Loading...
2019-10-24MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 6:30 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance _____Lisa Holland _____Reid Olsen _____Andrew Seal _____Ryan Fitzgerald _____Rhonda McCarvel _____Bill Cassinelli _____ Jessica Perrault - Chairperson 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of October 3, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 4. Action Items Land Use Public Hearing Process: After the Public Hearing is opened the staff report will be presented by the assigned city planner. Following Staff's report the applicant has up to 15 minutes to present their application. Each member of the public may provide testimony up to 3 minutes or if they are representing a larger group, such as a Homeowners Association, they may be allowed 10 minutes. The applicant is then allowed 10 additional minutes to respond to the public's comments. No additional public testimony is taken once the public hearing is closed. A. Public Hearing for Skyward Subdivision (H-2019-0087) by The Land Group, Inc., Located east of S. Eagle Rd., approximately ¼ mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. 1.Request: Annexation and Zoning of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district, and 2.Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 268 building lots and 17 common lots. B. Public Hearing for Silverstone Apartments (H-2019-0104) by Dave Evans Construction, Located at 4107 E. Overland Rd. 1.Request: Modification to the Conditional Use Permit (H-2016-0060) to increase the number of dwelling units in the multi-family development from 112 to 204, increase the acreage from 5.61 to 10 acres, and update the development plan for the site. - Adopted - Approved Continued to November 21, 2019 Continued to November 21, 2019 X X X X development from 112 to 204, increase the acreage from 5.61 to 10 acres, and update the development plan for the site. C. Public Hearing for Adera Storage (H-2019-0094) by Chad Olsen, Located at 1680 W. Ustick Rd. 1.Request: Conditional Use Permit for a self-service storage facility consisting of 300+/- units on 4.61 acres of land in the C-C zoning district. D. Public Hearing for Verraso Village North (H-2019-0105) by Chad Olsen, Located at 3543 E. Tecate Ln. 1.Request: Modification to the Conditional Use Permit (H-2018-0071) to reduce the number of dwelling units in the multi-family development from 56 to 36 and update the development plan for the site. E. Public Hearing Continued from October 3, 2019 for Goddard Creek Townhomes (H-2019-0068) by SI Construction, Located at the NW Corner of W. McMillan Rd. and N. Goddard Creek Way 1.Request: Rezone of 5.03 acres of land from the R-4 to the R-15 zoning district, and 2.Preliminary Plat for the Re-subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Goddard Creek Subdivision Consisting of 4.62 Acres of Land into 44 Building Lots and 8 Common Lots. All materials presented at public meetings become property of the City of Meridian and are considered part of the record of the meeting. Anyone desiring accommodations for disabilities related to documents and/or the hearing are asked to contact the City Clerk's Office at 208-888- 4433 or cityclerk@meridiancity.org at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Approved with Modifications Approved Continued to November 7, 2019 Meeting adjourned at 8:33 PM Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting October 24, 2019. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of October 24, 2019, was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald. Members Present: Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Lisa Holland and Commissioner Andrew Seal. Members Absent: Chairman Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli and Commissioner Reid Olsen. Others Present: Andrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland _______ Reid Olsen __X___ Andrew Seal ___X___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Rhonda McCarvel _______ Bill Cassinelli ________ Jessica Perreault - Chairman Fitzgerald: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like to call to order a special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning meeting for the date of October 24th and let's start with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We have two items that have been requested to be continued. So, if you are here for Skyward Subdivision, the application for that, or Silverstone Subdivision, those are both being continued tonight, so we are -- we will open them up only for the reason for continuing them to a later date. So, if you are here for those, we will be continuing those tonight. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended. Seal: So moved. Holland: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda for the Planning and Zoning hearing of October 24th. All those in favor say aye. Nay the same. Thank you. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda [ Action Item] Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 112 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 2 of 43 A. Approve Minutes of October 3, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Fitzgerald: I have one item on the Consent Agenda, which is the approval of minutes for the October 3rd Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda? Holland: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Motion -- nay same. Motion passes. Thanks again. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: At this time I would like to explain the public hearing process for this evening. We will open each item individually and, then, start with the staff report. The staff will report the findings regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code with the staff's recommendation. After the staff has 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 do so. After the applicant is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. There is an iPad in the back. Please take a minute, if you haven't, and put your name in there for the application you would like to be heard on and we will make sure you guys get to testify. If there is any individual -- I don't think we have a huge group tonight. So, if there is any individual speaking on behalf of an HOA we will give you a little bit more time. But the folks that they will be speaking on behalf we will ask them not to present their case. So, they will be giving up their time to the HOA representative. They will have ten minutes to give their testimony and, then, we will close the public hearing. I'm sorry. We will give the applicant opportunity to come back up and rebut any comments made by the public and, then, we will close the discussion. At that time we will have the Commissioners an opportunity to deliberate and make a recommendation to City Council -- or, hopefully, make recommendations to City Council or make a decision on the application. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Skyward Subdivision ( H- 2019- 0087) by The Land Group, Inc., Located east of S. Eagle Rd., approximately ¼ mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district, and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 268 building lots and 17 common lots. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 113 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 3 of 43 Fitzgerald: So, with that I would like to open the public hearing on No. 4-A, Skyward Subdivision, which is H-2019-0087. The applicant has requested a continuance of this application to November 21st. So, can I get a motion to -- or, I'm sorry, can we get a motion to continue that application until November 21st. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move to continue file number H-2019-0087 to the hearing date of November 21st in order to revise the plan based on discussions with staff. Holland: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to continue H-2019 -- 2019-0087, Skyward Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Opposed nay. Awesome. We are good to go. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. B. Public Hearing for Silverstone Apartments ( H- 2019- 0104) by Dave Evans Construction, Located at 4107 E. Overland Rd. 1. Request: Modification to the Conditional Use Permit (H-2016-0060) to increase the number of dwelling units in the multi-family development from 112 to 204, increase the acreage from 5.61 to 10 acres, and update the development plan for the site. Fitzgerald: So, we will move on to Item 4-B, which is the Silverstone Apartments, H-2019- 0104 and that applicant is requesting a continuance to November 21st in order to have more time to review and work with staff. They are analyzing the staff report and, hopefully, making recommendations that the staff has given them. So, can I get a motion to continue the -- the public hearing on H-2019-0104? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I move that we continue H-2019-0104 to November 21st in order to give the applicant time to review the staff report. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to continue the public hearing on H-2019-0104. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Thank you all. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 114 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 4 of 43 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Adera Storage (H-2019-0094) by Chad Olsen, Located at 1680 W. Ustick Rd. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a self-service storage facility consisting of 300+/- units on 4.61 acres of land in the C-C zoning district. Fitzgerald: Okay. Let's move on to C, which is the public hearing for Adera Storage, H- 2019-0094, and we will start with the staff report. Bill. Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. It's a pleasure to be with you this evening. The first item that you're going to be hearing this evening is the Adera Storage conditional use permit. The site consists of 4.61 acres of land, currently zoned C-C and is located at 1680 West Ustick Road. To the north we have single family residential or rural ag zoned RUT, west is vacant, undeveloped property approved for single family residential, zoned R-8, Ustick Road and Ada County EMS on the south, zoned C-C, and to the east we have vacant undeveloped land, zoned RUT and C-C. History on this property. It was annexed in 2009 with a development agreement. At the time that the developer was before you they had envisioned commercial uses on the property and they were required to come back and amend that development agreement when they actually had a development plan. Back in 2017 this Commission also saw a plan for some multi-family units on this property. Your recommendation to City Council was for denial. Prior to City Council hearing that application the applicant withdrew their CUP request and the project essentially died. They didn't move forward with it. Until just recently the Council -- this applicant went forward before City Council and had a new development agreement recently approved that depicted the storage unit and some retail uses on it. So, conceptually, Council approved the layout that you are seeing tonight and, then, procedurally the -- the UDC, the zoning ordinance, requires them to follow up with that conditional use permit approval with you this evening. So, again, the CUP is requested for a self-storage facility in the C-C zoning district. The project will contain 424 units, ranging in size from eight by ten and 20 by 10. Additional building for interior storage containing approximately 36 ten by ten units may be developed in the northeast corner of the site and as an alternative the applicant would like the flexibility to either allow that to be indoor storage or allow it to be a retail component, which is consistent with the concept plan that the City Council approved recently. One temporary full access is -- or excuse me. One full access is from North Linder Road into the site here and, then, the secondary access per the specific use standards will be from Ustick Road located on the south boundary. UDC requires 25 foot landscape buffers along both Ustick -- Ustick Road and Linder Road and, then, also because its commercially zoned property adjacent to residential properties to the west, the applicant is also required to do a 25 foot landscape buffer there as well. The applicant did submit conceptual renderings -- elevations for this particular property. You can see here that the interior of buildings are your typical storage buildings, but what the applicant's done differently here is that they have made the exterior Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 115 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 5 of 43 portion, which is primarily required by design review, he has made it more look like a store front than your typical storage facility and these are the same elevations that were tied to the development agreement that City Council acted on. So, staff has analyzed the project in conformance with the specific use standards in the UDC and we find that it does meet those requirements. I would also mention to the Commission that because this facility abuts a residential district they are limited in their hours of operations between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Staff did receive written testimony from Chad Olsen in agreement with the staff report and with that I will conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have. Fitzgerald: Are there any questions for staff? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Bill, can you share anymore about the retail aspect that they would consider? That's -- that's a potential? That's not something that's included in this? Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, the development agreement, the way it's structured -- it's not recorded yet and that's one of the conditions, they have to record that, too, before they can start construction on this, but if you can look at the concept plan in the upper left-hand corner you can see the retail buildings along Linder, just north of this. So, conceptually they are allowed to do retail, but the retail component doesn't require a conditional use permit, that's a principally permitted use, and -- on this particular property. So, I think the flexibility the applicant would like is either do the indoor storage or retail, but if you support that, then, I would encourage you in your motion to state that that can -- you wouldn't have to come back with another CUP to expand and -- to that portion. You could just say either/or -- if you are approving it to have indoor storage and retail consistent with their development agreement. Holland: Thanks, Bill. