries maybe once or twice a month and they are very minimal. We don't -- a lot of what we do -- 75 percent of our stuff is -- is design, so we do a lot of design and that's why our offices and showroom are so big, because we spend a lot of time doing that. But our production s take a long time. So, if we work on a product it could take a week to do and so -- with very minimal projects with our raw materials and so -- so, I mean it just depends on the project as well. But we -- we try to get one or two shipments a month and maybe one for a majority would be -- Perreault: Great. Thank you very much. Any additional questions? Thank you. Adams: Thank you. Is there anyone else here who would like to speak? Fitzgerald: Sorry. Three strikes you're out. Reynolds: Sally Reynolds. 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian. 83646. Just -- just as I was watching this evening before he got up and that's a tough act to follow, but as I was looking at their exterior elevations and I just kept thinking this is so wonderful. I mean they have trees breaking up the site. They have banding that they have been respective to their neighbors to try and fit into the community, where they are building where people all -- are already existing and even though their product is so different , they are being respectful of those neighbors and I'm not a huge contemporary, modern person. I did live in Seattle for four years, so you thought maybe I would have been converted , but as far as that goes I definitely think that this is just a beautiful facility. I love the patio. I love welcoming the community. The whole area on the site and how they have mixed organic material with metal. It's so innovative and I think that it's what the community needs. Honestly, I wish that it was somewhere off of Eagle or Chinden where it could really be showcased and I think being a family business that's what Meridian is about and, yeah, I'm -- I -- I would love it if we had more projects like this. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Okay. I rescind my comment, because that was exactly what I was thinking. Perreault: Okay. Is there anything the applicant would like to add? Excellent. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I move we close the public hearing, Excalibur Metal Design, Item H-2018- 0139. Holland: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 124 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 57 of 61 Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2018-0139. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I'm going to jump in first, because I like -- I like economic development, obviously. That's what I do for a living. So, I wish that you could just replicate the entrepreneurial spirit of the company and the staff and everyone that showed up tonight. So, I wish we could replicate it and do 16 of these in Meridian, because I think it's a great -- great sounding concept and looks like it's well thought out, design touches -- it's going to be a great addition to the community. Great expansion and it's always great to see Meridian companies expanding and growing here. So, we appreciate that for sure. I also like that, you know, there is great ties for the apprenticeship program, which is something the Department of Labor is really focusing on, something that CW I is really focusing on. So, as far as the economic development portion of the comp plan, I think it fits in perfectly with the mission and vision of what the city is looking for for economic development. I don't really have any concerns when I'm looking at it. You know, the -- the only other note I would make is that a lot of the projects that are coming through the valley right now that are looking for locations -- national companies, there is -- because of technology changes there is a big shift in commercial companies looking a little more industrial, where it's more of a commercial look and more of a commercial feel, but they have got industrial process because CNC machining and technology has gotten so far advanced that they can do some really cool stuff with it. So, I don't have any concerns with the way that the site plan is laid out. I think it makes sense with having the gated parking in the back , because of the nature of the materials they work with. Just their own security. So, no concern to me. Perreault: Anything further? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I totally echo that. I was going to say the same thing and -- and congratulations to you guys for -- for the expansion, for the growth. That's awesome. And it's fun to see -- and I think it's a -- I think it's a cool building. My only concern was I didn't want to see a pile of scrap metal in the back. I don't think that's going to be a problem . It doesn't sound like they -- they have much waste and what there will be will be kept in the -- kept -- kept in the screened area there where the dumpster is. There is -- Intermountain Wood Products is right down the street there and they have heavy truck traffic all day long. So, I don't -- this -- the noise and traffic coming out of this as far as deliveries and whatnot won't even -- I think will be a nonfactor. So, I think it's -- I think it's great. I don't think we Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 125 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 58 of 61 should go remove that condition. Leave that in, let them -- let them work with -- with staff on the design. I think we will -- we will figure out a great design on that. Seal: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I fully agree. I'm kind of excited about this and this is my first night, so didn't expect that, but, to be honest, I -- I agree that we should probably recommend the exception to the elevations, because I'm kind of excited to see what they would bring with -- with what they have talked about, especially making it something that could be educational in nature. That's pretty exciting. And I think whatever they put on the side of the building is going to -- they are going to want it to represent their business and what they are willing to offer. So, I think it's going to be something that our community probably will look very favorably. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I completely agree. I don't want to force something that we are adding stone that doesn't make sense for their business, it doesn't make sense for the design. I commend you guys for -- first for your whole family and for your team to be here. We appreciate the community support and -- and kudos to the architect. You guys did a great job of bringing in a vision, a sense of place that I think that neighborhood needs and so I -- I would like to put it somewhere where it would be in the center of town, other than an industrial area, but that's just because I like metal or -- or metal and glass. So, you can come and design my house. But I think you did an exceptional job. I think it's -- it will be -- it will add tons to that part of the world. I used to live in Woodbridge, which is right down the street, and so I am excited for the design and I appreciate the work you guys do and I'm going to come and see if I can have some -- bid on something. Now I'm excited. Olsen: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: I think it's unanimous. This is a marvelous project to see a family coming together and grow a business long enough to get to the point where you can actually afford your own building. That's tremendous. And it's nice to be part of it. Thank you. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. If -- if there is anybody else that has discussion I don't want to cut anyone off, but I would be happy to make a motion if we are at that point. Perreault: I would like to share some thoughts. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 126 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 59 of 61 Fitzgerald: No. You can't. Perreault: I -- I agree with everything that -- that the Commissioner said and -- but also thank you that you are choosing to open this to the community, because that's not something you have to do and I think it's fantastic that you are doing it and I know that also as a business owner it creates concern and risk and liability that have come -- people come through and insurance costs and all those good things, but -- but to have it open to the community is just absolutely fantastic and I really appreciate that you're doing that, because I would imagine that it's not easy to be watched when you're being creative and designing something and so it's very kind of you to -- to make that something that is open. And I love glass. I think glass is beautiful and I think it's just the facade of the building is -- is really fantastic. It's -- it's lovely. And I agree, I wish it was in a more obvious area in the community, so -- one quick thing I wanted to find out from staff is -- as far as the distinct field materials, is there a section of the staff report that would need to be changed in order to reflect the -- Fitzgerald: Section G. Perreault: Section G. And read Section G and I did not -- Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, we will pull up the staff report and see if there is anything we need to modify to make a recommendation. Holland: Madam Chair? Bill, would it be appropriate if in our motion we just said that we would modify Item G to work with staff to meet whatever requirements are necessary, but that the applicant could have freedom, flexibility? Leonard Madam Chair, Commissioner Holland, I would say yes, that would be appropriate. It is -- I'm going to find the actual number for you, so you can include that in your motion if you would like, but just know that they can work with staff on the design exception and -- the requirement for the two field -- or two field materials. Condition 8.1.G if you want to include it in your motion. Fitzgerald: I would support that wholeheartedly. Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Madam Chair, I move we -- after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I moved to approve file number H -2018-0139 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 7th, 2019, with the following modification for Item 8.1.G, that the applicant would work with staff on the design requirement and aesthetics to meet -- let them have their creativity, but still meet the city requirements. Fitzgerald: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 127 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 60 of 61 Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to approve conditional use permit for application H-2018-0139. All those in favor? None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Perreault: Congratulations. Cassinelli: Congratulations. Fitzgerald: Bill wants to know if you design cell towers. Perreault: We appreciate you hanging -- thank you for hanging -- thank you very much for hanging in there with us tonight, everybody. Okay. Can I get one more motion, please? Parsons: Madam Chair, before we adjourn I just wanted to -- I just wanted to remind the Commission that there is a joint meeting on the 21st that's beginning at 4:00 o'clock. So, hopefully, that's on your calendars. Perreault: Thank you. Appreciate that. Parsons: You're welcome. Perreault: Did everyone catch that? Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Olsen: Do you have a -- do you know -- have any idea how long that's going to last? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, we will start at 4:00 and we got a hearing right at 6:00 o'clock. So, it's -- you're going to -- it's going to be a full one. Cassinelli: That's our regularly scheduled -- Parsons: The regularly scheduled at 6:00. Yeah. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Oh -- Cassinelli: That was me. I move to adjourn. Holland: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 21, 2019 – Page 128 of 202 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Page 61 of 61 Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing -- Planning and Zoning Commission hearing for February 7th, 2019. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:54 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED Biu � ,i .. ATTEST: C. JAY C LES - CITY CLERK 1'�/ i DATE APPROVED O�PjED AUGUST �Q v 'o = Oly„f ' IDAHO �% SEAL �/ Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 3 A Project File Number: Item Title: Approve Minutes of January 17, 2019, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Request: Meeting Notes: rte✓ 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 J anuary 17, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission M eeting AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Minutes Minutes 1/25/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 3 of 145 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 49 of 49 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED S ERREAULT - CHAIRMAN ATTES . C. JAY CO - CI CLERK o,�LTa71 � DATE APPROVED o�Q�RATED gVCG „r o '0,4 "ff 0 z. SEAL / TRE City Council Meeting February 5, 2019 Zoning Map FLUM Original Plat Qualified Open Space & Play Structure Conceptual Building Elevations Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan Conceptual Elevations a.Future development of the site shall be consistent with the design standards listed in UDC 11 -3A-19; and the guidelines in the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual (or any updated versions thereof) and the TMISAP AND the conceptual site plan in Exhibit A. The proposed development shall consist of a mix of single, two and three story buildings as proposed. b.Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. c.All of the existing buildings on the site shall be removed and any existing business located on the property shall cease immediately upon annexation. d.A cross-access/ingress-egress easement(s) shall be granted to the property to the west (parcel #S1214120710) and to the property to the east (parcel #R8580480020) in accord with UDC 11 -3A-3. With the first certificate of zoning compliance application, the applicant shall provide a recorded cross access easement that grants access to the Twelve Oaks and Calnon properties as depicted on the submitted concept plan. e.A pedestrian access shall be provided to both the parcel to the west and to the east in order to facilitate pedestrian traffic through the area as proposed. f.Future development of this site shall be consistent with the land use, transportation and design elements contained in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) and the design standards in effect at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. g.The applicant shall construct a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along the east boundary of the three story indoor storage building OR obtain a council waiver to construct the 10 -foot wide landscape buffer as shown on the conceptual site plan in accord with UDC 11-3B-9. h.Any future indoor self-service storage use on the site must obtain approval of a conditional use permit and comply with the specific use standards set forth in UDC 11-4-3-34. i.Other than the one (1) proposed access to W. Franklin Road, all other access is prohibited in accord with UDC 11 -3A-3. Elevations Approved with DA Proposed Elevation Submitted with Application Revisions to Elevations After Staff Report Item #9D: Warrick Subdivision (H-2018-0115) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 36.22 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located on the south side of E. Amity Rd., just west of S. Eagle Rd. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: LDR (3 or fewer units/acre) Summary of Request: This project was heard by the City Council on January 2nd. At that meeting, the Council voted to continue the public hearing to tonight’s meeting in order for the Applicant to revise the preliminary plat to reduce the number of building lots from 130 to 112, resulting in a g ross density of 3.09 dwelling units per acre consistent with the Low Density Residential (LDR) designation (3 or fewer units/acre). The Applicant submitted a revised plat consisting of 125 building lots, 5 fewer than the original plat , resulting in a gross density of 3.45 units/acre, which still requires Council approval of a “step” up in density to MDR (3 -8 units/acre). Attached units are no longer proposed resulting in solely detached units range in size from 1,350 -4,000 square feet. A children’s play structure has also been added as an additional amenity for the development. Written Testimony since the last hearing: Bill Prolsdorfer, Elise Poulson, Lisa Nomura, Susan Karnes, Susanna Bohlman – In support of Council’s direction to the Applicant to reduce lots; against requested step up in density to allow more than 3 units/acre. David Palumbo – Belief that the City is in violation of State Code (67-65) pertaining to noticing farther than 300’ of the project boundary for projects that substantially impact a greater area. Steven & Kathy Stark – concern pertaining to construction of the subdivision improvements increasing the floodplain on their property; requesting the Applicant’s commitments at the last hearing to replace the culvert on Amity Rd. and the culvert downstream to reduce the floodplain to the banks of the Ten Mile Creek be memorialized as conditions of approval for the development. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2018-0115, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 5, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0115, as presented during the hearing on February 5, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0115 to the hearing date of February 5, 2019 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9E: Alicia Court Subdivision (H-2018-0107) Application(s): Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 3.084 acres of land, zoned R-4, located at 4036 E. Granger Avenue. History: The property was annexed and pre-platted in 2003 with the final plat being approved in 2006 as part of the Redfeather Estates development. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR Summary of Request: The applicant proposes to develop the site with 6 single-family residential lots and 2 common lots. The gross density of the proposed plat is 1.94 d.u. per acre with a net density of 2.3 d.u. per acre, which falls below the target density of the MDR designation. The applicant is request a “step down” in density from Council as allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plat is consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 district. There is an existing home and accessory structure that are to remain as part of this project; located on the proposed Lot 1, Block 1. Access to the site is from the extension of W. Alicia Street; via a common driveway to access five (5) of the six (6) lots. The existing home on Lot 1, Block 1 is requesting a Council waiver to keep direct access to E. Granger Avenue. If waiver is not approved, the applicant will need to redesign their plat to provide local street access to Lot 1, Block 1. With the extension of the utilities to this property, the applicant is proposing a pathway/maintenance road from E. Granger Avenue to the common driveway that is proposed for the project. The maintenance road will serve dual purposes: 1) allow the City to perform maintenance of the utility mains within the proposed 30 foot utility easement and 2) provide a pedestrian connection to the west. The UDC requires a 20 foot landscape buffer along E. Granger Avenue. There is an existing landscape buffer that was installed with the Redfeather Estates No. 2. The 20 foot landscape buffer was placed in an easement with the approval of the Redfeather Estates No. 2. UDC 11-3B-7 requires that all street landscape buffers be placed in a common lot that is owned and maintained by the home owner’s association. There is existing fencing along the frontage of E. Granger Avenue that is proposed to remain as part of the development. UDC 11-3A-7 requires that the fencing be located outside of the 20 foot easement. The provided landscape plan shows a portion of the existing fencing within 10 feet of the existing property line. The applicant shall move the fencing outside of the recorded landscape easement as show on the recorded plat for Redfeather Estates No.2 or apply and receive approval for alternative compliance to vary from the standards set forth in the UDC. The applicant provided a sample of elevations prosed for the development. The homes consist of a mix of materials including stone, stucco, lap siding and architectural shingles and provide visual interest on the elevations provided. The applicant should ensure that the elevations that face E. Granger Avenue provide architectural interest and modulation. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Penelope Constantikes ii. In opposition: iii. Commenting: iv. Written testimony: v. Key Issue(s): Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Realignment of the pathway/utility common lot ii. Construction material (decomposed granite vs. asphalt) for the pathway/maintenance road. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. Struck site specific condition of approval 1.a. ii. Modify site specific condition of approval 1.b. to allow the pathway common lot to remain in the location as proposed by the applicant (see Exhibit VII.D.). iii. Site specific condition of approval 1.g., Commission recommended the Council grant the access waiver to allow the existing home on Lot 1, Block 1 to continue taking access from E. Granger Ave. iv. Site specific condition of approval 1.h., Commission supported the request for the step down in density. v. Modify site specific condition of approval 2.b. to allow the maintenance road/pathway to be constructed of decomposed granite instead of asphalt. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Approve the request of the step down in density from MDR to LDR. ii. Allow the existing home on Lot 1, Block 1 to continue to access E. Granger Ave. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Penelope – Applicant’s representative in agreement with the Commission Recs. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2018-0107, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 5, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0107, as presented during the hearing on February 5, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0107 to the hearing date of February 5, 2019 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9F: Bainbridge Franklin (H-2018-0057) Application(s): Annexation Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 3.68 acres of land, zoned R-1, located at 2075 and 2155 W. Franklin Road. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-use Commercial Summary of Request: The applicant proposes to annex the site with a C-G zoning district which is an appropriate zoning district for an MU-COM designated area. The site is currently operating with a developed with several single family residence with on operating a small engine repair business. A recommended provision of the annexation is that the residential and business cease upon annexation. MU-COM designated areas are intended for the development of a mix of office, retail, recreational, employment and other miscellaneous uses, with supporting multi-family or single-family attached residential uses. Traditional neighborhood design concepts with a strong pedestrian-oriented focus are essential. Development should exhibit quality building and site design and an attractive pedestrian environment with a strong street character. An overall target density of 8-12 dwelling units (d.u.) per (/) acre is desired, with higher densities allowed in individual projects. A conceptual site plan was submitted that depicts 5 commercial pad sites, including a mix of single, two and three story buildings with a similar design theme, various square footages (range 4,300 to 29,250 sq.ft.), open plaza area, an access to Franklin Road, and a cross access to the Twleve Oaks multi-family project to the east and the Calnon property to west. The new plan also incorporates the required 25-foot wide street buffer width along Franklin Road in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3. Future uses may include retail, office and an indoor self-service storage facility. For information purposes, Council should note that cumulative land use changes have occurred in this area of the TMISAP in th vincity of this project which has resulted in an increase in more commercial property and less residential densities than originally evisioned for the area. The most recent being, the Calnon project that was approved in 2015, which changed the Comprehensive Plan designation on the south and west boundaries of this property from Medium-High Density Residential to Mixed Use Commercial. Because the adjacent properties to the west are much larger, staff anticipates a mix of employment, retail and other residential uses developing on in the area. Full compliance with the TMISAP is not required for the development of this property (no residential component) however; specific design elements are required to be complied with to ensure a consistent design theme and quality development complementary to the surrounding developments. Buffer to Residential Use: Because the applicant is requesting to develop the site with commercial uses adjacent to Twelve Oaks multi-family project along the east boundary of this site; a 25-foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to the residential use unless the Council grants a reduction of the buffer. The submitted concept plan depicts a 10-foot wide landscape buffer. Staff recommends the applicant install the 25-foot wide landscape buffer unless the council grants the waiver. Staff recommends that the buffer not be reduced less than 10 feet in width as currently shown on the concept plan. Building Elevations: Structures within the proposed development that are visible from the street or abutting properties are required to comply with the design review standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the Architectural Standards Manual. Further, the property is located within the TMISAP, which has higher design standards. The applicant has provided a color rendering that demonstrates the design theme for the proposed development. Although specific building materials are not identified, all structures constructed in the development should comply with the design elements of the TMISAP. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Shawn Nickel ii. In opposition: iii. Commenting: iv. Written testimony: v. Key Issue(s): Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Adequate parking for the site. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: iii. Allowing a 10-foot landscape buffer along a portion of the east boundary/abutting the proposed indoor storage facility. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Shawn Nickel – Applicant’s Representative Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2018-0057, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 5, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2018-0057, as presented during the hearing on February 5, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2018-0057 to the hearing date of February 5, 2019 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #9G: Cope Collision (H-2019-0002) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.73 acres of land, zoned I-L, located at 1724 E. Franklin Rd. History: In 2017 this property was rezoned from I-L to C-G, a comprehensive plan map amendment was also processed to change the land use designation from commercial to industrial. The recorded DA requires compliance with commercial design standards in the ASM. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Industrial Summary of Request: The applicant requests a modification to the existing development agreement to revise the building elevations from those approved with the original agreement. The original elevations included steel panels with extensive glass storefront and overhead doors. The applicant is requesting a modification to replace the northern glass storefront component with stucco and glass roll-up doors to access vehicle bays on the west side of the site. The originally proposed elevations do not comply with a couple of standards found in the Architectural Standards Manual for Commercial Districts. Specifically, the ASM requires that buildings include banding along the base of buildings to provide a visual anchor; and the use of at least two field materials on facades. Staff included conditions regarding the areas requiring revision in the staff report and the applicant has since provided revised elevations. The revised elevations are more in-line with the ASM requirements for commercial districts. The revisions do provide banding around the base of the building which was one of staff’s conditions. However, staff is still recommending that an additional field material be added to the building elevation. The applicant has provided two different colors of gray stucco - staff would like to see a greater variation in color, additional score lines or some variation in texture to help create even more compliance with the ASM. Staff would like more information regarding the dimensions of modulation and articulation and recommends that the applicant provide further detail with the CZC and DES application. Staff recommends approval of this project with the conditions in the staff report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0002, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 5, 2019: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0002, as presented during the hearing on February 5, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0002 to the hearing date of [date] for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 A Project File Number: H-2018-0090 Item Title: Public Hearing Continued from December 20, 2018 for Alpina Townhouse Subdivision (H-2018-0090) by A Team Consultants, Located NE of W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. REQUEST: 1. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 15 multi -family building lots and 7 common lots on 3.99 acres; and 2. Request: Conditional Use Permit For a multi -family development consisting of 60 multi- family residential units within 15 multi -family structures on 3.99 acres of land in an existing C -C zoning district; and 3. Request: Modification of an Existing Development Agreement to change an existing development agreement to change the previously approved concept plan with a new concept plan Meeting Notes: �2 &4J TD G 1v Gf`/ I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.A . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing Continued from December 20, 2018 for Alpina Townhouse Subdivision (H-2018-0090) by A Team Consultants, L ocated NE of W. Ustick Rd. and N. L inder 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 Memo to Commission from D ecember Cover Memo 12/17/2018 S taff Report f rom December S taff Report 12/17/2018 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 53 of 145 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/7/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-A Project Name: Alpina Townhouse Subdivision Project No.: H-2018-0090 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 1 Signature City- I Wish To Sign In Address For Against Neutral Name State -Zip Testify Date/Time Denise 6706 N 2/7/2019 83646 X X LaFever Salvia Way 6:20:07 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=155 2/8/2019 December 17, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission CC: City Clerk, Bill Nary FROM: Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor RE: Alpina Townhome (H-2018-0090) December 20th, P/Z Commission Meeting On November 15th, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued this project to allow the applicant time to coordinate the design of this project so it would provide better integration with the surrounding underdeveloped county properties. Items of discussion included cross access with adjacent properties, discussing a public street extension with ACHD, and possibly floating the mixed-use community designation on to the northern property to allow this property and surrounding properties to develop with a mix of uses consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Since the public hearing, the applicant has met with ACHD and the surrounding property owners. Those conversations have resulted in modifications to the site plan/plat which has been included as part of the public record. The changes to the plan include re-orienting several of the buildings to the northwest and southwest corner; removal of the access to Linder Road; more open space and amenities; and cross access drive aisle along the north project boundary. Further, ACHD indicated that a public street is not desired with the construction of the development and staff did receive an email from the buyer of the Vogel property supporting the location of the northern driveway location. In discussions with the applicant, cross access will be provided to the east property boundary for inter-connectivity. In reviewing the record, the Commission was supportive of floating the MU-C designation across the Vogel property to ensure a broad mix of uses develop in the area. In the Commission deliberation, it was discussed that commercial could develop along Linder Road with better access away from the intersection. Based on those discussions, the applicant has not incorporated another land use within the proposed development. Staff finds the applicant has addressed most of the concerns discussed during the last meeting. Staff is supportive of the new plan however; conditions of approval have not been incorporated into the staff report due to staff’s recommendation for denial of the project. If the Commission determines a single use is appropriate for this site and recommends approval of the project, staff has prepared conditions of approval for the Commission’s consideration as follows: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 54 of 145 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DA PROVISIONS: 1. The existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2014-088000) shall be replaced a new development agreement. 2. A new Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of the application approval. The new DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) and the developer. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application will not be accepted until the new DA is recorded. 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 Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting approval and subsequent recordation. The DA shall, at a minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the site plan, plat and elevations approved with H-2018-0090 and the provisions included herein. b. The applicant shall provide cross access to property to the north (parcel #S0436336051) and the property to the east (parcel #S043636156) in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. A recorded copy of the cross access agreement shall be provided with the first certificate of zoning compliance application. PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The applicant shall comply with the preliminary plat dated 12/14/2018. 2. Ten (10) days prior to the Council hearing, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that comports to the revised preliminary plat. 3. The final plat shall substantially comply with the approved preliminary plat in accord with the requirements listed in UDC 11-6B-3C. 4. Comply with all bulk, use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. 5. Comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches, laterals, canals and/or drainage courses, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. 6. Install lighting consistent with the provisions as set forth in UDC 11-3A-11. 7. 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. 8. Comply with the sidewalk standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. 9. Install all utilities consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-21 and 11-3B-5J. 10. 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. 11. Construct the required landscape buffers consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C (streets). 12. Construct storm water integration facilities that meet the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C. 13. 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. 14. Provide bicycle parking spaces as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G consistent with the design standards as set forth in UDC 11-3C-5C. 15. Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 55 of 145 16. Construct all required landscape areas used for storm water integration consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-11C. 17. Comply with the structure and site design standards, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines set forth in the Architectural Standards Manual. 18. Comply with all provisions of UDC 11-3A-3 with regard to maintaining the clear vision triangle. 19. Low pressure sodium lighting shall be prohibited as an exterior lighting source on the site. 20. All fencing constructed on the site shall comply with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7 and 11-3A- 6B as applicable. 21. 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. CONDITONAL USE PERMIT 1. The applicant shall comply with the site plan dated 12/14/2018 with the following modifications: a. The back out areas for the parking areas shall be removed from the Linder and Ustick Road street buffers in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.6. b. The applicant shall install a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along the east boundary in accord with UDC 11- 3B-9C or seek Council waiver. c. The applicant shall close the existing access to Linder Road in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. d. The applicant shall provide cross access to property to the north (parcel #S0436336051) and the property to the east (parcel #S043636156) in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. A recorded copy of the cross access agreement shall be provided with the first certificate of zoning compliance application. e. The applicant shall comply with the site amenities and open space as depicted on the revised site plan, dated 12/14/2018. f. Depict the location of a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access and a directory map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development, in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B. g. Include locations of covered parking in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6. h. The site plan shall depict a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail and directory map of the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. 2. 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. The applicant shall 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, per UDC 11-4-3-27G. b. Floor plans shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that clearly depicts a minimum of 80 square feet for the patios in compliance with private useable open space standards. 3. 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. 4. 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. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 56 of 145 5. The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application from the Planning Division, prior to submittal of any building permit application. 6. The landscape plan shall be revised prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Landscaping is required to be provided along the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27-F. b. Include a calculations table demonstrating compliance with the qualified open space requirements listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. c. A landscaped planter island is required within the rows of parking on each side of the drive aisle on the east side of the clubhouse/swimming pool in accord with UDC 11-3B-8C. d. Fencing details should be included on the plan if fencing is proposed. Any fencing proposed along the southern boundary should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7 for fencing adjacent to common open space. 7. The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application from the Planning Division, prior to submittal of any building permit application. 8. 