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just further elaboration on that. The way I understood it was just the one building was going to be indoor storage or retail, not anything north of that; is that correct? Parsons: Chairman, Members of the Commission, this site plan doesn't show the entire four point -- the entire site. Seal: Correct. Parsons: Yeah. There will be more retail in this location and at some point there is a road that will come -- bisect the property and stub to the north as well and that will either Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 116 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 6 of 43 be single family -- a couple single family homes on that side of the road or another office. I don't think the applicant -- when the development agreement modification was before City Council they showed some townhome multi-family units on the site and Council didn't support having additional multi-family in this area, so that was removed from the concept plan and the development agreement per Council's direction. So, again, the applicant hasn't further defined his concept plan yet, but the intent is to have primarily a mix of commercial uses on the site. Retail, office, and the storage facility. Fitzgerald: Bill, in regards to the retail space, does that change the parking dynamic in regards to spaces if they add a store there? Parsons: Yeah. Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Member -- it does. Certainly for a retail component you are looking at one parking stall for every 500 -- for every 500 square foot -- per 500 square feet of gross floor area. For the storage facilities our parking counts are only based on the square footage of the office, which is located here and central to the -- the project. So, this is the leasing office, if you will. But the -- the applicant has plenty of area to add parking to -- if there are two commercial buildings constructed on this property. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions? Seal: Mr. Chairman? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: On the pathway designation, the staff recommendation was to -- instead of having that a ten foot sidewalk -- essentially what staff is recommending is to continue that regional pathway and not connect that to the existing sidewalk; correct? Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the way I'm reading it in the staff report it -- they are actually going to replace the sidewalk and construct a new sidewalk so it is ten feet. So, right now the pathway is stubbed and is constructed to this point and there is an existing sidewalk here and the applicant's agreed to widen that to be ten feet to get the connections at the intersection. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: More questions? Thanks, Bill. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and address for the record, please. Olsen: Chad Olsen. 6142 North -- North Queensbury Court, Boise, Idaho. 83713. So, I just was listening to a little bit of the dialogue and wanted to maybe answer some of the questions -- maybe about the retail building. So, when we came here roughly three weeks ago and we discussed this, we had some neighbors come out -- and, of course, you heard earlier -- and you already know that a year ago this was proposed as a bunch of apartments, but the impact was just too great to that intersection with parking and with schools. So, what we did is we kind of revamped it and came back and what we heard Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 117 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 7 of 43 from our neighbors at that meeting was that they would like to see some retail uses and maybe more than what we had and so what we wanted to do is have that ability to -- with that one building that you see there, there is actually another building across from it, but we ghosted that out or we didn't submit that at this point, because we didn't want you to think that that had -- you know. Well, conceptually it's all been approved, but we wanted to be able to have that flexibility if we do have a retail use that we can use and do retail there, that seemed to be a little bit more cohesive with our neighbors around us and so that's -- that's why there is that for -- for that part of it on the retail building or storage, either/or. Commissioner Fitzgerald, you mentioned about the -- the parking. So, that's more than enough just for that use right there without even going to the north even more. As Bill mentioned it's one per 500 and we are way over that. So, that can go either way. We kind of already planned for that. And, then, Commissioner Seal, with regards to that pathway at the bottom -- yeah. That's always been something -- they wanted us to extend that from seven foot to ten foot to extend that out, so that we could continue the regional pathway. I kind of felt like -- you can't see the north part, but I think we have really worked well with staff trying to create a community center there. As Bill mentioned, the Council did not want any multi-family there and opted just to have commercial only. So, basically, that gives us a nice mixed use of having some storage unit. Probably the biggest thing that I would like to brag about this project is -- is that it doesn't look like a storage unit. Our intent was to disguise it, if you would. But it's a need and people need storage and it does really limit impact to our schools and to our traffic, especially on that corner. That's a tough piece, because it's so -- it's not a large piece and it's in the hard corner of Ustick and -- and Linder -- or, excuse me, Linder and Ustick there and so it's got some -- some kind of hang ups that go along with the road, you know, trying to get out onto that road and being so close to the intersection. We were able to work with ACHD and have them permit that full access for us, even though it's just a little bit under their policy. So, anyway, I stand here ready to answer any questions you might have of me. Fitzgerald: Any question for the applicant? Commissioner Holland, go right ahead, ma'am. Holland: No. Fitzgerald: Oh. Holland: I'm good for now. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Okay. McCarvel: I think you -- in the written in testimony you are -- there was a whole lot of bold in the staff report. So, you're agreement with every -- everything that they have got in here? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 118 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 8 of 43 Olsen: Yeah. I did see a lot of that bold there in that staff report and -- but it was things that we had agreed to. They are -- McCarvel: Yeah. Olsen: -- basically the UDC stuff and -- and, you know, one thing to be said about that -- we are not actually requesting any -- any exceptions from the UDC at this point. The -- the 25 foot on both Linder and Ustick and, then, also the west boundary, because it abuts to a residential, we just complied with all of that. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for the applicant? Thank you, sir, very much. Olsen: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk, do we have people who have signed up to testify? Weatherly: Mr. Chairman, we have three people who signed in, two of which wish to testify. Carl Wibel being the first. Fitzgerald: Mr. Wibel, you want to come forward? Thank you for being with us, sir. State your name and address for the record. Wibel: Okay. Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Carl Wibel. W-i-b-e-l. My address is 3045 North Springtime Way. That's in the Tumble Creek Subdivision, which is due south of this parcel and this project. Number one, I do not represent Tumble Creek Subdivision or our HOA. I'm here on my own. The first thing was just -- and this was for Mr. Olsen. There was -- there were two meetings, one on April 25th and July 23rd for residents in the area and I would just like when he comes back if he could explain how that was advertised, because my neighbors that I have talked to, no one knew of those meetings. The first one said no one attended and the second meeting on the application said one person attended in July. So, curiosity was how was that put out as notice for us to just come and communicate with the developer with Mr. Olsen. The only other thing that we -- I have is the timeline for the possible construction of the townhomes that he's talking about in the application in the future, is I just do have a question as what would the timeline be, because there is nothing here. So, are we talking three months, six months, a year? Because this area has not been developed and as homeowners in the area, we are still hoping for some additional commercial development, which is in concert with all the subdivisions there. Someplace where families could go. A restaurant, something that could be used within the neighborhoods for some retail and commercial development. So, we are just curious to know as if that is something in the near future or is this going to be beyond our lifespan. So, that's the only questions I had. And we do appreciate what you guys are doing on the Commission. Thank you very much. And we are hoping for this area to be developed in a very positive way. So, thank you very much. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 119 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 9 of 43 Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir, very much. Mr. Wibel, we will -- we will have Bill address one of your questions and, then, I will let the applicant take care of one, too. Andrienne, who was next on your list? Weatherly: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The next person that signed up is Chris. Williams: Good evening. Chris Williams. 1762 West Canyon Ranch Street in Meridian. I am in the Watersong Subdivision. I am not representing the HOA. Just on my own. A few comments on there that I wanted to hit on and I apologize this is no particular order, but, me personally, I don't think the storage units belong there. I appreciate them trying to -- what I would consider put a wall around them trying to disguise the storage units. We have residential all around there, you know, as the staff report shows on that. We have residential undeveloped right behind it that's zoned residential. You know, we hope one day that gets there. I know it's been a while on that. But I'm just thinking, you know, even about them, you know, moving in and the property values on that as well, just in the immediate area on that is a concern having that. W ith that said, I want to be clear I'm not anti-development. I'm all for it. I have been to past hearings, you know, for the development, but smart growth, smart development. You know, maybe the applicant has better information than I have, you know, on this. I recently in the last couple weeks called around some immediate storage units to just kind of try to get an idea on that as far as indoor storage. I can honestly say all the ones in that immediate area within about a -- probably about a two and a half to three mile radius is as far as I went -- all have plenty availability as far as storage units. So, as far as a need, I disagree with that. Not to mention I can't even -- you guys probably know over there on McMillan in between Linder and Ten Mile, the massive storage units that are going in over there already. I have no idea how many units, but I'm sure we have an abundance of storage units in this area. You know, the last gentleman that just spoke here, you know, wasn't planning on saying -- you know, but I wasn't aware that there was a neighborhood meeting either. Never heard of the first one. Never heard of the second one. I was out of town for work when the last one was with the City Council a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to attend that. Also one thing, unless I missed it, that they didn't address, there is a single family home immediately to the north of where they want to, you know, develop this. You know, I know it's kind of odd that that guy's owned the land there forever and, you know, to have that backed up -- again, I don't know that individual, but I'm just thinking. You know, the retail -- again, I have been excited to have this developed when I purchased my home. You know, I knew that it could be retail. I was excited for it. Again, something that we can use around there. Something whether we walk or drive, you know, it's close enough to the neighborhood, to BridgeTower, to Watersong, Tumble Creek, you know, restaurants -- I don't know, maybe a nail salon, you know, whatever it is, just -- you know, some type of retail. But we are not sharing what that retail is, you know, or potentially -- I really don't have tenants. I'm not saying that. But just something that's in there, you know, and, then, if I'm understanding tonight maybe retail, it may want to be indoor storage units. You know, we -- if it does have to pass, you know, I ask -- you know, again, I appreciate, you know, the attempted wall around it, but, I don't know, maybe we can see some more -- you know, some more landscaping if it has to pass, you know, on -- as it is. I would also like to maybe try to see some better, you know, pictures or structures of the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 120 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 10 of 43 retail to see exactly what they are going for. We just have a tiny little peek on here, you know, from the south side and that's it. If you guys have any questions for me I will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Mr. Williams. Appreciate it, sir. Williams: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Is there anyone else in the audience? Ma'am, do you want to come forward. Thank you for being here. Pullman: Hello. My name is Janie Pullman. I live at 5030 North Goddard Creek Way. And I'm actually here for the next one, but I saw this on there and I hope my poor graphics do not make you not listen to what I have to say. I apologize. So, I'm up here by this McMillan Storage and we were here a couple years ago fighting against what we are fighting against tonight, the apartments that will be next, but -- so, we -- we are looking here at one square mile and if this storage unit goes in, we -- this will be our fourth storage unit in one square mile. I'm beginning to feel like we live in a warehouse district or something. I mean literally four storage units in one square mile. I really would ask you to, please, consider the people that live in the area and what is being put on these vacant parcels. We have plenty and maybe it's -- that parcel could be used in a better way for our -- our community at large. That's all that I have on this one. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Is there any -- anyone else who would like to testify on this application? Would the applicant like to come back and close the discussion, sir? Olsen: Chad Olsen. 6142 North Queensberry Court, Boise, Idaho. 83713. First of all, the meeting was noticed twice. We had a meeting two different times. What we do is we get a 300 foot radius of the property. I -- I'm just thinking back in my mind. I think I saw one or two Tumble Creek, but I didn't -- you know, you have to live within a certain distance to -- to see that. This is the -- to answer the first question for the first gentleman, the townhomes were stricken from the development agreement. So, there are no townhomes being put in at all. But one thing that you did hear is you heard the neighbors mention additional retail and commercial and that's, again, why we want that option for that inside storage. The next set of questions was Mr. Williams. So, residential was proposed. It was proposed a year ago and it was denied. The neighbors came out in mass on that and said we do not want residential, because that's more people using the roads and that's more people taking up school seats. So, no, residential is not the best option for this corner piece. We did a lot of studying, a lot of research on this piece, and residential is the worst thing in the world for this piece of property. Landscape. He asked about additional landscape. We are actually following the UDC. This is what's designed in the code for this exact type of application. Again, we are not asking for any exceptions on that. He mentioned about data -- having data. Well, there is data. People visit their homes one to three times a day. The resident -- or commercial use is even higher than that and storage units are one to three times a year. So, it's about impact here. Again, he also mentioned having some additional retail and I say the same thing, we could have Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 121 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 11 of 43 come in with even -- let's just say more retail, but we have to really balance that in that -- in that already congested neighbor -- or intersection. And the last lady. She said that it's slowly looking like a warehouse district, but that will not look like this corner. This corner will look like a retail district. So, they can have as many storage units as they want to have in all the corners of all the places, but ours doesn't look like a storage unit. We are spending extra money to ensure that. She said there must be a better solution. If so what? As I mentioned earlier, houses increase more traffic. Houses take school seats. And I looked at every letter that came through from every person who wrote and I literally tallied up every single complaint about that project -- and this is the best solution for that corner. There is no other really good solution. And while we only have three people here tonight, at the Council meeting we had a lot more. And, again, we stood up here and we said, okay, what can we do to -- to mitigate impact in that -- in that corner, what -- what can we do in a sprawling city to relieve some of the pressure and what you see before you is -- is our solution to that and if you have any questions I can ask answer those. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I wonder if you could expand a little bit more -- again, the same question I asked Bill on the -- the retail component of what your intention is there. I mean giving the option of doing interior storage or retail, I would just like a little bit of clear direction of what -- what kind of retail you are anticipating, if you have got any -- anything in mind there. Olsen: Well, I -- I don't know that -- I have been approached by one person that was a daycare for the back -- the back of the section that you don't see. That only gave us flexibility. Our intention was primarily to do a storage unit and an interior climate controlled storage unit. After we left that last meeting we said, well, hey, maybe there is a -- maybe there is a win-win here for us to come back and make that a little bit more retail. So, all we were really -- we didn't have anything in mind. All we were doing is basically trying to be a good neighbor and offer more of the retail. Again, we have to kind of balance that with the traffic impact that will make and so, basically, what you see is that option to either do it or not do it. I mean, obviously, a storage unit would be very -- a lot less impact than a commercial. But, at the same time, if -- if our neighbors want a little more commercial, then, maybe we can be a good neighbor and do that. Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I just want to know if he could touch on the timing of construction question. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 122 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 12 of 43 Olsen: Oh, yeah. Sorry about that. So, I thought I touched on that when I said that the construction of the townhomes will not take place, because there are no townhomes allowed. The Council was very clear about limiting the use to commercial only in that -- in that part. So, there were originally eight townhomes planned and there will be none. As far as the storage unit construction, we were hoping that maybe we can get going on it right away. That would be an idea that we would have to, you know, have our civil plans approved and our construction plans approved and stuff. So, I would say maybe two to three months if we had an approval. Holland: Mr. Chairman? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: One more follow-up question. So, it was said this storage facility doesn't represent the full parcel and that there is some other components of it. What percentage of the full parcel does the storage represent on that development plan? Olsen: I would say that it represents 80 percent. What you could see just north of that is you would see another retail building, the same interior storage go right there and depending on what happens in that back corner, that's the part that really had some heartburn for our neighbors, because that's right up -- and it didn't matter that we had 25 feet. That was the part that really gave them some heartburn is what the use was going to be right next to that specific parcel and so the daycares reached out to us on that back corner, but I -- I would have to -- you know, the offices are permitted use now. So, conceivably we could come in tomorrow and just get a building permit for parts of that. The conditional use is only for the storage unit parcel portion. So, I would say that there could be maybe two more offices over there. Three is kind of pushing it. But, then, that gives us that flexibility for that other piece that you do see there of being able to make that retail as well. If that ends up being a win-win. Holland: Mr. Chair, one more following comment. Fitzgerald: Go ahead. Holland: I know in my experience a lot of retailers tend to like having the hard corner visibility. Was there consideration in your site plan to model and have that retail actually have retail fringe all along the Linder Road towards Ustick and kind of hide the storage in the back part of it? Olsen: Absolutely. ACHD nixed that plan. ACHD has a rule that says that no arterial can come into an intersection less than 660 feet from center line to center line. Our property is 601. So, basically, it was put your road at the very top or you are not doing it. And, in fact, we did the Adera Project 18 times -- 18 different redesigns. The 18th was caused by ACHD at the last moment saying that will be a right-in, right-out only entrance onto Linder. There was no way. For this parcel to be real commercial, it needed to be double in size. It needed to be able to have an ability to -- to go in. There is some certain Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 123 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 13 of 43 constraints on the south part there with the canal and the regional pathway, it's just kind of tucked in there and it's not really conducive to a full on retail parcel. So, what we did is we went back and said, okay, let's put some retail where we can and that's kind of what you see before you. Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Any follow up? So, Chad, is there -- the stub street on Trade Winds, is -- are you using that or is it going to be stopped and blocked off? Olsen: We cannot -- it cannot come through. Fitzgerald: That's right. That's -- okay. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. Olsen: ACHD was very clear about letting residential neighborhoods pass through. So, right now we are just kind of in like limbo on exactly what to do and when Commissioner Holland asked about that upper area, that's why I was a teeny bit vague is because that's kind of got to be a juggle act with ACHD and City of Meridian staff about what we do there. Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Olsen: Let me follow up one thing and say, though, that the development agreement that was approved only permitted commercial or retail use in that corner. So, Commissioner Holland, I want you to know that no matter what happens it's going to be one of those two items. Okay. Fitzgerald: Good? Thanks very very much. Olsen: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Any questions for staff or other thoughts, comments, before we close the public hearing? Sir, you already had your time. Sorry. Appreciate it. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Holland: So moved. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2019-0094. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Thoughts? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 124 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 14 of 43 Seal: I'm just looking at the layout overall and I like what they have done for storage units. I mean the presentation is something that's -- it's not going to catch your eye and say, oh, those are storage units, it's going to look more like retail. That said, it's -- they are still storage units, so reading through the -- some of the public testimony in there, there was -- there was mixed views on what this should be used for. I mean some people went back to, you know, why are you putting storage units in here, why don't you put townhouses in here, which was already struck down. So, I think it's kind of no matter what goes in on that corner it's going to be highly contested by one group or another. So, I'm just trying to keep that in the back of my mind as we go through this process. The other thing I would like to comment on is there is a lot of commercial development that's been done on -- up in the McMillan area. McMillan and Linder. There is a lot of commercial development that's going in there. A lot of restaurants. A lot of businesses and things like that and with the completion of Linder Road there is a lot of bike paths, walking paths and things like that as well. So, it's a little bit further up the road, a little bit more of a hike, but at the same time there is a lot of commercial development that's going in there. So, I'm sure that's something that -- we want to make sure that we don't have a glut of any of that going in as well. You know, if business kind of goes in we want to make sure it's going to have every -- every opportunity to be successful. But I do like the concept of this overall. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, do you have thoughts? Holland: I do. Didn't know if I wanted to go next. I -- I struggled when I read the application on this one. I struggled when I read the public testimony on this one, because I think there is a lot of storage that's been coming in and it's not just Meridian, but the entire valley has been seeing an influx of storage and that's because we are gluttonous people that like to keep stuff and don't have enough room in our garages. So, that is what it is and there is certainly a need for storage. I struggle with where the location of this is, because it's on that hard corner and -- I always like to see storage that's tucked back a little bit behind something, so that you can keep that visibility and that frontage. So, if I was -- you know, I don't have the opportunity to redesign this, but I would prefer to see more retail uses along that frontage, even though there is -- there is some challenges with ACHD on that site. I'm not opposed to having maybe a smaller portion of storage back behind it, but I mean looking at the top left picture that we have got here where it shows a couple of those retail units, if -- if it was like that the whole way across Linder I would probably be much more in favor of the way that this is laid out. I don't -- Bill, one clarification question. Did ACHD tell them that they couldn't even do a right-in, right-out off of Linder? Was that pretty much vetoed completely? Parsons: Yeah. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yeah, the staff report from -- from ACHD said you get one access to Linder Road, one full access, and, again, as the applicant testified, didn't want them to tie into the local street that's on the west boundary. So, what we did is in the concept plan -- I'm happy to pull up the other concept plan, too, if you want to see it as part of the DA, but join that road connectivity, but they, essentially, working with the applicant -- typically with mixed use we want integration; right? This is mixed use community, we want that to all be integrated, but because of ACHD policies Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 125 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 15 of 43 -- again, we can work with ACHD and possibly make that open section, but they required it to be emergency access only to the local street that will be constructed at a later date. But staff worked with the applicant and said, well, if we are going to do that we will leave -- that's where this open space is going to go per the mixed use standards. So, you don't see the entire picture before you this evening, because, really, your purview is the conditional use permit. But with the DA mod we talked about the access. We limited now -- we limited multi-family on the site from happening. We didn't specifically state that residential wasn't allowed to occur on the property. So, there is a -- there is a distinction there. Council just didn't like his elevations, three stories, modern look, that just didn't fit in with the neighborhood. That was the intent. So, again, I think the applicant has some flexibility, just no multi-family on the site and, then, as part of the DA we recommended that he create some kind of central usable open space as an amenity to complement the office retail component of that. Again, you don't see that, but those are things that were tied to the development agreement. So, we are trying to get some of that neighborhood feel, some of that integrated development, just not getting it connected with the road or a residential component at this time anyways. Holland: So, just to confirm, Bill, they can't even do a right-in, right-out on Ustick? Parsons: ACHD will not give them another access. Holland: Okay. Parsons: Yeah. Ustick, no. They said emergency access only. Fitzgerald: My thoughts -- and just to share. I -- the challenge I think -- we are used to making recommendations to take to Council and Council kind of almost -- not put us in a box, but they kind of already made the decision and that's the challenge I think here is because the DA is already there, we are just -- they have agreed to the majority of the concept of this at Council level and so we are going in reverse of normal and we are approving the CUP after the Council has already acted in this stead. So, I'm -- we are taking -- agreeing with Commissioner Seal's comments. I think -- I think it looks good. I think making a retail front much -- looks much better than a normal storage unit. As we are taking our cues from City Council, it's hard for me not to go in line with what they have already agreed to. So, that's my challenge. I think it's -- I agree that there is -- I think we are getting a little heavy on the storage units in that area. I live over there and I think we see a lot of them. But I think this corner is hard. I think we have seen this -- Rhonda and I have seen it at least three times, maybe four times, and so -- sorry, Commissioner McCarvel. We have seen it a number of times and so I -- I'm struggling and if the Council has made a decision, this is the direction they think is the best use for that property, I have a tough time trying to second guess them. But I would love additional thoughts from my co-commissioners. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 126 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 16 of 43 McCarvel: I have got to agree, as many times as we have seen this little piece of property, it does have some constraints and I wish it wasn't the last corner to be done here and that there weren't some of the other storage units close, but I think to keep the traffic down on that corner and the restrictions of access, just -- it's a -- it's tough to get a whole lot of commercial on there, but I would like to see as much as possible and if they are talking, you know, a daycare center it would probably be a highly sought after -- Fitzgerald: Or a coffee shop. McCarvel: A coffee shop and that kind of stuff in there -- I think as much retail as you can, but I realized that corner just -- it's not conducive with the access. So, like you said, it just -- it needs to be twice the size to be able to have the access it needs, so -- I think with all the other options that have come before us on this piece of property, this is the least impact and I do think they have done a nice job of trying to disguise it as not your average storage unit from the outside. Fitzgerald: Additional thoughts? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I still am struggling a little bit, because I -- if we -- if we make a recommendation -- or if -- we are virtually the voice at this point of the conditional use permit. So, if we approve that and we say that -- we give them flexibility to do additional retail or the indoor storage, I don't know that it will come back before us either. If we were to move forward with the recommendation I would want to strongly suggest that additional internal storage wouldn't be allowed, but there would be a retail or office use that would be there. I would prefer that they would carve out even a little bit more of the frontage on Linder and have another pad available for retail use there and minimize some of that frontage there. I don't know that that's something that the applicant would be open to doing, but I -- I would prefer to see three -- three or four lots there that have, you know, some -- because I know they can't come down all the way, because there is no access off of Ustick, but if we can still maximize the frontage that we can get there for some additional retail uses, maybe we could get two or three different retail uses there. That's my thoughts. Fitzgerald: And I would agree, I mean I think retail -- maximizing the retail there to compliment the neighborhood, to give them a walking -- something they can walk to that they can utilize, I think -- I understand the need for that, so -- Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I agree. I like your thought there. Just saying, yes, it needs to be retail instead of the option. Fitzgerald: Yeah. So, what are our options in regards to -- I mean -- it's a conditional use permit, so we can -- we have the -- the carrot and the stick I think in regards to what we can -- can we say we want more pads? I mean I think we can definitely say that we can Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 127 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 17 of 43 -- we would like to have the two pads to be retail, but can we go beyond that and say we would like to see three or four? That's outside of the applicant's -- or application, but -- can you give us some guidance? Parsons: Yeah. Absolutely. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, so currently this is, essentially, the site plan that's going to be tied to the development agreement. So, you can see here it says future indoor storage and, then, this is the layout that you are -- this is the layout that you are looking at. So, essentially, the applicant has this layout. Now, what you could do is if -- if the applicant is open to it -- certainly reopen the public hearing and see if he's amenable to removing the interior storage component and making that retail. Again, he is not violating his concept plan, but he is agreeing to reduce the amount of storage on the site and allow it to -- allow that indoor storage building to be -- to be either retail or office or something in the future other than storage. But that would be my recommendation to see if he has an appetite for that and, if not, then, more than likely you need to stay with what the applicant's proposing this evening with interior storage. Holland: Mr. Chair. One more question for Bill. Do we have the ability to ask them if they would be willing to consider adding another commercial parcel there or would that alter the site plan too much where it would have to go back to Council for the DA? Parsons: Certainly Member -- or Chairman, Members of the Commission, I mean we give the applicant latitude to change the site plan to some discretion. So, if he wanted to reduce his storage footprint this evening and you wanted to see that and he was open to that, I would just say maybe continue this out, get a revised plan and bring back something for you to see. That would be easier and that way the -- the findings are clear, the record is clear, we have an updated site plan and at least you have a visual of what you hope to see occur on the site. Fitzgerald: Would you be amenable to reopening the public hearing to hear from Mr. Olsen? Holland: Mr. Chairman? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I move that we reopen the public hearing for the purpose of hearing from Mr. Olsen some additional thoughts on our deliberation. Fitzgerald: I have a motion to reopen the public hearing. Do I have a second? McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to reopen the public hearing on H-2019-0094. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same? MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 128 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 18 of 43 Fitzgerald: Mr. Olsen, can we chat with you, please, sir. Olsen: Chad Olsen. 6142 North Queensberry Place, Boise -- Boise, Idaho. 83713. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, do you want to -- Holland: Mr. Olsen, I think you heard some of our conversation back and forth and I don't know if you would be amenable to looking at adding some additional commercial pads if you were to reduce the block length of that frontage on -- on Linder to add even one more commercial pad. I think -- Olsen: Commissioner Holland, with all due respect, no. We want the option to add the front one. There are two or three more over there. As Commissioner Seal pointed out, there is a lot of retail that's already being built just a mile away. It's easy to say that we can have retail, but there has to be people to come that want to rent it, too. This is a good balance. We came to the Commission with the idea to change the future into -- into retail, but I'm under the understanding that it's already approved under the idea of a future interior storage. We wanted the flexibility to add more and I might be wrong. Bill, am I wrong? Fitzgerald: I would, Bill, can we get clarification on that, so we understand where we -- where we land there. Parsons: If I'm understanding you right, Chad, are you saying that this is the concept plan that was submitted with the MDA. It says interior storage; right? And I believe in the staff report I said two future commercial sites; right? Or did I say one? Olsen: You said -- well, in the staff report I thought you said one and -- but I think that was to the north piece, that commercial piece. Parsons: The one right there. Yes. Olsen: Yeah. So, in reality, I'm asking to change the plan to do more commercial, but this idea of doing three or four pads along there, there is no way it will work. Parsons: Well, I think the Commission is asking if you are even willing to consider just this retail, instead of the interior storage, as a multi-tenant building. Olsen: Well, I heard two or three pads mentioned. Parsons: It was -- it was a combination. Fitzgerald: I think we asking for -- we have multiple questions. First, are you -- are you willing to change the interior storage concept to a commercial pad. And, then, I think Commissioner Holland's thoughts were is there a potential we could change the site plan for additional commercial pads. Those are two separate questions. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 129 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 19 of 43 Olsen: Okay. So, let me answer the second question first. No. The first question -- well, it just -- it doesn't make sense. It really doesn't. I mean it's a great idea. It really is. But it just -- that piece you cannot wind back down in and expect to have safety trying to wind your way back out. You have to have two entrances. That is what the police department and the fire department require. It doesn't work. As far as that piece right there on the corner, the only problem I have ever had is that -- as I have mentioned, we have a full access right now. If you want to see that access go away, put a lot more people on it trying to travel across two lanes. What I wanted was the flexibility to add it later, not to be put into a corner to have -- on the spot say I will do it, because by doing that it could take that access and create it to a right-in, right-out only, basically ruining that corner piece of property. So, the answer to question one is I would like the flexibility to add it to -- as retail if it makes sense for the entrance and the egress and ingress and the traffic. I want to be sensible about it. Fitzgerald: And we appreciate that. I think the balance is is its highest and best use; right? I mean that's the -- you have a bottom line and you have a pro forma you got made. We are trying to think about what's the best for the neighborhood and so it's that balance point. Olsen: Well, it's not even really -- I actually probably make more money renting it retail than interior storage. Thirty-six units, 80 bucks, 4,000 dollars. I could probably get more for that as a nice retail location than that, but if it jeopardizes that right-in, right-out it will kill that little piece of corner property and when there is enough wrecks, then, you will see what you see all over Meridian and Boise, you will see all the yellow cones go up where they just shut the access off. Bill will tell you that in that report where they gave us full access, it says -- the keywords are up to a time, under ACHD discretion. They can take it away at any time. You jam pack that little corner, it's over. They will shut that corner down. It would be nice, because we are the Commission; right? And we are the City of Meridian. But they got the control on that road. We can't do anything on that. As Bill mentioned, the access onto -- onto Ustick, they just basically said no. This is the only thing we could do. I mean I'm -- I'm under the impression that if this doesn't get approved in this way, this is non -- nondevelopable. We come back as residential -- okay. Too much traffic, too much schools, they should be taken. So, I guess we build a park, because that's what it is. The corner is too tight and that's the way it is. So, I hate to be obstinate. I'm not an obstinate person. But I just have done this thing about 18 times. So, I have pretty good intimate -- I met with