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 February 7, 2019 – Page 57 of 145 STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: 11/15/2018 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Josh Beach, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 BRUCE FRECKLETON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MANAGER, 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0107 ALPINA TOWNHOME SUBDIVISION PROPERTY LOCATION: The project is located on the northeast corner of W. Ustick and N. Linder Roads I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION CJf1E NDIAN,_- -- The applicant, A Team Land Consultants, has submitted the following applications: L An application for a preliminary plat consisting of 6 single-family building lots and 2 common lots on 3.99 acres of land in the C -C zoning district; 2. An application for a conditional use permit for a multi -family development consisting of sixty 60) multi -family residential units within fifteen (15) multi -family structures; 3. An application to modify an existing development agreement to change the previously approved concept plan with a new concept plan. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Acreage Future Land Use Designation Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use(s) Current Zoning Proposed Zoning Lots (# and type; bldg/common) Phasing plan (# of phases) Number of Residential Units (type of units) Density (gross & net) Details 3.99 MDR (Medium -Density Residential) Vacant 60 multi -family units in 15 structures C -C (Community Commercial) C -C (Community Commercial) 15 multi -family, 7 common Single Phase 60 multi -family units 20 net density Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 58 of 145 Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) Amenities Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: History (previous approvals) B. Community Metrics Details 0.42 of an acre proposed at 11% including 11/2 of the buffers along W. Ustick and N. Linder as well as dog park and putting green Dog park, putting green, gazebo None June 13, 2018 with 3 people in attendance Received annexation and short plat approval in 2014 as Sugarman Subdivision (AZ -14-007) 6 6 Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Fire Response Time 3 minutes Staff report (yes/no) Yes 7 Requires ACHD No 1, meaning current resources would be adequate to supply Commission Action service. yes/no) Accessibility Roadway access, traffic Access (Arterial/Collectors/State One access to W. Ustick and one Access to N. Linder, both 7 Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) arterial roadways 1000 gallons per minute, fire sprinklers in the units will be Traffic Level of Service Ustick Road — better than E, Linder Road — better than E 7 Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross None 7 Access West Ada School District Distance (elem, ms, hs) Existing Road Network NA Existing Arterial Sidewalks / NA Capacity of Schools Buffers of Students Enrolled Proposed Road Improvements ACHD plans to widen Linder Road, between McMillan and Distance to other key services Ustick in 2019. Fire Service Distance to Fire Station Not provided 7 Fire Response Time 3 minutes 7 Resource Reliability 80%, does not meet the target of 85% 7 Risk Identification 1, meaning current resources would be adequate to supply 7 service. Accessibility Roadway access, traffic 7 Special/resource needs An aerial device will not be required. 7 Water Supply 1000 gallons per minute, fire sprinklers in the units will be 7 required Other Resources West Ada School District Distance (elem, ms, hs) River Valley Elementary — 1 mile; Heritage Middle — 3 mile; 8 Centennial High — 1 and 11/2 miles Capacity of Schools of Students Enrolled Distance to other key services Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 59 of 145 USTR Vil Lou- ofior, I ix- 1! m LAL. I V. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 60 of 145 IV. NOTICING A. Newspaper notification published on: 10/26/2018 B. Radius notice mailed to properties within 300 feet on: 10/24/2018 C. Applicant posted notice on site on: 11/2/2018 D. Nextdoor posting: 10/23/2018 V. STAFF ANALYSIS This property is designated Mixed Use Community (MU -C) on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM). 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 uses. Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20% of the development area at densities ranging from 6 to 15 dwelling units per acre, and shall consist of at least three land use types. The applicant requests a preliminary plat, a development agreement modification and conditional use permit application to develop the proposed multi -family lots with sixty (60) dwelling units. The overall gross density of the project is 20 dwelling units to the acre. Staff finds that the proposed development is not consistent with the MU -C land use designation for the following reasons: 1. The proposed density is above the range set forth in the comprehensive plan. 2. The applicant is not proposing a mix land use types. 3. The project doesn't integrate with the surrounding area. There is no pedestrian or vehicle connectivity between the proposed project and the properties to the north or to the east. 4. Staff feels that the current approvals for the site are superior to the proposal and should remain in place. A. Comprehensive Plan Policies: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (Staffs comments 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) The development of multi family homes on this site will contribute to the variety of housing types available in this part of the City, however the density is greater than anticipated by the comprehensive plan, there is not a mix of land use types and the applicant isn't proposing any interconnectivity with the surrounding area. Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 61 of 145 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 applicant is proposing to construct high density residential on the subject property; however the MU-C designation calls for a mixture of land use types. The applicant has not provided the necessary mix that the designation calls for. Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (3.06.02D) The applicant is proposing to have one access to N. Linder and one to W. Ustick. Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect local roads and collectors to adjacent properties (stub streets)." (3.03.020) The applicant has not provided cross-access to any other adjacent properties. Further, stafffeels that in order to do so, a public street will be required to better facilitate traffic from those parcels out to the arterial roadways. 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) Urban services can be provided to this property upon development. Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and along streets." (2.01.04B) Landscaping is proposed within planter islands in the parking areas on this site as shown on the landscape plan attached in Exhibit B. 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." 3.07.02L) The proposed multi family development is located in close proximity to major access thoroughfares (i. e. I-84 and Ten Mile Road Road) within the City. Elevate quality of design for houses and apartments; evaluate the need for design review guidelines for single -family homes." (3.07.020) The multi family structures within the proposed development will be subject to the design standards in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines in the Architectural Standards Manual. Further refinement to the design of these structures is required in order for the project to meet the design review requirements. Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers." (3.07.02D) Because of its location in close proximity to the Ten Mile Interchange (which is rapidly developing), as well as major transportation corridors (I--84 and Ten Mile Road), this property is ideal for providing higher density housing options. B. Dimensional Standards: Development of the site should be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C district. Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 62 of 145 C. Concept Plan: A concept plan was submitted that depicts the fifteen residential buildings and site amenities. D. Specific Use Standards: 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: (Staff's comments in italics) A minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space is required to be provided for each unit. The floor plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict 80 s.f. of private open space for each unit. Developments with 20 units or more shall provide a property management office, a maintenance storage area, a central mailbox location with provisions for parcel mail that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access and a directory map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. At a minimum, 250 s.f. of common open space is required for each unit containing more than 500 s.f. and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area. All of the proposed units are between 500 and 1,200 square feet; therefore, a minimum of 15, 000 square feet or 0.34 of an acre of common open space is required. The applicant is proposing 18,672 square feet of open space, or 0.42 of an acre. For multi -family developments between 50 and 75 units, 3 site amenities are required to be provided with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4- 3-27D. The applicant proposes a dog run, a putting green, gazebos and benches as amenities in compliance with UDC standards. The applicant is required to provide one amenity from each of the three sections as set forth in UDC 11-4-3- 27. The applicant is missing two amenities. One is missing from the quality of life section and one from the open space section as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27. Landscaping is required to comply with UDC 11-4-3-27-F. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation as follows: the landscaped area shall be at least 3 -feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24 inches for every 3 linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plans. The current plans do not meet this requirement and the applicant will need to revise them to meet the requirements of the UDC. 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. E. Access: Access to the site is proposed from W. Ustick Road, and N. Linder Road. ACHD has limited the access to N. Linder and W. Ustick to right-in/right-out only. Staff also has Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 63 of 145 concerns that the applicant is not providing cross -access to either the parcel to the north or the east. Additionally, in order to provide access to the parcels to the east and north a public street will likely be required on the eastern property line. F. Parking: Per UDC 11-3C-6, parking for multi -family uses is based on the number of bedrooms. In this case, each unit contains 2-3 bedrooms, which requires 2 parking spaces per unit and one in a covered space. Based on the number of units (60), the applicant is required to provide 120 parking spaces with 60 covered. The applicant is proposing 143 parking spaces for the development with 120 spaces required. G. Landscaping A 25 -foot wide street buffer is required to be constructed along both N. Linder and W. Ustick Roads, both arterial roadways, as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7. Landscaping is required to be provided within the buffers as set forth in UDC 11 -3B -7C. With the exception of the double sidewalk in certain section of the landscape buffer, the proposed landscape plan is in compliance with the aforementioned standards. H. Fencing All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. I. Certificate of Zoning Compliance The applicant is required to obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for establishment of the new use and to ensure all site improvements comply with the provisions of the UDC and the conditions in this report prior to construction, in accord with UDC 11-5B-1. J. Design Review: The applicant is required to submit an application for Design Review concurrent with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application in accord with UDC 11-5B-8. The site and building design is required to be generally consistent with the elevations and site plan submitted with this application and the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. K. Utilities: Enter Utilities Analysis. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the subject MDA and consequently the PP and CUP requests based on the following reasons: The proposal does not comply with the requirements of the Mixed Use -Community designation because the proposed density is greater than the range proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 64 of 145 The proposal does not provide a mix land use type in order to comply with the Mixed Use— Community designation. The project doesn't integrate with the surrounding area. There is no pedestrian or vehicle connectivity between the proposed project and the properties to the north or to the east. Staff feels that the current approvals for the site are superior to the proposal and should remain in place. For these reasons, Staff does not feel it's in the best interest of the City to modify the existing development agreement to accommodate the current development proposal. B. Ada County Highway District (ACHD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=l 57525 C. Meridian Fire Department: http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/157209/Pa eglaspx D. West Ada School District: http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/I57974/Pa57974/Page l.aspx E. Central District Health Department (CDHD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.as]2x?id=l 56405 F. COMPASS: http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/157016/Pa egl.aspx G. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/156946/Pa egl.aspx H. Idaho Transportation Department (ITD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/157259/Pa eglaspx I. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/I57307/Pa eglaspx Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 65 of 145 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan USTICK R0.4CI "+.•._--J LEr D r uxvuurroerfwe.eHr cEnn s se.m ro•,. AMM oFmvxex Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 66 of 145 B. Landscape Plan Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 67 of 145 C. Existing Concept Plan MIA OSVWV. OMM UP I I 118111 t I AL Y1N i Page 11 L1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 68 of 145 VIII. FINDINGS Preliminary Plat In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat is not in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land usebe cause the proposal is above the target density for the Mixed Use -Community Comprehensive Plan designation, does not provide a mixture of land uses and does not provide connectivity between the subject property and the propertis to the north and east. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section VII, of the StaffReport for more information. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property upon development. See Exhibit B of the StaffReport for more details from public service providers) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the developer at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property that should be brought to the Commission or Council's attention. ACHD and ITD consider road safety issues in their analyses. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider any public testimony that may be presented when determining whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which Staff is unaware. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features on this site that need to be preserved. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11 -5B -6E) The Commission and Council shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 69 of 145 Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional & development regulations of the C -C district. 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, however the lack of three distinct land use types, the density greater than what is allowed and the lack of connectivity within the MU -C Comprehensive Plan designation is not harmonious with the 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 the general design, construction, operation and maintenance of the multi- family development should be compatible with existing residential and uses in the vicinity. Further, staff finds that the proposed project will be compatible with the existing and intended character of the area and will not adversely change the character thereof. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council consider any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposal will adversely affect other properties in 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 the proposed development should not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If approved, conditions of approval will be included in Exhibit B of this staff report to ensure the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently available to the subject property. Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. L 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 that the proposed development should not involve activities that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. However, the Commission and Council should rely on public testimony from adjacent neighbors to determine if the proposed lighted fields and outdoor speaker system and large volume of Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 70 of 145 traffic generated by the proposed use will be detrimental to their welfare in determining this finding. 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 the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural feature(s) of major importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which staff is unaware. Page 14 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 71 of 145 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 B Project File Number: H-2018-0135 Item Title: Public Hearing Continued from January 17, 2019 for Pine Four-Plex (H-2018-0135) by Amanda Blackwell, neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located 645 W. Pine Ave. REQUEST: Meeting Notes: 1. A Conditional Use Permit for a multi -family family development consisting of 4 units on 0.29 of an acre of land in the R-15 zoning district rte✓ I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.B . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing Continued from J anuary 17, 2019 for P ine F our-Plex (H-2018- 0135) by Amanda B lackwell, neUdesign Architecture, L L C, L ocated 645 W. P ine Ave. 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 2/1/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 72 of 145 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/7/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-B Project Name: Pine Four-Plex Project No.: H-2018-0135 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 1 Signature City -State- I Wish To Sign In Address For Against Neutral Name Zip Testify Date/Time Matt 6202s Nampa id 2/7/2019 X X naumann mcdermott 83687 6:26:45 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=169 2/8/2019 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 2/7/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0135 Pine Four-Plex LOCATION: 645 W. Pine Ave. (Located in the SE ¼ of Section 12, T.3N., R.1W.) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a multi-family family development consisting of 4 units on 0.29 of an acre of land in the R-15 zoning district, by Amanda Bidwell, neUdesign Architecture. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 73 of 145 Page 2 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Amanda Bidwell, neUdesign Architecture – 725 E. 2nd St., Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Leon Kerns, AFM Enterprises, Inc. – 7801 Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date Legal notice published in newspaper 1/26/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 1/22/2019 Nextdoor posting 1/22/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on property 1/23/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates the subject property as Medium Density Residential (MDR). The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 74 of 145 Page 3 purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): The proposed development demonstrates compliance with the following policies of the Plan:  “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B) The proposed development will contribute to the diversity of housing types and rental options available in this area which consist of single-family and multi-family dwellings.  “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 medium density multi-family development will contribute to the variety of residential categories in this area.  “Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and along streets.” (2.01.04B) A new parking lot is proposed in this development which will be required to comply with the parking lot landscape standards in UDC 11-3B-8C.  “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) The proposed development is within walking distance of the City’s downtown area.  “Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A) The proposed development is required to comply with the open space standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family developments. Based on the size of the units (i.e. 1,060 square feet), a minimum of 1,000 square feet (or 0.02 of an acre) is required to be provided.  “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) Urban services are currently provided to this property.  “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D) Only one (1) access is proposed to this site via W. Pine Ave., an arterial street; local street access is not available. A cross-access easement is required to be provided to the property to the west for access to the proposed driveway upon redevelopment to reduce access points on the arterial street.  “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) Although not high density, the proposed apartments will be located in close proximity (less than a half mile) to Old Town and Pine Avenue is a fairly major access thoroughfare.  “Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 75 of 145 Page 4 This area contains a mix of single-family and multi-family residential uses and the surrounding area is designated for future medium density and high density residential uses. Therefore, staff is of the opinion the uses are compatible. B. Existing Structure(s)/Site Improvements: There is an existing mobile home and accessory structure on this site that will be removed with development of the site. A driveway exists via W. Pine Ave. There are existing trees and landscaping on the site. C. Site Plan: A site plan was submitted with the conditional use permit application that depicts how the site is proposed to develop with one (1) 2-story multi-family 4-plex structure, driveway access via Pine Ave. and parking (see Section VII.A). Each of the dwelling units are proposed to have 2 bedrooms. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed multi-family development is listed as an allowed use in the R-15 zoning district with conditional use approval and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for multi-family development (see below analysis). The proposed residential use and density is consistent with that desired in MDR designated areas per the Comprehensive Plan. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-27): The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27, Multi-Family Development, as follows:  Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of 10 feet unless a greater setback is otherwise required by the UDC. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances, porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties. The proposed plan complies with this standard.  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. The Applicant should comply with this requirement.  A minimum of 80 square feet (s.f.) of private useable open space is required to be provided for each unit. Private patios/balconies are proposed for each unit that range in size from 112-114 square feet that comply with this requirement.  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. Common open space shall not be less than 400 square feet in area and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of 20 feet. The proposed units range in size from 1,044-1,059 square feet; therefore, a minimum of 1,000 s.f. (or 0.02 of an acre) of outdoor common open space is required to be provided within the development. Outdoor common area is proposed at the south end of the building in accord with UDC standards consisting of a BBQ area with table and seating and an open grassy area.  For multi-family developments with less than 20 units, two (2) site amenities are required to be provided from two (2) separate categories (i.e. quality of life, open space, or recreation) that meet the particular needs of the residents. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 76 of 145 Page 5 The Applicant proposes a piece of public art (to be selected) and a barbeque area with tables and seating for tenants as amenities in accord with this standard.  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 plants. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should comply with this standard; evergreen shrubs should be provided at the spacing required.  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. F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2A-7): Development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed below for the R-15 district. Staff has reviewed the proposed site plan and deems it in compliance with the required standards. Notes: 1. Measured from back of sidewalk or property line where there is no adjacent sidewalk. 2. A reduction to the width of the buffer may be requested as set forth in subsection 11-3B-7C1c of this title. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 77 of 145 Page 6 G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): One full access is proposed via W. Pine Ave., an arterial street. Access via a local street is not available; therefore, a cross-access/ingress-egress easement is required to be granted to the adjoining property to the west for access to the driveway proposed with this development at the shared property line. The proposed access complies with UDC 11-3A-3 and the Comprehensive Plan (3.06.02D referenced above) which restricts access to arterial streets. H. Transit: The nearest bus stop located at 700 W. 2nd St. is within 0.4 of a mile from the site. I. Parking (UDC Table 11-3C-6): Off-street vehicle parking is required to be provided for 2-bedroom multi-family dwellings as follows: 2 spaces per dwelling unit; at least 1 in a covered carport or garage. Based on (4) 2-bedroom units, a minimum of 8 spaces are required with 4 of those in a covered carport or garage. A total of 9 spaces are proposed, including an ADA space, with 4 of those being in a covered carport in accord with the minimum UDC standards. On-street parking is also available along this section of W. Pine Ave. for guest parking if all of spaces on the site are occupied. Bicycle parking is required to be provided based on 1 space for every 25 vehicle spaces provided on the site. Based on a total of 9 vehicle spaces, a bicycle rack capable of holding a minimum of 1 bicycle is required. A bicycle rack is depicted on the site plan as required; a detail of the bicycle rack should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. J. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8, 11-3B-12C): There are no pathways depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this site. K. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): An attached sidewalk exists along W. Pine Ave., an arterial street, on this site. Although detached sidewalks are required along arterial streets per UDC 11-3A-17, Staff does not recommend the sidewalk is reconstructed as a detached sidewalk. L. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer is required to be provided along W. Pine Ave., an arterial street, as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district; landscaping is required within the buffers in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 25-foot wide buffer is depicted on the site plan with landscaping in accord with UDC standards. Note: The buffer appears to actually scale at 24’, please verify it meets the minimum width standard. Parking lot landscaping is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. The perimeter along the west and south boundaries should measure a minimum of 5-feet in width inside curbs and contain vegetative groundcover in accord with UDC 11-3B-8C.1. Other than that, the proposed landscaping within the parking area complies with UDC standards. There are existing trees on this site that will be removed during development of the sit e that may require mitigation. Contact the City Arborist, Elroy Huff (208-371-1755), prior to removal of any trees on the site to schedule an inspection to determine mitigation requirements as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10C.5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 78 of 145 Page 7 Because the subject property is in a residential district, no buffer to adjacent uses is required. M. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): There are no waterways that cross this site. N. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-7): All new fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall closed vision fence is proposed to be constructed around the perimeter of the development. A detail of the fence should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. O. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): 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. City water and sewer services are currently provided to this site. P. Pressure Irrigation (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development in accord with UDC 11-3A-15. Q. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments; design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage facilities counted toward qualified open space are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11C. R. Lighting (UDC 11-3A-11) All outdoor lighting provided on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. Lighting should be provided for safety in stairwells. S. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Building elevations were submitted for the proposed 4-plex structure (see Section VII.C). Building materials are proposed to consist of board and batten and horizontal lap siding with stone veneer accents and stained wood trim and fascia; architectural asphalt shingles are proposed for the roof. Final building colors will be selected from an earth-tone palette with a green tint. All structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A detail of the trash enclosure and carport structures should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that is consistent with the multi-family structure. T. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)/Design Review (DR): An application for a CZC and DR is required to be submitted for review and approval of the site design and structure to ensure consistency with UDC standards, design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual, and provisions in this report prior to submittal of building permit applications for the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 79 of 145 Page 8 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff finds the proposed development complies with the applicable minimum UDC standards and will provide a housing type (i.e. multi-family apartment units) that will be compatible with existing uses and will contribute to the variety of housing types in this area. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the Applicant’s request for conditional use permit. VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 80 of 145 Page 9 B. Landscape Plan (date: 1/24/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 81 of 145 Page 10 C. Building Elevations & Floor Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 82 of 145 Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 83 of 145 Page 12 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Conditional Use Permit 1.1 Site Specific Conditions 1.1.1 The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi- Family Development. 1.1.2 The site/landscape plan included in Section VII is approved with the following modifications: a. The north side of the building (i.e. street facing) shall have landscaping along its foundation as follows: the landscaped area shall be at least 3-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24 inches for every 3 linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plants as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27E. b. 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 per UDC 11-4-3-27B.2. c. Depict a detail of the bicycle rack that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. d. Depict a detail of the 6-foot tall closed vision fence proposed to be constructed around the perimeter of the development. e. Depict a detail of the trash enclosure and carport structures that is consistent in design with the multi-family structure. f. Include mitigation information on the landscape plan for existing healthy trees on the site that will be removed with development of the site as determined by the City Arborist in accord with UDC 11-3B-10C.5. Contact the City Arborist, Elroy Huff (208-371-1755), prior to removal of any trees on the site to schedule an inspection to determine mitigation requirements. g. The perimeter buffer along the west and south boundaries should measure a minimum of 5- feet in width inside curbs and contain vegetative groundcover in accord with UDC 11-3B- 8C.1. h. Revise the notes on the landscape plan to refer to City of Meridian code requirements rather than City of Boise’s. Such modifications should be shown on revised plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.1.3 Provide an address sign within the street buffer along Pine Avenue for the development and addressing on the building for each unit for easy identification by emergency services. 1.1.4 Submit a floor plan correctly depicting minimum 80 square foot private patios/balconies for each unit in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.3. 1.1.5 Lighting shall be provided in the stairwell for safety. 1.1.6 The Applicant shall provide a minimum of two (2) site amenities for this development consisting of public art and a barbeque area with tables and seating for tenants (or other qualified amenities) in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D. A detail of the public art shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 84 of 145 Page 13 1.1.7 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 as set forth in UDC 11-4-3- 27F. A recorded copy of this agreement shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.1.8 A cross-access/ingress-egress easement is required to be granted to the adjoining property to the west (parcel #S1212428049) for access to the driveway proposed with this development along the shared property line in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. A recorded copy of the easement shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.1.9 The conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the city. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. 1.1.10 An application for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review is required to be submitted prior to submittal of a building permit application for review and approval of the proposed site design and structure to ensure consistency with Unified Development Code standards, design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual, Comprehensive Plan, and provisions in this report B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Given the nature of this development a street light plan is not required. Streetlight 4840A fronts the property. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 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 be dedicated using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. 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. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.2 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. 2.3 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. 2.4 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 addressed per Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 85 of 145 Page 14 UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.5 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. 2.6 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. 2.7 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.8 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. 2.9 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. 2.10 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.11 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.12 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.13 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. 2.14 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. 2.15 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings for any public infrastructure 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. 2.16 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 public 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. C. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160339/Page1.aspx D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 86 of 145 Page 15 http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/159844/Page1.aspx E. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/159881/Page1.aspx F. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/159772/Page1.aspx G. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160487/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6) Required Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 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 the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional & development regulations of the R-15 district (see Analysis Section V for more information). 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 use is consistent and harmonious with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan. 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 if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended 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 if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. 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, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently provided to the subject property and will serve the proposed development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 87 of 145 Page 16 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. 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. 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 the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare of the area. 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. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) 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 February 7, 2019 – Page 88 of 145 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 C Project File Number: H-2018-0130 Item Title: Public Hearing for Razzberry Villas (H-2018-0130) by Ed Bowman, Located 1434 and 1492 Star Dr. REQUEST: 1. Request: Rezone of 1.86 acres of land from the R-8 and L -O zoning district to the R-15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 1.43 acres of land in a proposed R-15 zoning district Meeting Notes: Jv C t v j �Gr I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.C. Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Razzberry Villas (H-2018-0130) by E d B owman, L ocated 1434 and 1492 Star D r. 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 2/1/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 89 of 145 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/7/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-C Project Name: Razzberry Villas Project No.: H-2018-0130 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 1 Signature I Wish To Sign In Address City -State -Zip For Against Neutral Name Testify Date/Time Derrick 1329 E. Meridian, 2/7/2019 X X Eisenbeis Star Drive Idaho 83646 2:02:09 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=156 2/8/2019 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 2/7/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0130 Razzberry Villas LOCATION: 1434 and 1492 Star Drive (NE ¼ of Section 31, T.4N., R.1E.) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Rezone of 1.86 acres of land from the R-8 and L-O zoning district to the R-15 zoning district; and Preliminary plat consisting of 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 1.43 acres of land in a proposed R-15 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 1.43 Future Land Use Designation MDR (Medium Density Residential) & MU-N (Mixed Use – Neighborhood) with a N.C. (Neighborhood Center) overlay Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) SFR (single-family residential) Current Zoning R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) and L-O (Limited Office) Proposed Zoning R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 16 building lots/4 common lots Phasing plan (# of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units (type of units) 16 (8 detached/8 attached) Density (gross & net) 11.2 gross/13.7 net Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) NA (site is under 5 acres in size – qualified open space is not required) Amenities NA (site is under 5 acres in size – qualified site amenities are not required) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 90 of 145 Page 2 B. Project Area Maps Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) None Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 11/1/18; 6 attendees History (previous approvals) AZ-03-034 (no DA); CUP-03-062 (Planned Development for a mix of residential and office uses in R-8 & L-O zones); PP- 03-039; FP-04-055 (Razzberry Crossing) Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 91 of 145 Page 3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Ed Bowman – 802 N. Knox Ave., Star, ID 83669 B. Owners: Douglas Victor – 4701 W. Braveheart St., Eagle, ID 83616 Jason Ames – 1878 E. Townline Way, Meridian, ID 83642 Randy Donald – 513 Regents Gate Dr., Henderson, NV 89014 C. Representative: Corinne Graham, Civil Site Works – 921 S. Orchard St., Ste. 200, Boise, ID 83705 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Legal notice published in newspaper 1/18/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 1/15/2019 Nextdoor posting 1/15/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on property 1/25/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan)) This site is partially designated Medium Density Residential (MDR) (0.78+/- of an acre) and partially designated Mixed Use – Neighborhood (MU-N) (0.65+/- of an acre) with a Neighborhood Center (N.C.) overlay on the MU-N portion on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The purpose of the MU-N designation is to assign areas where neighborhood-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to avoid predominantly single-use developments by incorporating a variety of uses. Land uses in these areas should be primarily residential with supporting non-residential services. Non-residential uses in these areas tend to be smaller scale and provide a good or service that people typically do not travel far for (approximately 1 mile) and need regularly. Employment opportunities for those living in the neighborhood are encouraged. Connectivity and access between the non-residential and residential land uses is particularly critical in MU-N areas. Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 40% of the development area at densities ranging from 6 to 12 units per acre. Where there is a N.C. overlay designation in MU-N areas the City seeks to create a centralized, pedestrian-oriented, identifiable and day-to-day, service-oriented focal point for neighborhood scale development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 92 of 145 Page 4 The proposed development demonstrates compliance with the following policies of the Plan: (Staff’s comments 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) A mix of single-family attached and detached units are proposed for a diversity of housing types; Staff is unaware if they will be owner occupied or rental units.  “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 medium high density development with a mix of attached and detached units will contribute to the variety of residential categories available in the City.  “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) The proposed development is within a couple of miles of employment and shopping located along Eagle Rd. and Fairview Ave.  “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) Urban services can be provided to the proposed development upon development.  “Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) The proposed single-family residential development should be compatible with existing single-family residential uses abutting the site. B. Rezone: The site is proposed to be rezoned from the R-8 and L-O zoning districts to the R-15 district consistent with the MDR and MU-N with a N.C. overlay FLUM designations. The proposed density of 11.2 units per acre is above that desired within the MDR designation and at the high end of that desired in the MU-N designation. Because the subject parcels have a split FLUM designation and FLUM designations are not necessarily parcel specific, Staff deems the MU-N designation is appropriate to “float” to the MDR designated parcels with a zoning of R-15. Further, Staff is of the opinion the proposed single-family residences at a higher density will provide a transition to the existing non-residential uses to the south and east that consist of a daycare and office uses. A legal description for the area proposed to be rezoned is included in Section VII.A. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with a rezone 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 rezone with the provisions included in Section VIII. C. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat is a re-subdivision of Lots 1-3, Block 6, Razzberry Crossing Subdivision. There is an existing 20-foot wide sewer easement (Instrument #105139574) depicted on the Razzberry Crossing Subdivision plat across Lot 1, Block 6 that is required to be relinquished prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat for the proposed subdivision. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 93 of 145 Page 5 The proposed plat consists of 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 1.43 acres of land in the proposed R-15 district (see Section VII.B). Compliance with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 is required. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and determined it is in compliance with those standards. D. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures or site improvements on this site except for sidewalks along the project’s frontage along N. Bright Angel Ave. and E. Star Dr. E. Proposed Zoning/Use Analysis: The proposed R-15 zoning district for the site is consistent with the existing MDR and MU-N with a N.C. overlay FLUM designation. Single-family detached and attached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. F. Dimensional Standards (UDC Table 11-2A-7): Development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed below for the R-15 district. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and found all of the proposed lots comply with the minimum property size requirement. Future structures should comply with the minimum setback standards. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 94 of 145 Page 6 G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed via E. Star Dr. and N. Bright Angel Ave., both local streets, and via common driveways from these streets in accord with UDC standards. H. Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3) All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. The proposed driveways comply with the minimum dimensional standards and serve the maximum number of units allowed. The driveways are required to be paved with a surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment; and be straight or provide a 28’ inside and 48’ outside turning radius. Solid fencing adjacent to the common driveways is prohibited unless separated from the common driveway by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer. The preliminary plat depicts building envelopes for the proposed structures; however, the conceptual building elevations do not coincide with the building envelopes and setbacks shown. An exhibit should be submitted with the final plat application that depicts setbacks, fencing, building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures that coincide with the concept building elevations approved with this application if different from that shown on the preliminary plat. A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder for the common driveways, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the recorded easement should be submitted with the final plat application or with the plat submitted for City Engineer signature. I. Parking (UDC Table 11-3C-6): Off-street vehicle parking is required to be provided for 2- and 3-bedroom multi-family dwellings as follows: 2 spaces per dwelling unit; at least 1 in a covered carport or garage. Two-car garages are proposed along with 20’ x 20’ parking pads for each unit in accord with this standard. J. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8, 11-3B-12C): No pathways are depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this site and no pathways are proposed or required by the UDC on this site. K. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): A detached sidewalk exists along E. Star Dr. and an attached sidewalk exists along N. Bright Angel Ave. in accord with UDC standards. L. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Common area landscaping is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.2. Landscaping is proposed in accord with UDC standards. There are several existing trees on this site some of which are proposed to be removed consisting of a total of 76 caliper inches that require mitigation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5. A total of 77.5 caliper inches of trees are proposed for replacement in accord with UDC standards. M. Qualified Open Space & Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G-3): Because this site is below 5 acres in size, open space and site amenities are not required per UDC 11-3G-3A. However, the Applicant is working with the Razzberry Crossing Homeowner’s Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 95 of 145 Page 7 Association to potentially include this development in the existing HOA. This would provide residents with access to existing common areas and site amenities and provide the HOA with additional dues that could be used to maintain those areas. N. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): There are no waterways that cross this site. O. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All new fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. P. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): 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. City water and sewer services are stubbed to this site. Q. Pressure Irrigation (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development in accord with UDC 11-3A-15. R. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments; design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. S. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the attached structures but they are not consistent with the building footprints depicted on the preliminary plat. Therefore, Staff has requested the Applicant submit revised elevations for both the attached and detached units that are consistent with the footprints shown on the plat prior to the Commission hearing. All attached structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and with the guidelines in the TMISAP. T. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)/Design Review (DR): An application for a CZC and DR is required to be submitted for all single-family attached structures to ensure consistency with UDC standards, design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual, and provisions in this report prior to submittal of building permit applications for the development. Single-family detached structures are exempt from this requirement. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff finds the proposed development meets the minimum development standards of the UDC; therefore, Staff recommends approval of the proposed Rezone and Preliminary Plat. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 96 of 145 Page 8 VII. EXHIBITS A. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 97 of 145 Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 98 of 145 Page 10 B. Preliminary Plat (dated: 1/7/19) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 99 of 145 Page 11 C. Landscape Plan (date: 11/27/2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 100 of 145 Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 101 of 145 Page 13 D. Conceptual Building Elevations (date: 6/12/2018) NOT APPROVED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 102 of 145 Page 14 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Rezone 1.1 A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of rezone of this property. Prior to approval of the rezone ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of rezone ordinance adoption, and the developer. 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 Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the rezone for Council approval and subsequent recordation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan, and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII, and the provisions contained herein. Note: A final plat application will not be accepted until the DA is executed. 2. Preliminary Plat 2.1 The existing 20-foot wide sewer easement (Instrument #105139574) depicted on the Razzberry Crossing Subdivision plat across Lot 1, Block 6 shall be relinquished prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat. 2.2 The final plat submitted for this subdivision shall include the following revisions from that shown on the preliminary plat included in Section VII.B as follows: a. Remove existing lot lines from the Razzberry Crossing Subdivision plat. 2.3 The landscape plan submitted with the final plat application shall include the following revision (if applicable): a. If solid fencing is proposed adjacent to the common driveway it shall be separated from the common driveway by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer; otherwise, it’s prohibited. 2.4 An exhibit shall be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures that are consistent with the conceptual building elevations approved with this application in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D if different from that shown on the approved preliminary plat. 2.5 A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder for the common driveways, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D.8. A copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted with the final plat application or with the plat submitted for City Engineer signature. 2.6 An application for Administrative Design Review shall be submitted and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications for any single-family attached units. Single-family detached units are exempt from this requirement. 2.7 Approval of the preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat; or, submit and obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 103 of 145 Page 15 2.8 The conceptual building elevations submitted with this application for the attached structures are not approved as they aren’t consistent with the building footprints depicted on the preliminary plat. Therefore, revised elevations for both the attached and detached units that are consistent with the footprints shown on the plat shall be submitted prior to the Commission hearing. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat or building permit 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. 1.2 Applicant needs to extend sewer main north in the eastern common drive to serve lots 9,10, 11 and 14. Abandon sewer service at MH L14-348 in E Star Drive. Also, abandon sewer main between MH L14-350 and MH L14-363 due to proposed houses on top of the existing sewer line. This abandonment will cause sewer flow issues in the existing sewer main in N Bright Angel Ave. Sewer main slope in Bright Angel will need to be flipped between MH L14-350 to the new proposed manhole (SSMH B-4) to correct this flow issue. Other option is to not build on top of existing main line MH L14-350 to MH L14-363. 1.3 No plans submitted that show proposed water main, hydrants, or location of services. Developer shall work out the configuration of water services with Land Development Analyst in Community Development. 2. General Conditions of Approval 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 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. 2.3 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. 2.4 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, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 104 of 145 Page 16 the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 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. 2.6 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. 2.7 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. 2.8 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. 2.9 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. 2.10 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. 2.11 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. 2.12 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. 2.13 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. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 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 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 105 of 145 Page 17 with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 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. 2.21 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. 2.22 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. 2.23 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. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160090/Page1.aspx D. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160516/Page1.aspx E. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160638/Page1.aspx F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160281/Page1.aspx Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 106 of 145 Page 18 IX. FINDINGS A. Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required 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 and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The proposed map amendment to R-15 and development plan is consistent with the MDR and MU-C with a N.C. overlay FLUM designations and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. 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-15 zoning district is consistent with the purpose statement for the residential districts in UDC 11-2A-1. 3. 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 the Commission and Council consider any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. 4. 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. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. This finding this is not applicable because the request is for a rezone, not annexation. B. Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) 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 analysis in Section V of the Staff Report for more information. 2. 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 Section VIII of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 107 of 145 Page 19 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the developer at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. 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.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property that should be brought to the Commission or Council’s attention. ACHD 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. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8- 30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 108 of 145 Razzberry Point Villas Subdivision Rezone / Preliminary PlatH-2018-0130 City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission February 7, 2019 Presented By: Corinne Graham, PE Civil Site Works LLC Rezone •Existing Zoning: L-O (Limited Office) and R-8 (Med Density Residential) •Requested Zoning: R-15 (Med-High Density Residential) •Comprehensive Plan Transitions between MDR (Medium Density Residential) and MU-N (Mixed Use Neighborhood) with a NC (Neighborhood Center) overlay L-O R-8 MDR MU-N LDR Comprehensive Plan Project meets the following goals of the MU-N comp plan designation: •Provides higher density residential development (11.2 DU/AC) •Provides a transitional use between the existing office and medium density residential uses adjacent to the project •Provides an additional land use to the neighborhood •Provides a variety of residential categories •Urban services can be reasonably provided •Development is contiguous to the City Preliminary Plat •16 single-family dwelling units •8 detached units •8 duplex (attached) units •2,009 SF minimum lot size / 3,150 SF average lot size •4 common lots •2 common drives •2 landscape common lots Site Plan 2 common drives •Provide access to 12 dwelling units •Limit drive access to Star Drive •Eliminate the need for internal streets •Face garages away from Star Drive Landscape Plan •Provides berming and landscaping at Star Drive and Bright Angel as focal point for entrance into neighborhood •Screens homes at Star/Bright Angel intersection from headlights Razzberry Crossing Subdivision •Project lies within existing Razzberry Crossing Subdivision •Project will remain part of existing HOA •Provides access to open space and pressure irrigation for residents •Dues from new homeowners go to improving existing park spaces •Utilizes contemporary materials and appealing architectural features •Primarily two-story elevations with stepped roof lines at the garage •Garages are set back from living space •Plans will focus on efficient floor plans and contemporary finishes •Provides affordable housing option to Meridian residents Building Design SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS DUPLEX UNITS (NORTH BOUNDARY) DUPLEX UNITS (BRIGHT ANGEL) Summary •Rezone request complies with Meridian Comprehensive Plan •Preliminary plat complies with R-15 zoning designation requirements •Provides affordable housing options to Meridian residents •Is compatible with neighboring uses Questions/Discussion Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 D Project File Number: H-2018-0087 Item Title: Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility H-2018-0087 by Horizon Tower/Verizon Wireless C/0 Powder River Development Services, Inc, Located at the southeast corner of E. Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd REQUEST: 1. Conditional Use Permit for a wireless communication facility in and R-8 zoning district Meeting Notes: 9 I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.D. Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Hill's C entury F arm Wireless Communications F acility H- 2018-0087 by Horizon Tower/Verizon Wireless C /0 Powder River D evelopment Services, Inc, L ocated at the southeast corner of E . Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd C lick H ere for Application M aterials 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 2/5/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 109 of 145 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/7/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-D Project Name: Hill's Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility Project No.: H-2018-0087 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 I WishSign Signature City -State- In Address For Against Neutral To Name Zip Date/Time Testify 2/6/2019 Meridian ID John May 5039 S Marsala Way X 9:36:59 83642 AM 2/6/2019 Angela X 9:50:24 Aristo AM Meridian , 2/6/2019 Barbara 3675 E Woodville Dr. Idaho, X 9:57:38 Bohne 83642 AM 2/6/2019 Stehvn X 10:22:23 Tesar AM Meridian, 2/6/2019 Heidi Allen 2436 E Cyanite Dr Idaho. X 10:23:06 83642 AM 2/6/2019 Amber Rust 83642 X 10:31:33 AM 2/6/2019 Meridian, Darik Watt 5268 S. Palatino Avenue X 10:42:40 ID 83642 AM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 2 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 2/6/2019 Cynthia Meridian 2352 E. Hyper Dr. X 11:01:38 Arrington ID. 83642 AM Meridian 2/6/2019 Blayne 3702 e Lachlan st Idaho X 11:10:09 azevedo 83642 AM 2/6/2019 Nick Meridian, 5269 s. Wayland ave X 11:18:55 kugelman ID 83642 AM Meridian 2/6/2019 Duanne 3675 E Woodville Dr Idaho X 11:19:39 Bohne 83642 AM 3390 e 2/6/2019 Murchison Angela Moore X 11:32:15 meridian AM I'd 83642 2/6/2019 Mary Meridian, X 113 Bennett ID 83642 AM 2/6/2019 Heidi X 11:40:10 AM 2/6/2019 April Century Farm Meridian X 12:02:28 Figueroa PM 2/6/2019 Deborah Meridian, 493 E. Shafer View X 2:37:42 Boyd y ID 83642 PM 2/6/2019 Sam Meridian, Sam.scranton@gmail.com X 3:55:10 Scranton ID 83642 PM 2/6/2019 Barbara 5616 S Graphite Way ID X 5:54:09 Early Berlat PM 2/6/2019 Susan 5556 S Graphite Way ID X 6:58:09 Karnes PM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 3 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 2/6/2019 Cliff and Pat 2269 Hyper Dr. E Meridian X 7:57:18 Looney PM 2/6/2019 Shaun Pope X 8:15:20 PM 2/6/2019 Meridian ID Eric Schey 2091 a Mores Trail dr X 8:33:42 83642 PM 2/6/2019 Jacque Meridian ID 2091 E Mores Trail Dr X 8:34:22 Schey 83642 PM Matthew 2/6/2019 Pond. 2069 E Mores Trail Rd Meridian X 8:56:40 Southern PM rim coalition 2/6/2019 Jennifer Meridian, 3731 E Tenant X 10:20:46 Strout ID 83642 PM 2/6/2019 Nicole Meridian, 5360 S. Tindaris PI X 10:25:27 Schuette ID 83642 PM Kent and 2/7/2019 Meridian, Helen 2311 E. Mores Trail Drive X 6:39:03 ID 83642 Tjemsland AM 2/7/2019 Charles X 6:39:23 Boyd AM 2/7/2019 Susan Meridian, 2239 E Mores Trail Drive X 6:46:57 Denniston ID 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Allyson Meridian Id 5175 S Marsala Way X 6:55:00 Gozart 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Gregory L 2061, E. Taconic Dr Meridian X 6:59:17 Wells AM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 4 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 Meridian 2/7/2019 Merilee 2417 E Taconic Drive Idaho X 7:21:56 Andrew 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Laddie Meridian, 5866 S Graphite Way X 7:22:38 Tlucek ID 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Bobbie 2517 E Mores Trail Drive Meridian X 7:33:19 Gregory AM 2/7/2019 Luke 2517 E Mores Trail Dr Meridian X 7:33:34 Gregory AM 2/7/2019 Jamie 5212 S Marsala Ave ID X 7:36:04 Claiborn AM 2/7/2019 Joseph Meridian ID 2092 E Taconic X 7:44:45 Reger 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Leslie 3600 e Angus Hill Drive 83642 X 7:46:43 Leach AM 2/7/2019 Amy 2215 E. Hyper Dr. Meridian X 7:52:13 Anderson AM Meridian, 2/7/2019 Charles M. 5669 S. Graphite Way Idaho X 7:52:34 Ray 83642 AM Meridian, 2/7/2019 Sam Karnes 5556 S Graphite Way Idaho X 7:53:14 83642 AM Laddie and 2/7/2019 Meridian, Andrea 5866 S Graphite Way X 7:57:34 ID 83642 Tlucek AM 2/7/2019 Meridian, M83642 Andy Upton 4943 S. Marsala Way X 8:20:48 ID AM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 5 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 2/7/2019 Steven Meridian, 2630 E Amity Road X 9:00:56 Stark ID 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Meridian, Kathy Stark 2630 E Amity Road X 9:01:38 ID 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Emily Upton 4943 S Marsala Way ID X 9:09:04 AM 2/7/2019 Lindsay Meridian ID 3490 E. Angus Hill Dr. X 9:35:46 Rodriguez 83642 AM Meridian, 2/7/2019 Dean Kidd drkidd66@gmail.com Idaho X 10:16:25 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Michelle Meridian, 2255 E. Lodge Trail Ct X 10:25:25 McUmber ID 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Meridian ID Celeste Fox 582 S Woodhaven Ave X 10:28:22 83642 AM 2/7/2019 Justin X 10:31:32 Harshbarger AM 2/7/2019 Meridian, Kim Harker X 10:34:53 ID, 83642 AM 2/7/2019 MICHAEL A 5662 S. GRAPHITE WAY MERIDIAN X 11:10:25 WAGEMAN AM 2/7/2019 Lani Meridian,ID 5662 S Graphite Way X 11:30:03 Wageman 83642 AM Meridian 2/7/2019 James 2461 E. Shady Glade Dr. Idaho X 12:01:05 Beehn 83642 PM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 6 of 7 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 2/7/2019 Doris 5004 S Marsala Way ID X 12:09:36 Grenier PM George Meridian, 2/7/2019 Wren wrengrenier@comcast.net Idaho X 12:36:15 Grenier 83642 PM 2/7/2019 Marti 4848 S Twilight Mist Way Idaho X 12:43:00 Hutchinson PM 2/7/2019 Mrs. T. L. X 2:06:41 Cays PM 2/7/2019 Jean Yap X 2:30:08 PM 2/7/2019 12438 West Horsham Krista Self BOISE X 2:48:38 Drive PM 2/7/2019 Meridian, joe baldwin jnjbaldwinl28@gmail.com X 3:37:03 ID 83642 PM Meridian 2/7/2019 Melissa 2353 e lodge trail dr Idaho X 4:38:02 Johnson 83642 PM Meridian 2/7/2019 Treven 2353 E Lodge Trail Dr Idaho X 4:38:54 Johnson 83642 PM 2/7/2019 Anne Meridian, 2390 E Mores Trail Dr X 5:17:49 Parberry ID 83642 PM 2/7/2019 Sally Meridian, 1166 W Bacall St X X 5:39:17 Reynolds ID 83646 PM 2/7/2019 Lisa Meridian, 2331 E Lodge Trail Drive X 5:42:29 Broderick ID 83642 PM http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Page 7 of 7 Lawrence rust 3627 E Woodville dr Meridian, Id 83642 X 2/7/2019 6:56:25 PM 2/7/2019 Debbie Meridian, 2389 Taconic Drive X 7:07:56 Brain ID 83642 PM 2/7/2019 Robert Meridian, 2389 Taconic Drive X 7:09:41 Brain ID 83642 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=173 2/8/2019 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 2/7/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0135 Hill’s Century Farm Wireless Communication Facility LOCATION: Generally located off the southeast corner of E. Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd., in the NW ¼ of Section 33, T.3N., R.1E. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a wireless communication facility in an R-8 zoning district, by Powder River Development Services, LLC. II. PROJECT SUMMARY STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 39.71 Future Land Use Designation MU-N Existing Land Use Agricultural (farm land) and a single-family residence Proposed Land Use(s) Wireless communication facility (100’ tall monopine cell tower) Current Zoning R-8 Proposed Zoning NA Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) None Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 7/24/2018; 0 attendees History (previous approvals) CPAM-15-001; AZ-15-004 (DA #2015-061375); RZ-15- 007; PBA-15-012; H-2016-0092 (1st addendum to DA #2016-119080); H-2018-0127 (2nd addendum to DA - Findings have been approved but the DA has not yet been signed) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 110 of 145 Page 2 III. PROJECT AREA MAPS Future Land Use Map Aerial Map III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Horizon Tower/Verizon Wireless c/o Powder River Development Services, LLC 408 S. Eagle Rd., Ste. 200, Eagle, ID 83616 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 111 of 145 Page 3 B. Owners: Martin Hill, Hill & Hill Properties LP – 3625 E. Amity Rd., Meridian, ID 83642 Brighton Corporation – 12601 W. Explorer Dr., Ste. 200, Boise, ID 83713 C. Representative: Zack Williams, Powder River Development Services, LLC on behalf of Horizon Tower and Verizon – 408 S. Eagle Rd., Ste. 200, Eagle, ID 83616 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date Legal notice published in newspaper 1/18/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 1/15/2019 Nextdoor posting 1/15/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on property 1/22/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan) The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates the subject property as Mixed Use – Neighborhood (MU-N). The purpose of the MU-N designation is to assign areas where neighborhood-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to avoid predominantly single-use developments by incorporating a variety of uses. Land uses in these areas should be primarily residential with supporting non-residential services. Non-residential uses in these areas tend to be smaller scale and provide a good or service that people typically do not travel far for (approximately 1 mile) and need regularly. Employment opportunities for those living in the neighborhood are encouraged. Connectivity and access between the non-residential and residential land uses is particularly critical in MU-N areas. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): The proposed development demonstrates compliance with the following policies of the Plan:  “Provide facilities and services that keep up with growth.” (3.01.01) The proposed wireless facility will provide for the communication needs of residents/travelers in the southeast portion of the City.  “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D) The Applicant proposes to utilize an existing access via S. Eagle Rd. to the Idaho Power substation to the north to access this site; no new accesses via the arterial street (Eagle Rd.) are proposed. An access easement is necessary from Idaho Power for the proposed access.  “Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F) The closest residential property to the project site that is not separated by an arterial street is approximately 900’ south of the project site in Hill’s Century Farm Subdivision. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 112 of 145 Page 4 B. Existing Structure(s)/Site Improvements: The majority of this 39.7 acre parcel is being farmed; there is a single-family residence and accessory structure located at the southeast corner of the parcel approximately 1,200 feet away. C. Site Plan: A site plan was submitted with this application that depicts how the northwest corner of the subject parcel is proposed to develop with a 20’ x 70’ (1,400 square foot) fenced lease area for a 100-foot tall monopine cell tower and associated equipment for Verizon Wireless (see Section VII.B). The tower will be co-locatable for a total of up to four (4) carriers and will support panel antennas; ground mounted equipment will be located within the fenced enclosure. The project site is part of a larger 39.7 acre parcel of which the existing uses will remain the same. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed wireless communication facility is listed as an allowed use in the R-8 zoning district with conditional use approval and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-43: Wireless Communication Facility (see below analysis). The proposed use is not specifically listed as a desired use in the MU-N designation in the Comprehensive Plan although it will provide communication service for the surrounding area. The proposed facility will add to Verizon’s existing network and provide improved services to customers and improved calling/data capacity improving overall system performance. Maintenance visits only occur about once a month, therefore traffic to this site will be minimal. The Applicant submitted a vicinity map showing locations of existing towers (5) within 2.3 miles of the site with the nearest being one (1) mile away (see Section VII.D). Propagation maps were also submitted showing the current coverage area and the coverage area after the proposed tower is constructed (see Section VII.E) E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-43): (Staff’s comments in italics) Process (11-4-3-43C): 1. All proposed communication towers shall be designed (structurally and electrically) to accommodate the applicant's antennas as well as collocation for at least one additional user. The proposed tower will accommodate up to a total of 4 carriers using a stealth design. 2. A proposal for a new commercial communication tower shall not be approved unless the decision making body finds that the telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved structure and/or tower. The Applicant’s Network Engineer submitted a letter stating the existing towers in the area do not meet all requirements (i.e. height and/or location) to function reasonably to address their coverage gap in the area. 3. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate the proposed tower or antenna cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or structure. One or more of the following documentation shall be provided as proof that the new tower is necessary: a. Unwillingness of other tower or facility owners to entertain shared use. b. The proposed collocation of an existing tower or facility would be in violation of any state or federal law. c. The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of existing towers, as documented by a qualified and licensed structural engineer. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 113 of 145 Page 5 d. The planned equipment would cause interference, materially impacting the usability of other existing or planned equipment on the tower as documented by a qualified and licensed engineer. e. Existing or approved towers cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function reasonably as documented by a qualified radio frequency engineer. The Applicant’s Network Engineer submitted a letter stating the existing towers in the area do not meet the height and/or location requirements to function reasonably. Stealth tower facilities are required to meet the following standards (11-4-3-43C.5): 1. Stealth towers in residential districts with allowed nonresidential uses shall require conditional use permit approval. In all other districts, stealth towers shall be deemed a principally permitted use and shall require a certificate of zoning compliance prior to installation. The Applicant is requesting conditional use approval with this application. 2. Facilities shall meet the setbacks of the zoning district, except for facilities on a property abutting a residential use or a public right of way shall be set back a distance equal to the height of the tower. The facility is set back more than 100’ from the adjacent right-of-way of S. Eagle Rd. Although there aren’t existing residences within 100’ of the proposed tower, the concept development plan approved for the adjacent area is for residential uses; therefore, Staff recommends the subject site area is expanded to the west, east and south a minimum of 100 feet from the location of the tower to accommodate the required setback. If the land use of the adjacent area changes to a non-residential use in the future, the site area could be reduced per the setbacks of the zoning district. 3. Any facilities not meeting these standards shall require approval of a conditional use permit, in addition to any other necessary permits. As proposed, the project site area does not allow for a 100 foot setback from future residential uses; if a lesser setback is deemed to be appropriate by the Commission, it should be part of the subject conditional use approval. Required Documentation: 1. For all wireless communication facilities, a letter of intent committing the tower owner and his, her or its successors to allow the shared use of the tower, as required by this section, if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use. A Letter of Intent was submitted with this application as required and is included in Section VII.F. 2. Propagation charts showing existing and proposed transmission coverage at the subject site and within an area large enough to provide an understanding of why the facility needs to be in the chosen location. Propagation maps were submitted and included in Section VII.E demonstrating current transmission coverage and the transmission coverage anticipated with the proposed facility. 