ACHD three or four times on this. Bill will tell you I met with the City of Meridian at least five times. This is what we have. Fitzgerald: So, I -- and I appreciate that and -- Olsen: Sorry. Fitzgerald: -- I will open the question -- and I understand where you are coming from. The only pushback I will say -- and I will -- is that there are -- there is vacant land and several acres above you to the north. So, I mean I -- it's not like we are -- this is being put into a box forever, but I mean -- so, there is -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 130 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 20 of 43 Olsen: You mean combine the property? Oh. Yeah. Fitzgerald: I mean that's -- and I have no idea timelines, but I mean -- so, it's not locked completely as a -- Olsen: Sure. Sure. Fitzgerald: But I understand -- I understand where your -- the situation you're -- your current property. Olsen: All the property to the north is zoned RUT. It's not zoned this way. So, yeah, other than that, yes. Fitzgerald: I would guess that we could float that, but I understand what you're saying. Any additional questions for Mr. Olsen? Thanks very much, sir. We appreciate it. Parsons: Chair, Commission, Mr. Williams asked if he could address you one more time. I asked him I would -- I told him I would ask if you were open to that, since you have reopened the public hearing. But keep in mind the applicant -- Fitzgerald: Mr. Williams. Parsons: -- the applicant gets the last word. Fitzgerald: Yeah. I would allow -- I will allow that. I will allow Mr. Olsen to come back up if he wants to -- Williams: Yeah. No. That's fine. First of all, thanks for reopening the public comment. From previously when the applicant was up here I want to be clear. I thought I was. Maybe I misspoke due to nerves, so -- so, I apologize. Residential on there I don't think's a good idea. Just to be clear on that. I'm not saying we should have residential on that corner. I -- I have been in all the past hearings. I will say listening to your guys' discussion as far as maybe adding another pad or two for commercial, I really like that idea. Even if they could potentially, you know, scale down the -- you know, the storage units a tiny bit to allow some more room, I think that's a great idea. I think it's a good compromise. As far as the last thing I will leave with as far as -- if this doesn't, you know, go through, that's the end of it, I have heard this -- you know, what have we been here, two, three times before over the years. I have been here for seven years. I have heard that before. Every applicant says the same thing. And I will leave it at that. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Mr. Olsen, do you want to respond? May have to buy you new shoes later from wandering back and forth. Olsen: Chad Olsen. 6142 North Queensberry Court, Boise, Idaho. 83713. As mentioned before, there is no way that we can do another pad in there. Mr. Williams points out that some other developer will come and he will take it and he will do new things with it. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 131 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 21 of 43 Everything's been done that can be done, short of combining it with other parcels above it. To the left you are pretty much strung in because of the creek right there and there is a lot of easements from Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. This property has been just amazing to me. I don't actually own it. I have never developed a parcel -- piece of parcel of land that has had more interest than this little corner in my entire life. This is by far the hardest piece of land I have ever developed. I have even looked at Bill and Bill and I have just both shook our heads and said, well, rezone? What I'm offering is the least amount of impact to our roads and to our schools. I am offering some retail. I am trying to incorporate that component in. It is a mixed use component designation right there and I think we have done an outstanding job and if you have any more questions I'm here to answer them. Fitzgerald: Any additional thoughts, questions for the applicant? We do appreciate it, sir. Olsen: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you so much. Can I get a motion to re-close the public hearing on H- 2109-0094. Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Okay, team. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I am inclined to be in support of it as is and move forward. I agree this has been a difficult little piece of land and I -- I agree that this is -- we can try to tweak it for a long time, but I -- I would have to admit I acknowledge the reasoning of that access could get taken away with too much in and out of there. It's just a difficult little piece of land and at some point, you know, the owner has got the right to develop, he can't wait for everything. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Mr. Chair, I -- I'm still struggling with this corner and I know -- I want to say I appreciate the applicant's patience in working with the city and coming forward with multiple proposals to try and figure out what the best use is for this piece and, you know, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 132 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 22 of 43 with -- with not having the cooperation of ACHD to allow a Ustick access, I can see how they are handicapped in the way that they develop the site. I do appreciate that they are willing to spend the extra cost to make it look a little nicer than most storage units, so that it doesn't become an eyesore on that corner. I still struggle, though, because I want to think about the highest and best use for the future of Meridian, where we are going to be in 20 to 30 years and I think I could come to some sort of compromise, but I mean ideally I would love to see more on Linder, but I understand what the applicant is saying and if their full access is taken away, that -- it would be challenging for retailers in there, unless that piece to the north develops at some point in the future and integrates in. But I think at a minimum I would like to see the future interior storage become a commercial pad, instead of being left to be either -- either/or. That's where I would be at. So, that there would be two commercial parcels there. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal, do you have thoughts or are -- you're gathering? Seal: I haven't seen this before and it's still a struggle, understanding businesses and if they do take that -- that -- that full access away on the street it definitely hobbles it. It is -- for me personally it's -- it's made my choice easy in some businesses, whether I frequent them or not, just by the access that's provided. So, when they put that in it makes it incredibly, you know -- or if they take that access away I should say it makes it incredibly difficult to get in and out. The fact that this is very close to a school and we do want to reduce impact to that school as far as student count, as well as driver count or car count, vehicle count, I mean a storage unit makes sense from that standpoint. The retail portion of it, again, because of some of the neighbors that are there, it makes that tricky as well, where, you know, the school is going to also regulate what kind of retail can be there as well. So, they have some constraints that they have to comply with as far as that goes as well. So, I -- I mean I struggle with it. I like the concept. I mean as far as the storage -- storage unit facility. I like the concept of it. I like the layout of it. It's just tough at this point. Fitzgerald: Well, as someone who has seen it four or five times on the other side, I think I tend to agree with Commissioner McCarvel. And I agree with you, too. I think it's -- I struggle -- it's not easy and I know that there is a balance -- a balance between being able to develop and being able to finalize a pro forma that makes sense. But I think that your comments about taking access away I think is very very strong, because I -- I do the same thing, I make decisions based on what I don't want to go to on Eagle Road, because I don't want to put the U-turn to figure out how to get back. So, that is a big deal. So, I think I would agree that -- I would -- my only thing would be to strongly recommend that they look at the -- the commercial on both pads -- or the retail space on both pads. I'm not sure how to phrase that, but -- do I have a motion? I can't make motions, so it's all you guys. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 133 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 23 of 43 McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2019-0094 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24th with no modifications. Holland: Mr. Chair, really quick. I just noticed there was one typo in the staff report, so I just wanted to point it out for staff. It was on page four, number G. There is a lingering the at the end of that sentence. I just wanted to point that out to have that corrected on the record, too. Fitzgerald: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second or comments or questions for the motion maker? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: The motion I think would be more -- better received I think if we -- I don't want to necessarily remove the option for commercial, but I think we want to strongly recommend that they look for a commercial use for that, instead of doing the interior storage. I think some kind of wording along those lines would be in order, because there is -- I mean -- and I -- I think the feeling is if there is something that can fit there, then, they should move forward with that and that's, essentially, the feelings. McCarvel: I accept the amendment to the motion. You want me to restate it? Fitzgerald: Yeah. Can you restate your motion with the changes, ma'am. For the record. McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2019-0094 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24th, 2019, with the following modifications: That we strongly recommend exhausting all options of retail for the existing interior storage. Fitzgerald: Or in lieu of? McCarvel: Or in lieu of. Fitzgerald: Bill. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, there is a condition of approval in the staff report that gives the applicant that flexibility, so I just wanted to let you know it's actually condition number six. It says flexibility shall be granted for the future interior storage depicted on the site plan at the northeast corner of the site to be converted to retail if desired by the applicant. So, we have it covered for you. Fitzgerald: Highly recommended -- recommended. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 134 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 24 of 43 McCarvel: Highly recommended. Fitzgerald: So, I have a motion. Do I have a second? Seal: I second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to -- to approve file number H-2019 with modification -- or 2019-0094 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay. Same. Holland: Nay. Fitzgerald: Motion passes. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT. D. Public Hearing for Verraso Village North (H-2019-0105) by Chad Olsen, Located at 3543 E. Tecate Ln. 1. Request: Modification to the Conditional Use Permit (H-2018- 0071) to reduce the number of dwelling units in the multi- family development from 56 to 36 and update the development plan for the site. Fitzgerald: Okay. Moving on to open the public hearing on H-2019-0105, Verraso Village North and start with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. Next item is the Verraso North conditional use modification. This site consist of 1.7 acres of land zoned C-G and is located at 3543 East Tecate Lane on the west side of North Records Avenue, south of East Ustick Road. Adjacent land uses. We have Les Schwab and Culver's restaurant zoned C-G to the north. To the west we have retail and restaurants, zoned C-G. Townhome style multi-family to the south and to the east is a collector road, which is East Records Road. Last -- in 2018 a multi-family development -- excuse me -- a conditional use permit was approved for a 56 unit multi-family development on the site, which is the site plan that's in the upper left-hand corner for you. It was tucked under garage parking and, then, it had the units above it, for total of 56 units. The applicant is here this evening to modify that conditional use permit to reduce the number of units on the site from 56 to 36. The previous elevations were -- was all one structure and this particular revised site plan that you see on the left hand -- the right-hand side consists of more four -- or four townhome style apartments with tuck under garages for the three stories with garages accessed from a shared driveway off Tecate Lane and, then, there is also an emergency access just off to Records per the fire department requirements. So, the applicant is required to provide open space for the multi-family standards. You can see the areas highlighted in green is the open space that's proposed for this site. This applicant was -- or this -- this project was put on hold, so the applicant could further define and process Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 135 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 25 of 43 their design -- or further to refine their design and so originally the applicant had one additional unit and it was -- this was one long building and per the recommendation of staff they actually separated the buildings and created some more green space between them to add and enhance the open space and amenities for -- for this particular development. If you read the staff report, staff has recommended -- currently there is a sidewalk that's going along this -- or the applicant wants -- I don't know if there is an existing sidewalk or sidewalks being proposed by the applicant, but there is pedestrian connections along this side of the street and you can see here there is some landscaping that projects into the walkway that could prevent pedestrians from entering -- not only into the units, but also into the commercial development that this shares -- the property is part of and so staff actually recommended that these -- this entire building gets shifted down to the south and that these parking pads be removed, so that we actually get additional green space in between the street and the buildings to add more of that pedestrian element and some more open space to the development. The other caveat to this particular plan is that it's over parked for UDC standards and I know this Commission takes that -- with multi-family we are always curious about the parking count for this site. So, really, the only required parking are the two car -- two car garages that's proposed tucked under the -- I don't have that here for you, that exhibit, but -- and these parking pads are additional parking for the unit. So, they are not required by code, but the applicant is, again, trying to emulate a townhome style development and complying with the multi-family standards. So, this -- this side or this bank of townhome units will not have a parking pad, but they still meet UDC standards and, then, the rest of the site, again, will -- does exceed UDC requirements for multi-family parking standards. Here are the elevations that the applicant provided. You probably saw the upper -- the ones on the left -- upper left-hand corner you saw in the previous rendering with the Adera site. This is the townhome units that were proposed with that project that Council nixed and here are some additional of the elevations that the applicant is proposing. Further refinement is going to be needed and the applicant is going to have to comply with the architectural standards manual. So, the applicant hasn't really decided on what the design will be for these structures. At this point we know that they are going to be a townhome look, of modern design, with parking in the rear of them. So, again, the applicant as they go through the certificate of zoning and design review process with staff, we will make sure that the elevation is with those standards. If the Commission has a preference this evening, certainly you can say which one you prefer and we can remove one from the staff report and say one is preferred and one's not preferred or unapproved and the one approved, whichever one you want to see on the site, which you have that ability through this conditional use process. The applicant did provide written testimony in agreement with the conditions in the staff report and we are recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you might have. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Bill. Any questions for staff? Thank you, sir. Mr. Olsen, would you like to join us again, sir. Olsen: Take you up on the shoes. Chad Olsen. 6142 North Queensberry Place, Boise, Idaho. 83713. So, why would we come in here and want to reduce units? We felt like as we got back in there after having this condition approved with 56 units, that as we got Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 136 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 26 of 43 in there and we looked at it a little bit closer and we felt we were a little bit too tight. What we did is we traded a general parking garage for individual private garages and as a result we reduced to 37 units originally and, then, under staff's recommendation for more green space we omitted a third or the last unit down to 36 units. We did this primarily to just open it up a little bit and have a little bit higher end. It's probably more conducive to the other Verraso projects that we developed and built. Those are a little bit higher end, higher caliber, and so we thought, well, keeping that same -- same theme, let's just make these a little bit nicer and to do that it required reducing the number of units. So, that's what we did. Why the two renderings? Well, at the beginning we wanted to make this easy for Commission. We wanted to get a rendering that looked most like the one that had already been approved and that came with those metal accoutrements on top and you can see those -- those metal -- that metal -- oh, horrible, if you would, at the top there. But when we got it done we didn't like it as much as we thought we would like it. It worked really well on the other project that we had submitted to you that you had approved. It looked really good. But sometimes too much is too much and so we started going, well, let's go back to our original design, which is the one that you see in the bottom right-hand corner, which is a little more simplistic in its designed and it really emulates a modern Brownstone and, of course, the Brownstone design is very very popular all over and we kind of wanted to put a new modern spin on that. Of course, the Verraso project has been very successful and we -- we didn't want to do anything that would tear away from that and we wanted to keep that whole Records Road looking awesome and so that's maybe some of the reasons why we did what we did. I stand here for any questions that you might have. Fitzgerald: Any questions for the applicant? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Bill, what is your plan for that fourth building that they have recommended no pads for at this point? Olsen: Well, I -- I saw that in the staff report and, then, I saw the one part about the amenity and, then, I think that got handled with the park, but I wasn't sure. There was actually a sidewalk on the other side in the beginning, but I think -- if I think what we need to do there -- I think I have got a couple considerations. First of all, the pads there are 20 -- or are 20 foot and to be a recognizable or an official parking spot it can be 19. So, there might be a little bit of ability for us to -- to move those pads a little bit shorter and do that, but if -- if it has to come to it, that's what it has to come to. I felt like, you know, a great relationship with staff and very sensible and looks at each project the way that someone would want to live there. It's one of the things that I really appreciate about staff is that -- I think it's all fun and games right now, because there is a lot of people moving to Boise -- or to Meridian, but at the end of the day if it slows down I won't have a product that we can -- we can market and that will be a nice product for someone to live in and so there is still a two car garage and even if that had ended up being reduced, we might be able Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 137 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 27 of 43 to even get a third spot in there may be in a parallel fashion or something like that. So, I just knew that there was some flexibility there in moving around to make that happen. Originally we weren't required to put the sidewalk on our side, because there is a sidewalk on the other side -- a fully -- a full sidewalk, so -- but, yeah, I'm in compliance with that agreement from staff. We will sit down and we will figure out what -- what's the thing to do there. Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate it greatly. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Oh, Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I know you have got the big park and everything on the other side, but just in -- I mean it does feel like a lot of concrete back there when you are driving through some of those places. What is the amenity or green spaces in between the buildings there? Olsen: It's a little park. It's a teeny park. So, that as you are coming in the road -- but this is really characteristic of all our designs at Verraso and we all -- we all pretty much had that same format that you see there and I -- personally when I drive down it I don't think there is too much concrete, but I think Bill was right and Bill will take -- he should be taking credit. He said, hey, look, when you're driving in I want to be able to see something that's green. I don't want to have to, you know, forget about it. Once I have entered into the inner core of that I want to be able to see green spaces when I'm coming in and I agreed with that and I thought that was a good idea. So, I said let's -- McCarvel: Is it just -- I mean it's driveway, just a private street, it's just concrete right up to the buildings. Olsen: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. McCarvel: Okay. Thanks. Fitzgerald: Thank you very much. Olsen: Thanks. Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk, do we have some signed up for this application? Weatherly: Mr. Chairman, no one signed up for this project. Fitzgerald: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this application? Let the record show that no one came forward. Mr. Olsen, do you have any other additional thoughts? We are good? Okay. Thank you. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2019-0105? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 138 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 28 of 43 Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: A motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Thank you. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Thoughts? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I like the -- just -- for the record I like their second option better. I do think -- Fitzgerald: Oh, on the bottom? McCarvel: Yeah. All that stuff -- Fitzgerald: Those -- I agree. McCarvel: Leave that for the birds. Fitzgerald: I totally agree. I had that exact -- we had conversation literally today. McCarvel: I can picture pigeons sitting up there. Fitzgerald: Yeah. I think that would be a mess. McCarvel: And the one on the bottom just does give a little -- a little more homey feel to what is just a lot of concrete on that side of the street. I realize there is a beautiful open park on the east side, but -- so, I think it's -- it's in concert with everything else that's going on back there and it's nice to have less units. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I would echo the same comments, that I like the photo better on the bottom right than I do the one on the top left, because I think it's got good architectural elements to it. It shows -- I like the diverse colors. I like the diverse styling of it, but it looks a little more homey and I would agree, we don't need bird's nests above people's front doors. So -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 139 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 29 of 43 Fitzgerald: I would completely agree. I -- I like the Brownstone feel, I think it gives it a great job, the undulations in the building and we really appreciate the applicant working with staff as close as they do. That -- breaking that building face up on the backside of buildings on the south side, I think that was great input from staff and we appreciate Mr. Olsen working with them, because I think that breaks that building face up and gives them a little bit of that green space and park to live to. But I agree that the Brownstone look is definitely better than the -- in the area. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Yeah. Generally speaking if somebody wants to reduce I'm over that -- that's something I always like to see. That said, this area is made for and has a lot of -- of high residential and so to see it reduced in an area that's made for it is a little bit concerning, but I understand the -- what the applicant was going for here as far as making something at the end of this that's going to be a little bit higher end for the people that want to -- want to pay a little bit more to live -- you know, have a little bit more space that's provided. I am concerned about the -- removing the parking pad, just because I -- I think that might end up causing some issues in that area as far as where people are going to park. It would be really really nice if we lived in a society where people didn't put a thousand dollars' worth of stuff in their garages and park 20,000 dollars' worth of cars outside of it, but it's not that way sometimes. So, I just see that that might cause some problems in the future. So, I mean with the suggestion the applicant made of maybe reducing the pad size and still trying to squeeze that green space in there, is that something that staff would be willing to work with or is that -- does that look like something that would be a realistic concept -- concept in order to still provide that pad space? Fitzgerald: Bill, do you have any thoughts? Parsons: Yeah. Chairman and Commissioners, the way the condition is written currently is you need to get five more feet to the drive aisle, which is only 20 in that area, so we would need 25 there. So, that's already cutting into that pad to 14 feet and, then, you pull the building back to make sure there is clearance for -- I almost like the little green strip in front of the sidewalk to have a parkway, so you give that much separation from the drive aisle and the sidewalk. That gives pedestrians comfort as they walk into the site. So, I'm envisioning no more than a five foot pad -- parking pad behind those units by the time this thing is redesigned by staff working -- in working with the applicant, so there is no wiggle room in code to have a reduce parking pad. It's nine by 19. So, that's why my -- my recommendation to you and the condition the way it's worded it's remove the pad. We won't accept anything more than a five foot parking pad there, so we don't have people parking behind the units and blocking the drive aisle for the fire department. That's the intent behind that and that's -- that's why I'm -- it's all or nothing is kind of how I see it working at this point. We have to be able to have pedestrians walk -- now with Trader Joe's in there it's going to have a lot of synergy there. I was there this weekend -- the past weekend, it was -- it was packed and I drove through the existing Verraso project Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 140 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 30 of 43 and the roads are narrow, it -- and there is a lot of concrete and it -- it feels like you're driving through an alley. So, what I think we should learn from our past mistakes, move this one forward, have him shift that building back -- that pedestrian scale on that -- create that safe passageway so those residents that are going to walk to Trader Joe's and lose some parking on this site. I -- yes, those might be harder to rent in the future, but there is still a two car garage and that's an amenity when you -- you either buy or rent apartment space. My professional opinion on that. Seal: Is there parking on the Tecate Lane? Parsons: No. No. It's a private street. Not allowed to have parking on it. Fitzgerald: If it was the whole project I would be more concerned. I think there are people who don't have as much, so I think you -- the market will drive which units they purchase or rent or whenever it's going to be. So, I think if it was the whole project I would be more concerned than I -- but I -- I think what Bill is going for is right, if you don't eliminate them completely you got people trying to park halfway over and you got a fire truck that has to drive through, it's going to be a real problem. So, I -- I would rather go that direction of eliminating them and -- and giving that drive aisle up front an additional green space. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I would agree. I use -- when I frequent the retail that's in front there I use it and I see a lot of people come through back there to get to Records instead of going out and have to do a U'ee on Eagle and so I think the more we can make that the obvious place to go, instead of people cutting through all those little drive -- those driveways, that's a better situation. I would be in favor of removing the pads from them. Fitzgerald: That's already in the staff report; correct, Bill? Thank you. Commissioner Holland, do you have any thoughts? Holland: No. I think I'm in agreement with what staff recommend there. Fitzgerald: Without additional thoughts or comments, I would entertain a motion. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2019-0105 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24th, 2019. McCarvel: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 141 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 31 of 43 Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Congratulations. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing Continued from October 3, 2019 for Goddard Creek Townhomes (H-2019-0068) by SI Construction, Located at the NW Corner of W. McMillan Rd. and N. Goddard Creek Way 1. Request: Rezone of 5.03 acres of land from the R-4 to the R- 15 zoning district, and 2. Preliminary Plat for the Re-subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Goddard Creek Subdivision Consisting of 4.62 Acres of Land into 44 Building Lots and 8 Common Lots. Fitzgerald: Okay. We will move on to open the public hearing on Item 4-E, Goddard Creek Townhomes, file number H-2019-0068 and Bill will start with the staff report, sir. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Commission, before I start the presentation I -- I want to just share with you -- I had a chance to look at some of the public testimony before I came in. As we all know tonight is parent-teacher conference night and we had a couple of residents say they can't attend because of that happening. So, they have asked for the Commission to continue this particular item so that they will have a time to come and testify and present at -- during the public hearing on this project. I bring that up to your attention to see if you are amenable to that request. If not, I'm certainly prepared to go forward this evening. I will leave it in -- just wanted to share that with you as -- as we get moving forward into this project. Fitzgerald: What is the will of the Commission before we get started, because I don't want to walk into this and have to redo it over again. Is there comments? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Reading through the public testimony there is a lot of negative comments on, essentially, this and there were a lot of people that did put in there that they couldn't -- they wouldn't be able to make it. If I were in that position I would definitely want my voice to be heard out loud, not necessarily in -- in -- in the form of an e-mail or something along those lines, so I -- I would be okay with a continuance. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 142 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 32 of 43 Holland: I would agree. I would be open to a continuance, but I don't know if we want to -- there is some folks who stuck it out with us for a couple hours. I don't know if we would want to hear perhaps the staff report and, then, open it up for some of the testimony here and, then, continue it and for additional testimony. Fitzgerald: I think that's where I was leaning as well. Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I would agree with Commissioner Holland. And this is another piece of property -- Fitzgerald: That we have seen -- McCarvel: -- that's been around for a while -- Fitzgerald: -- numerous times. McCarvel: -- and heard and heard and heard and so I feel -- I mean I think I know what the will of that neighborhood is, but, yeah, let's get through -- I think let's get through as much as we can, but I certainly want everybody to feel that they have been heard, so -- Fitzgerald: So, Madam Clerk and Bill, I think -- and when we -- depending on the will of the Commission, but also on -- I think it's on Silverstone, we need to make sure we re- publish that -- or repost that -- I think it is or re -- what do you call it? Renotice. Thank you very much for helping me. Renotice the -- the Silverstone Apartments project. I know Chris and I talked about that earlier. We need to make sure we re -- repost -- re-notice the Silverstone one specifically and I think we will probably do that with this tonight, if that's the will of the Commission, so -- so, Bill, let's kick off -- let's have a staff report discussion and we will take comments from the folks in attendance and, then, we will talk about what we do next. Parsons: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. Next item on the agenda is Goddard Creek Townhomes. The applications before you are -- is a rezone, preliminary plat, and development agreement modification and the director has approved the private street application and the alternate compliance application. The site consists of 4.62 acres of land currently zoned R-4 in this city. It's located on the northwest corner of West McMillan Road or North Goddard Creek Way. Adjacent land uses. To the north we have the Selway Apartments, zoned R-4. To the west we have a storage facility that's currently under construction that was approved with the previous application on this -- for this portion of this site in 2017. McMillan Road on the south and, then, East Goddard Creek is on the east boundary. So, this particular lot does not have access to Goddard Creek -- direct access to Goddard Creek, it -- there is actually a platted common lot that touches the eastern boundary of this particular property. So, the applicant is here this evening to discuss -- or excuse me. The history on this site. I think we are all aware of it. So, in 2002 this project came through as part of the Lochsa Falls development. The PUD granted office uses on the site, even though you see R-4 zoning on it. So, that's been some of the confusion around the public history -- the public comments on this particular Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 143 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 33 of 43 property. Everyone remembers the PUD, but it has residential zoning on it and sometimes neighbors and applicants -- not applicants, but residents get confused as to what can actually occur on the property, but I can assure you right now office uses are allowed to develop on that property if the DA mod is not approved and, then, in 2017 the comp plan amendment came through that included the self storage component and a multi-family component. As that project went through the public hearing process the applicant was asked by this body to reduce their unit count, because they didn't like the density on the site or the amount of open space -- space that was provided for that particular project. So, the applicant modified their plan, went from 82 units down to 76 units, trying to gain favorable approval from you. You ultimately recommended approval of a multi-family component and the storage facility as it went to Council, but because of the pushback from the neighbors, the applicant with -- based on the public hearing at the City Council meeting the applicant was saying that the Council didn't have an appetite for additional multi-family on this particular property or the density and they requested the Council to acknowledge the withdrawal of the CUP application. So, that Goddard project, the self storage and the comp plan amendment and the rezone to the C-C zoning district occurred with that piece and this particular property remained R-4 subject to the PUD and the development agreement, which allows office uses. As I mentioned to you, the -- this -- this particular property is mixed use community and so, again, with that land use type we envision three specific land uses within the area. Noted that this has been broken down into the last four acre piece. A viability of having three different land use types on this property isn't going to work. So, what we do typically, if that occurs, we look at the adjacent properties and see what's happening in the area and, then, trying to make that nexus of whether or not we have adequate commercial and residential and office uses in the area and just to the west of this site there is vacant commercial and office uses, along with the storage component, along with the multi-family and the single family and the school in the area. So, certainly we can find a nexus that this is consistent with that mixed use community land use designation and an R-15 zoning is appropriate -- is the -- is one of those preferred zoning requests for this property as well. So, the applicant is asking for a rezone from the R-4 zoning district to the R-15 zoning district and the DA modification is to remove this property from the Lochsa Falls DA, have it rezoned to R-15 so they can develop the plan that's before you this evening. The plat itself consists of 41 single family lots with a mixture of single family attached and townhome units. The color graphic that you see here has -- well, this particular property is under five acres in size, so it's not required to meet the open space and amenity requirements of the UDC, but the applicant's gone out of his way -- in looking at the surrounding residential developments with Lochsa Falls and Kelly Creek, they certainly have abundance of open space in those developments. So, I think the applicant's intent here was to emulate what's occurred in that area. Yes, it is a compact development, but he is offsetting that with additional open space, which is approximately 20 percent and three amenities, which, again, is not required by code. The only required landscaping for this site is the 25 foot landscape buffer along McMillan Road. So, to me this is something unique. as I mentioned to you it was originally 76 units on this, now reduced down to 41 for sale townhome units. So, a stark difference. The density of that previous project I believe was around 15 units to the acre and this density on this particular project this evening is within range of that six to 15 units. This comes in at 8.87. So, we are just slightly above the minimum desired in this Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 144 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 34 of 43 land use designation. So, if you had a chance to read through my staff report, staff had recommended some changes to the site plan and plat that you see this evening and I will point this out quickly for you. So, you can see here the -- and I appreciate the applicant's symmetry on the -- on the design of the plat, but we think currently there is a water and sewer stub that is stubbed right in this location of the property, which would cause the applicant to jog it over at a 45 degrees angle and, then, bring it in through the site. So, in looking at the design and working with our Public W orks Department, we felt it may be prudent to actually shift the common lot over to the east. So, take these units, which are labeled 18 -- or 19 and 20 and attach those here and have a four unit townhome here and shift the open space over and connect it into the dog park. That way you can facilitate efficient expansion of city utilities, you consolidate open space a little bit better, and, then, because the applicant's over 30 units fire department is going to want an emergency access and, then, rather than having this shared driveway being the shared access, they may be able to create a pathway -- a wider pathway and tie into the sidewalk into McMillan Road as an amenity where it can serve as the maintenance road for our Public Works Department and serve as an emergency access for the fire department. So, to us there is a win there by shifting that over for everyone involved. Had a discussion with the applicant and he was in agreement with those changes and that's been reflected as a condition in the staff report. So, if you had a chance to read the staff report as well, you can see that there is actually multiple product types proposed with this development, single family attached townhomes, and typically when we -- private streets are not the preferred method for providing access to single family developments or townhome developments. Our -- our preference is to have public street connectivity. In this particular case the applicant -- and both city code and ACHD do not want to grant another access to McMillan Road, because it's an arterial, but when the apartment complex to the northwest went in we actually had a private street go in with that application and this provided cross-access to this particular property. So, in this case, because we have an arterial street, access is limited to this property and we have cross-access with the apartments, staff -- the director agreed to approve the private street application, so it's all a 24 foot wide street section, but in order to support private streets for single family, we need to -- you need to have either a gated community or a MU lot -- or MU development and typically what a MU is a linear open space, but the units are supposed to front on the MU, not the back of the units on the MU. So, one of my recommendation -- recommended conditions of approval was that the -- the townhome unit -- units internal to the site, which are these internal