3. A statement regarding compliance with regulations administered and enforced by the federal communications commission (FCC) and/or the federal aviation administration (FAA). A statement was submitted with this application as required and is included in Section VII.G. Design Standards (11-4-3-43E): All new communication towers shall meet the following minimum design standards: 1. All towers shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with the surrounding buildings and land uses in the zoning district, or otherwise integrated to blend in with existing characteristics of the site. There are no existing buildings/structures adjacent to this site Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 114 of 145 Page 6 except for the Idaho Power substation to the north; residential uses are planned to the south and east of this site per the conceptual development plan approved for this site although a self-service storage facility may request approval to develop to the east. The proposed monopine (i.e. pine tree) design should blend in with future uses in this area. 2. The facility shall be painted a neutral, non-reflective color that will blend with the surrounding landscape. Recommended shades are gray, beige, sand, taupe, or light brown. All metal shall be corrosive resistant or treated to prevent corrosion. The proposed pine tree design should blend in with future surrounding landscape. 3. All new communication tower facilities shall be of stealth or monopole design, unless the decision making body determines that an alternative design would be appropriate because of location or necessity. The proposed wireless facility is a stealth/monopole design resembling a tall pine tree. 4. No part of any antenna, disk, array or other such item attached to a communications tower shall be permitted to overhang any part of the right of way or property line. When the property is subdivided in the future to create a lot for the proposed wireless facility, compliance with this standard is required. 5. The facility shall not be allowed within any required street landscape buffer. The facility is proposed outside of any required street buffers. 6. All new communication tower facility structures require administrative design review approval, in addition to any other necessary permits. Structures contained within an underground vault are exempt from this standard. The Applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Design Review application concurrent with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for approval of the facility prior to application for a building permit. 7. Any equipment at ground level shall be screened by a sight obscuring fence or structure. The facility is proposed to be screened by a sight obscuring fence; ground level equipment will be contained within the fenced area. 8. All tower facilities shall include a landscape buffer. The buffer shall consist of a landscape strip of at least five feet (5') wide outside the perimeter of the compound. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the plant material shall be of an evergreen variety. In locations where the visual impact of the tower is minimal, the applicant may request a reduction to these standards through the alternative compliance process in accord with chapter 5, "Administration", of this title. The Applicant submitted a request for Director approval of alternative compliance to these landscape standards based on the existence of a 35-foot wide landscape buffer immediately to the north of the proposed site on the Idaho Power substation site. The Applicant doesn’t feel a landscape buffer is necessary for the east and west sides of this site as a storage facility is planned surrounding the project site; and a buffer on the south side of the project site is not feasible due to the necessity for the area to be open for easement access for maintenance visits. Because residential uses have been conceptually approved to develop on the adjacent property to the west, east and south of the project site, not a storage facility, the Director is not supportive of the request for alternative compliance. Additionally, because a 100 foot setback is required to residential uses, this should accommodate the area necessary to provide the landscape buffer outside of the area needed for an access easement on the south. Therefore, the Director denies the request for alternative compliance and requires the Applicant provide a landscape buffer around the facility in accord with this standard. If at some point in the future, the adjacent land use changes to a non-residential use, a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 115 of 145 Page 7 subsequent request for alternative compliance may be appropriate but it’s not appropriate at this time. 9. All climbing pegs within the bottom twenty feet (20') of the tower shall be removed except when the tower is being serviced. The Applicant’s narrative states that due to the stealth design of the tower resembling a pine tree, it will not have climbing pegs exposed within the bottom 20’ of the tower. F. Dimensional Standards (UDC Table 11-2A-6): Development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed below for the R-8 district. Staff has reviewed the proposed site plan and deems it in compliance with the required standards. G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed via the existing driveway for the Idaho Power substation. An easement shall be obtained from Idaho Power for use of this driveway; a copy of the recorded easement should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. H. Parking (UDC Table 11-3C-6): The proposed use does not require parking; when service vehicles enter the site they can park within the enclosed area. I. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8, 11-3B-12C): There are no pathways depicted on the Pathways Master Plan across this site; therefore, no pathways are required. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 116 of 145 Page 8 J. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): This site is not adjacent to a street; therefore, a sidewalk is not required. K. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): There are no waterways that cross this site. L. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-7): All new fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall chainlink fence with slats is proposed to be constructed around the perimeter of the development to screen the mechanical equipment. Chain-link fencing with slats is not allowed as a screening material per UDC 11-3B-5M; the fencing material should be revised to reflect an acceptable closed vision material (i.e. vinyl or wood). M. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): 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. Because facilities are not proposed on this site that require sewer service, connection to City sewer is not required for this development; connection to City water service is required for irrigation purposes. If the requirement for a perimeter landscape buffer is determined in the future to not be required for this development through the alternative compliance process, connection to the City water system should not be required. N. Pressure Irrigation (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. The Applicant may be able to tie into Idaho Power’s irrigation system with their consent. If the requirement for a perimeter landscape buffer is determined in the future to not be required for this development through the alternative compliance process, a pressurized irrigation system shall not be required. O. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments; design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. P. Lighting (UDC 11-3A-11) All outdoor lighting provided on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. Q. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Building elevations were submitted for the proposed monopine tower as shown in Section VII.C. R. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)/Design Review (DR): An application for a CZC and DR is required to be submitted for review and approval of the site design and structure to ensure consistency with UDC standards, design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and provisions in this report prior to submittal of building permit applications for the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 117 of 145 Page 9 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff finds the proposed use complies with the applicable UDC standards; therefore, Staff recommends approval of the Applicant’s request for Conditional Use Permit. Because the Applicant is not proposing an alternative means of compliance for the requirements in UDC 11-4- 3-43E.8, the Director has denied the Alternative Compliance application. VII. EXHIBITS A. Approved Conceptual Development Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 118 of 145 Page 10 B. Site Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 119 of 145 Page 11 C. Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 120 of 145 Page 12 D. Existing Cell Tower Locations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 121 of 145 Page 13 E. Propagation Study Maps Site Site Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 122 of 145 Page 14 F. Letter of Intent Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 123 of 145 Page 15 G. FAA/FCC Compliance Letter Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 124 of 145 Page 16 H. Letter from Network Engineer Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 125 of 145 Page 17 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Conditional Use Permit 1.1 Site Specific Conditions 1.1.1 The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-43: Wireless Communication Facility. 1.1.2 The site plan included in Section VII.B is approved with the following modifications: a. Depict sight obscuring fencing around the facility as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-43E.7. Chainlink fencing with slats does not qualify as a screening material per UDC 11-3B-5M. b. The boundary of the site shall be expanded to the west, east and south to allow for a minimum 100 foot setback from the tower to future planned residential uses in accord with UDC 11-4-3-43C.5b, unless otherwise approved by the Commission through the subject (or subsequent) conditional use permit. If the land use of the adjacent area changes to a non- residential use, the site boundary could be revised per the setbacks of the zoning district. c. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip outside the perimeter of the compound with a minimum of 50% of the plant material of an evergreen variety in accord with UDC 11-4-3- 43E.8. If the residential land use of the adjacent property changes in the future to a non- residential use and the visual impact of the tower is minimal, Alternative Compliance may be requested to reduce these standards as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. Such modifications should be shown on revised plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.1.3 No part of any antenna, disk, array or other such item attached to a communications tower shall be permitted to overhang any part of the right of way or property line as set forth in UDC 11-4-3- 43E.4. Any future subdivision of land shall allow for compliance with this standard. 1.1.4 All climbing pegs within the bottom twenty feet (20') of the tower shall be removed except when the tower is being serviced as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-43.E.9. 1.1.5 An easement shall be obtained from Idaho Power for use of this driveway; a copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.1.6 An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development for irrigation purposes as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. If the requirement for a perimeter landscape buffer is determined in the future to not be required for this development through the alternative compliance process, a pressurized irrigation system shall not be required. 1.1.7 This development is required to connect to the City water system unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Because facilities are not proposed on this site that require sewer service, connection to City sewer is not required for this development; connection to City water service is required for irrigation purposes. If the requirement for a perimeter landscape buffer is determined in the future to not be required for this development through the alternative compliance process, connection to the City water system shall not be required. 1.1.8 An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments; design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 126 of 145 Page 18 1.1.9 The Applicant/use shall comply with regulations administered and enforced by the federal communications commission (FCC) and/or the federal aviation administration (FAA). A statement of compliance with these regulations was submitted with this application and is included in Section VII.G. 1.1.10 The Applicant shall allow shared use of the tower if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use as required by UDC 11-4-3-43D.1 as agreed upon in the Letter of Intent included in Section VII.F. 1.1.11 The conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the city. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. 1.1.12 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted prior to submittal of a building permit application for review and approval of the proposed site design and structure to ensure consistency with Unified Development Code standards, design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual, and provisions in this report. The 2nd Addendum to the Development Agreement approved with H-2018-0127 allowing development of a wireless communication facility on this site shall be recorded prior to submittal of these applications. B. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/154419/Page1.aspx C. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=154429 D. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=154690 E. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/153921/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6) Required Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 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 Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII, the subject property will be large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional & development regulations of the R-8 district and those listed in the specific use standards (see Analysis Section V for more information). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 127 of 145 Page 19 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 use will be consistent and harmonious with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan if the Applicant develops the site consistent with the conditions of approval included in Section VIII. 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 if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the stealth design of the facility that resembles a pine tree should blend with existing and future landscaping in 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 if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. 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. The site will be unmanned, therefore Staff finds no additional facilities other than telco, fiber and power are required. The access driveway will accommodate fire trucks in the event of an emergency. 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. 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. 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 the proposed use should not be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare of the area. 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. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15- 2005) 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. B. Alternative Compliance Required Findings: In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application, the Director shall determine the following: (Ord. 10-1439, 1-12-2010, eff. 1-18-2010) 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 128 of 145 Page 20 The Director finds compliance with the requirements listed in UDC 11-4-3-43E.8 is feasible. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds no alternative means of meeting the requirements is proposed other than the facility possibly being located within a storage facility, which at this time is not an approved use on the adjacent property. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. The Director finds there is no alternative means for compliance other than not providing no buffer at all. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 129 of 145 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 E Project File Number: H-2018-0139 Item Title: Public Hearing for Excalibur Metal Design (H-2018- 0139) by Hatch Design Architecture, Located 1322 E. Watertower St. REQUEST: 1. Conditional Use Permit for a light industry use on 0.83 acres of land in the C -G zoning district Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.E . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing for E xcalibur M etal D esign (H-2018-0139) by Hatch D esign Architecture, Located 1322 E . Watertower St. 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 2/1/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 130 of 145 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/7/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-E Project Name: Excalibur Metal Design Project No.: H-2018-0139 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 1 Signature City -State- I Wish To Sign In Address For Against Neutral Name Zip Testify Date/Time 125 W. Matt Meridian, ID 2/7/2019 Taylor St. X Schneider 83642 5:44:00 PM #600 Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=159 2/8/2019 Page 1 HEARING DATE: 2/7/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Stephanie Leonard, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2018-0139 Excalibur Metal Design LOCATION: 1322 E. Watertower St. (NE ¼ of Section 18, Township 3N., Range 1E.) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A conditional use permit is requested for an approximately 10,980 square foot, two-story, light industrial facility on 0.83 acres of land in the C-G zoning district as required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The proposed light industrial facility will be used for employee offices, production and warehouse space and a showroom for a metal design company (Excalibur Metal Design). II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Description Details Page Acreage 0.83 Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use Undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Light industrial (metal design facility) Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning C-G Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: November 6, 2018; 1 attendee History (previous approvals) AZ 00-005; MDA 10-007 (DA Inst. No. 100040596); RZ-02- 004 (rezoned C-G from R-8) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 131 of 145 Page 2 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) No  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) 1 access proposed via E. Watertower St. (collector) 1 access proposed via S. Adkins Way (local) Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access Existing Road Network Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers Attached sidewalk existing along E. Watertower St. and S. Adkins St. Proposed Road Improvements Distance to other key services Wastewater  Distance to Sewer Services 0 ft.  Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed  Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See Application Info.  WRRF Declining Balance 13.52 MGD  Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Water  Distance to Water Services 0 ft.  Pressure Zone 3  Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application info.  Water Quality None  Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes  Impacts/Concerns Applicant to coordinate with Engineering regarding fire flow requirements beyond 1500 gpm Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 132 of 145 Page 3 C. Project Area Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Representative: Jeff Hatch, Hatch Design Architecture 6126 W. State St. Ste. 107 Boise, Idaho 83703 B. Owner: Jeremy Adams 75 W. Taylor Ave. Ste. 200 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 133 of 145 Page 4 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 1/18/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 1/15/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted 1/25/2019 Nextdoor posting 1/15/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant requests a conditional use permit to operate a light industrial use (metal design facility), in the C-G zoning district as required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. A conditional use permit is required for a light industrial use, subject to specific use standards listed below. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates this site as Commercial. The purpose of areas designated as Commercial is to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area residents and visitors. Uses may include retail, wholesale, service and office uses – the proposed light industrial facility will house a fabrication process intended to provide a unique service and product to customers. The facility is proposed to include a showroom and production areas where customers will be able to view the fabrication process and custom order wholesale or retail products. The proposed building will house a service bay intended to contain the majority of fabrication processes to mitigate sound and any industrial characteristics of the intended use. Since the proposed use is not exclusively industrial in character, incorporates various aspects that contribute to a retail and service atmosphere, and has been designed with surrounding properties and uses in mind, staff feels the proposed CUP would be consistent with the intent of commercially zoned properties. The applicant is also requesting alternative compliance (ALT) to UDC 11-3B to install trees in grates within pavers in lieu of the vegetative groundcover that is required in the 20-foot landscape buffer along E. Watertower St. The alternative compliance request only requires approval by the Director, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5; analysis regarding the request can be found in Section I below. A. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan):  “Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping.” (2.01.03B)  “Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and along streets, and to positively influence the physical and visual environment through screening, paving materials, and other landscape techniques.” (2.01.04B)  “Provide landscaping, pedestrian friendly areas, and appropriate signage at gateways, and new development sites throughout town as appropriate, with upscale attractive construction.” (2.01.03J)  “Require industrial areas to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses (e.g., landscape, fences, etc.) and community design criteria.” (3.06.01A) B. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-25, Industry, Light and Heavy. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 134 of 145 Page 5 A. All mechanical equipment emissions; shipping and/or delivery; or other outdoor activity areas shall be located a minimum of three hundred feet (300') from any abutting residential districts, or the use is subject to a conditional use permit. The proposed use does not abut a residential district so this requirement is not applicable. B. The application shall identify how the proposed use will address the impacts of noise and other emissions on adjoining residential districts. More specifically, the following adverse effects shall be mitigated through setbacks, buffers, sound attenuation and/or hours of operation: 1. Noise, odor, or vibrations, or direct or reflected glare detectable by the human senses without the aid of instruments. The service bay for the proposed light industrial use (metal fabrication) will be housed in the northwest part of the building, located furthest away from the patio area and closest to adjacent industrial and commercial uses. 2. Radioactivity and electric or electromagnetic disturbances that unduly interfere with the normal operation of equipment, instruments, or appliances on abutting properties. This standard is not applicable to the proposed use. 3. Any other emission or radiation that endangers human health, results in damages to vegetation or property or which exceeds health and safety standards. This standard is not applicable to the proposed use. 4. In the event that the director determines that the applicant cannot adequately address such impacts, the use shall be subject to conditional use approval. C. Additional standards for industry, heavy: The use shall be located a minimum of one thousand feet (1,000') from a hospital. The proposed building is not located near a hospital so this requirement is not applicable. D. The application materials shall include written statement that the proposed facility meets any applicable federal, state, or local standards regarding such use including, but not limited to, those of the U.S. environmental protection agency, the U.S. department of agriculture, Central district health department, the Ada County air quality board and Idaho department of water resources. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005). The applicant has not submitted these required materials with the subject application but shall submit information regarding the specific use standards in the narrative for the CZC and DES application. C. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): See UDC Table 11-2B-3 (Dimensional Standards in the Commercial Districts) D. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): One (1) access is proposed via E. Watertower St. (collector) and one (1) access is proposed via S. Adkins Way (local). Per UDC 11-3A-3 staff typically recommends that properties provide a cross-access/egress easement to abutting properties to limit the number of access points to collector roadways (Watertower) and to allow for inner-connectivity should redevelopment occur in the future. However, this site is proposed to include an accessory outdoor storage use which will abut an industrial property to the north. In this case, staff does not believe cross-access is practical and would cause the currently proposed project to change in character and design; specifically impacting the location of the storage yard and parking for the site. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 135 of 145 Page 6 E. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Per UDC Table 11-3C-6B.1, a minimum of 22 off-street parking spaces are required to be provided; a total of 21 spaces are proposed. One (1) additional parking space complying with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-5 shall be provided. F. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Seven-foot sidewalks exist along E. Watertower St. and S. Adkins Way. The applicant is proposing an outdoor paved patio that will continue to the existing sidewalk along both streets; a walkway leads from the patio to the front entrance of the facility. G. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A ten-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Adkins Rd. and a twenty-foot wide street buffer is required along E. Watertower St. as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3. All street buffers are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The applicant is proposing a fifteen-foot buffer along S. Adkins Rd. in excess of UDC standards and is submitting an alternative compliance request for the buffer along E. Watertower St. as detailed in item I below. Parking lot landscaping is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C and in accord with Comprehensive Plan action item #2.01.04B, “Require all new and reconstructed parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands and along streets, and to positively influence the physical and visual environment through screening, paving materials, and other landscape techniques.” The plan as submitted complies with these requirements. There are no existing trees on the site being removed that require mitigation. H. Alternative Compliance (ALT) (UDC 11-5B-5): The applicant has applied for Alternative Compliance as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5 to landscaping requirements (UDC 11-3B) regarding the required 20-foot landscape buffer along E. Watertower St. (collector). UDC 11-3B-7C-3a requires that all required landscape buffers along streets be planted with trees and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. The applicant proposes to install three (3) deciduous trees within grates bounded by pavers spanning approximately 85 linear feet. The tree grates border a patio area that is intended to serve as a pedestrian and employee gathering space (see Exhibit VII.B). Staff feels the applicant is proposing an alternative that incorporates an architectural site design that will promote a walkable and pedestrian oriented site and as such, meets one of the prerequisites for alternative compliance and provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements of UDC 11-3B (see Findings in Section IX). The alternative also fulfills the intent of Comprehensive Plan action item #2.01.03J, “Provide landscaping, pedestrian friendly areas, and appropriate signage at gateways, and new development sites throughout town as appropriate, with upscale attractive construction.” Staff is generally supportive of the alternative compliance request, however is recommending the applicant provide further information regarding the walkable and pedestrian oriented details to demonstrate the fulfillment of alternative compliance. Staff is recommending the applicant embellish on the following with the CZC and DES application: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 136 of 145 Page 7 a. The proposed site and landscape plan depicts a patio area but does not include information about potential seating options, pedestrian scale elements, or the type of pavers used. Staff recommends the applicant provide a detail of the patio, including an area for customers and/or employees to utilize the space with the CZC and DES application submittal. b. The applicant’s narrative and site and landscape plan depict the area in which the trees with grates will be located but does not provide information about the style or appearance of grate proposed, or the appearance of pavers and whether those pavers continue into the proposed patio area. Staff recommends the applicant provide more information and a detail of the buffer area with a rendering of pavers and tree grates with the CZC and DES application submittal. I. Outdoor Storage as an Accessory Use (UDC 11-3A-14) Outdoor storage of material, equipment, inventory, and/or supplies shall be incorporated into the overall design of the proposed building and site landscaping to minimize the visual impacts of the use. Outdoor storage shall be fully contained and screened from view of adjacent properties and/or public streets by a solid fence and/or wall with a minimum height of six feet (6’). The applicant is proposing to use the northern part of the site as secured accessory outdoor storage, but has not specified what type of fencing will be used for the secured gate or for screening to adjacent properties. The existing fencing at the northern boundary appears to be chainlink and does not qualify as a screening material. There does not appear to be fencing along the west boundary of the site, which will need to be screened if used as an accessory outdoor storage area. A detail of required proposed solid fencing along the north and west boundary of the site shall be submitted with the CZC and DES application. J. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7, 11-3A-14) Fencing proposed along the perimeter of the site shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7 and UDC 11-3A-14. In accord with UDC 11-3A-14, proposed fencing and/or wall shall be constructed of complementary or of similar design and materials of the primary structure. A detail of proposed fencing shall be submitted with the CZC and DES application. K. Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. The proposed plans submitted with these applications should comply with UDC standards and the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual for commercial districts. L. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): The applicant has submitted conceptual elevations of the proposed building included in Exhibit VII.C. Building materials consist of metal siding, sheet metal, a perforated metal accent screen, and a steel entry and awning. The Architectural Standards Manual (ASM) for commercial districts requires that building design incorporate complementary material combinations, including: the use of at least two (2) distinct field materials, colors, or material-color combinations on the building façade; incorporation of an accent material on the first story; and distinguishing field materials from accent materials. The submitted conceptual elevations depict one field material (metal) in varying applications. Staff recommends the applicant revise the building elevations to comply with the design standards in UDC 11-3A-19 and the ASM. The elevations submitted with the application (Exhibit VII.C) are not approved with the subject application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 137 of 145 Page 8 M. Trash Enclosure A trash enclosure is depicted on the site plan in the northern part of the parking lot and is proposed to be located within the secured parking portion of the site. A detail of the sides of the enclosure should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. The applicant shall coordinate with Republic Services on the design and location of the trash enclosure and shall develop an access plan for the enclosure. VI. DECISION A. Staff: 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 CUP application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 138 of 145 Page 9 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan (date: December 2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 139 of 145 Page 10 B. Landscape Plan (date: December 2018) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 140 of 145 Page 11 C. Building Elevations (date: December 2018) - NOT APPROVED Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 141 of 145 Page 12 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS 1. PLANNING DIVISION a. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of previous approvals (AZ-00-005, 100040596; MDA-10-007; RZ-02-004). b. The applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-25, Industry, Light and Heavy. c. The applicant shall comply with the Outdoor Storage as an Accessory Use standards in UDC 11-3A-14. d. The site plan, included in Exhibit VII.A, dated December 2018 shall be revised as follows: i. One (1) parking space shall be added to the site plan to comply with standards in UDC Table 11-3C-6B.1 e. The landscape plan included in Exhibit VII.B, dated December 2018, shall be revised as follows: i. The applicant shall provide details of the proposed tree grates and patio area with submittal of CZC and DES application. ii. A detail of the sides of the trash enclosure shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. iii. A detail of any fencing and secure gate proposed shall be submitted with the CZC and DES application. iv. One (1) parking space shall be added to the site plan to comply with standards in UDC Table 11-3C-6B.1. f. Development of this site shall substantially comply with the site plan and landscape plan included in Exhibit VII and the conditions of approval in this report. g. The applicant shall revise the building elevations to incorporate at least two (2) field materials from the basic categories specified in the ASM for commercial districts (wood, masonry, concrete, metal, stucco and glazing). h. 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. i. The applicant shall submit information regarding the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-25 in the narrative for the CZC and DES application. j. 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) for commercial districts. k. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. l. The applicant shall have a maximum of two (2) years to commence the light industrial 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. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 142 of 145 Page 13 m. 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. n. The applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. o. All signage for the property is subject to the standards set forth in UDC 11-3D. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 2.1.1 Sanitary sewer and water mains/services are currently available on the subject site. The applicant shall be responsible for the abandonment, per Meridian City standards, of any existing mainlines or services that are not utilized. 2.1.2 At least 1,500 gpm of domestic water supply is available at 20 psi at the water main. Applicant to coordinate with Public Works Engineering if a higher flow is required. 2.2 General Conditions of Approval 2.2.1 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.2.2 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. 2.2.3 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. 2.2.4 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.2.5 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.2.6 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. 2.2.7 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. 3. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160521/Page1.aspx 4. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/160483/Page1.aspx Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 143 of 145 Page 14 IX. FINDINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request on the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the site is 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 listed in UDC 11-4-3-25, Industry, Light and Heavy. 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 Commercial 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 the general construction, operation and maintenance of the light industrial facility institution should be compatible with the surrounding commercial uses in the vicinity. Staff feels that the applicant should provide revised elevations complying with the commercial standards in the Architectural Standards Manual to ensure the design of the building is cohesive with other uses in the general vicinity. Staff finds that the proposed project will be compatible with the existing and intended character of the area and will not adversely change the character thereof. 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 the proposed development should not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If approved, conditions of approval are included in Exhibit VIII of this staff report to ensure the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation were provided to this property with development of the subdivision; services will be extended to the proposed building by the developer. Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 144 of 145 Page 15 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 that the proposed development should not involve activities that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. h. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance in this area. Alternative Compliance Findings: In order to grant approval for alternative compliance, the Director shall determine the following findings: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR The Director finds that strict adherence or application of the requirements is feasible; however, the applicant desires to install a plaza and grated trees to provide a pedestrian oriented atmosphere. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the alternative compliance provides an equal means for meeting the City’s structure and site design standards and the landscape standards for the following reasons: 1) The grated trees will allow for an attractive and pedestrian oriented alternative to the typically required vegetative buffer. Customers, employees and pedestrians will be able to enter the site through various access points where they can utilize the outdoor patio area before or after entering the facility. 2) The applicant has proposed to include a patio area for customers and employees, which will provide useable outdoor space in lieu of a vegetative landscape buffer. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. The Director finds that the proposed alternative will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the use/character of the surrounding properties. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 7, 2019 – Page 145 of 145