lots here along the MU, actually want the applicant to reorient the front of those units onto the open space and that would be the primary focal point for those units and, then, the garages, again, will access off the public streets. So, really nothing changes in the site design, the layout. It really comes down to the design of the units and that also predicated a condition that I want to have three distinct elevations for the development as well. So, the applicant was nice enough to provide those for me this evening and I will share those with you as well. So, again, all of the units are pretty similar. Here is the -- here is the single family attached townhome and, then, the larger townhome units in the middle. Then here is kind of an example of a product type mix throughout the development for you. But, again, as I explained earlier, these units will be combined with this or some version of that. He doesn't necessarily have to combine them, he just needs to shift them or if he wants to keep them in twos, I'm fine with that, too. But I think just Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 145 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 35 of 43 shifting this open space here and having that focal point into the development is going to make it a lot nicer. The one other item that you would note on this site plan, too, is typically we don't allow parking on private streets and we have heard from this Commission time and time again there never seems to be adequate parking for developments. So, in working with the applicant he was amenable to adding these 16 overflow guest parking stalls along the private street and in case that's come to this development, I think that's -- that's a wise -- even though he has the parking pad and the two car garage per unit, which meets code, having this overflow parking does help the project as well. So, overall staff is supportive of what the applicant is doing here this evening. Staff did receive written staff report -- or written agreement from the applicant with all conditions in the staff report. and, then, if you had a chance to read the public testimony there were nine applicants that testified -- again concerned with traffic density and parking within the surrounding area. Staff is recommending approval with conditions in the staff report and I will stand for any questions you may have. Fitzgerald: Any questions for staff? Thanks, Bill. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and your address for the record, please, sir. Noriyuki: Commission. Scott Noriyuki. Northside Management. 6810 Fairhill Drive, Boise, Idaho. 83714. Thank you. First of all, I want to thank Bill. We had a lot of complex items we had to work with on this project. I think it far exceeds City of Meridian code and expectations. I think it blends beautifully between the existing R-4 and the existing Selway Apartments, as well as the mini storage and the arterial road from a standpoint of there is plenty of R-4, single family detached -- detached dwellings, in Kelly Creek and, then, of course, to the north there is plenty of rental. This provides a blend -- a step up product, if you will, for people who are young professionals or single parents or what have you to go from the rental situation to their first purchase that's more affordable, because a lot of people are getting priced out of Ada county right now. So, we feel like this is a nice natural progression. I don't have a whole heck of a lot to add aside from we are really proud of this. We have got a lot of good amenities in there. This is in high demand. We have covered a hundred percent of the parking. We have covered all the traffic. We have covered everything with the fire department and the police department. With planning. Not to be anti-climactic, but I think we nailed it. I think my only -- my only concern is I don't feel it's necessary to continue this. I think it can be taken up at City Council. We have had three neighborhood meetings. I noticed one for last night at Willow Creek. Nobody showed up. So, I think we have done our diligence. With that said I will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Scott, do you -- these are all individually platted; correct? Noriyuki: Absolutely. These are all for sales. These are not rentals. Fitzgerald: Is there any questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Noriyuki: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 146 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 36 of 43 Fitzgerald: Adrienne, what do we have for folks who would like to testify? Weatherly: Mr. Chairman, we do have eight people who signed in, but none of them indicated a wish to testify. Fitzgerald: As the first two -- well, ladies first. Ma'am, do you want to come forward and testify? Let's put it on the record, please, ma'am. Pollman: Janie Pollman. 5030 Goddard Creek Way. I was going to ask if this is continued, then, should I make the same presentation or, no, I don't need to? Fitzgerald: I think we will make sure it's on the record. We would love to hear your thoughts, so -- Pollman: Okay. So, again, I apologize, I'm going to have not very good graphics, but I am a visual person and -- Fitzgerald: And, ma'am, just while you are looking, I think it's -- it's the purview of the Commission whether they want to vote to continue it or not. I think the applicant has stated his thoughts about a continuance or not, so let's make sure we get your thoughts tonight if that would be okay. Pollman: Okay. Thank you. I do have -- these are just Google Maps that I brought up, that I gave to the clerk. I guess they are trying to find them. Two concerns that I have. So, we are starting here over on Meridian Road, all the way down to Ten Mile, to get your bearings a little bit, and this is the number of units that are in our area. So, we have got the big one down here at Prelude. Then we have got over here on Linder that's behind the Sonic and, then, of course, here Selway, 171 units. Then over here -- over there by that we have the Sawtooth Village. So, in a two mile radius -- or, excuse me, strip of McMillan we have 631 units. This is a lot like what I was saying about the storage units. I live right across the street. I mean I look out my bathroom window and the Selway Apartments are right there. I -- and I just bought my home five years ago. The apartments have been there a long time. I am not opposed to multi-family units. I'm not a person that is going to come before you and say we can't have this, because we just don't want apartments, but the saturation is a little much and I think that's what the neighborhood is saying, is that Selway is there and -- and as far as -- I have had no problems, but it's so -- just a little much, this high density in our area, except for the large unit Prelude, our neighborhood is impacted the greatest in that area with all of these high density housing and that's -- that's a big concern for us and, then, down here by Walmart I think it's R-15 over there. Apartments are going to go in over there. So, that's my one concern. Could I have the other page, please? The other concern -- and I understand and realize that you cannot control the roads. I totally get that. But I did want to point something out to you, please. Right here at the proposed rezone at that intersection is a T intersection and across the road is that -- is the big canal. A hundred and twenty-five is another T intersection for Hunter Elementary. So, in 125 feet we have all of this traffic coming out from our neighborhood. At the top of my -- my map Goddard Creek is used very much to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 147 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 37 of 43 get to Rocky High School to avoid Linder over there and also to get to Willow Creek Elementary. We also have bus stops for each one of those -- or, excuse me, no bus for Rocky Mountain High School. I'm sorry. But there is right on -- my time is up. Fitzgerald: If you could wrap up your thoughts real quick, ma'am. Pollman: Pardon me? Fitzgerald: If you could wrap up your comments real quick. Pollman: Okay. So, I was just going to say a lot of buses come out of Hunter Elementary. It's just really a -- a -- in a short period -- or, excuse me, a short amount of space for driving, it's a lot of cars dodging each other coming -- we have no lights, no, you know, any of that kind of stuff and it's difficult to see how this is going to work in -- in our area. It will be difficult if this passes for us. Thank you very much. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Sir, if you want to come and join us. Fisher: Good evening. Dan Fisher. 2382 West Apgar Creek Drive. I live in the last house right -- where Goddard Creek and this development -- so, thank you very much for your service and thank you for what you do for our city to make it more livable. Two years ago we came before this body and when the -- when another developer wanted to change the development -- the Kelly Creek development agreement to put in another similar high density project and the -- your body chose to honor the Kelly Creek development agreement and we very much appreciated that and we would ask that you would, please, honor the Kelly Creek development agreement as it stands. And another point regarding the light office. The -- I don't know the technical term for what allows the light office, but we all as the neighborhood came and we -- we see the light office with some traffic during the day for maybe a dental clinic or a law office would be perfect, because most of the -- most of the traffic comes after that is cleared out. As far as parking goes, I cannot park in front of my house. I realized that I don't own that clearly, but if I have guests that I want to come to my house, I cannot park in front of my house at any time. The Selway Apartments -- the parking overflows onto Apgar Creek Drive on both sides, so that my guests cannot park in front of my house. So, this is just -- it's too much. It's too much on this corner and so I would ask that -- that we stick with the -- the use that was approved two years ago with the light office, the R-4 zoning, and I appreciate your time. Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir. We appreciate it. Fisher: Oh. May I also comment for the record that we, please, would ask for a continuance. We very strongly would like to have the neighborhood be able to come and express their -- their views to you as a body. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Appreciate it. Thank you, sir. Anyone additional that would like to testify? Mr. Noriyuki, would you like to come back up and close your thoughts, sir? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 148 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 38 of 43 Noriyuki: Thank you, Commission. Scott Noriyuki. 6010 Fairhill Place, Boise, Idaho. So, I'm going to kind of just address the comments of her directly. Number one from a traffic standpoint, this entire area was originally master planned and approved by ACHD. ACHD has submitted the staff report. They have reviewed the project. There is capacity within the roadway system. So, we are completely in conformance. As far as schools, if there is any comments that come up regarding that, I personally spoke with the school district assistant superintendent as far as five new -- well, one new high school, Owyhee, which you're all aware of that's going to be complete in 2021. Pleasant Valley Elementary, which will be completed in 2020. Mountain View High, which is getting a major expansion complete in 2020. Star Elementary complete in 2020. And Mary McPherson Elementary currently under design. So, there is capacity and it's been calculated that we will add roughly 35 additional students. So, I just want to assure you that -- that by the time we are complete with this project, which will be in 2020, that relief will be there. So, we are not going to be a burden on the system as far as education. We are not going to be a burden on the system as far as traffic. I do want to speak very specific to this development agreement. Your body has already modified this development agreement originally to allow for the mini storage going in. So, all we are doing is now we are all just adjusting, if you will, and, then, from a parking standpoint, I want to ensure that we have got parking covered. These units have full two car garages with 20-by-20 minimum parking pads that can handle a total of four cars, as well as the 16 overflow. With that I will stand for -- oh. And in closing I see no necessity to continue this. We have given plenty of opportunity for the neighbors and also we also have a City Council hearing. So, with that I respectfully request we proceed. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions for the applicant? Thank you, sir, very much. We appreciate it. Noriyuki: Thank you. Fitzgerald: A motion to close the public hearing on H-2019-0068. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Commissioner Holland. Holland: Perhaps before we make a motion to close the public hearing we talk about whether or not we want to continue it. Fitzgerald: That's probably a good call. Holland: Stay open if we are going to continue. Fitzgerald: Thank you for your guidance. Council? Appreciate that. So, do you have a comment you would like to make around that? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 149 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 39 of 43 Holland: Mr. Chairman, I think there is -- I don't know if we want to dive into comments about the application itself, but I think there was enough public testimony that makes me have pause to want to make sure we give residents the opportunity to come before this body and share their comments. So, I probably would still be inclined to continue it. Seal: I would agree with that. Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel, do you have -- McCarvel: Am I saying this right? I mean we have 12 -- there is three pages of comments I think. Seal: There is 12 in there. I was just confirming there is 12. McCarvel: There is 12 and some of those are -- I'm just -- I mean I guess my question is are we going to hear anything more than what's in the public comment -- I mean already. For as large as that neighborhood is to have -- they are not all at teacher conference I guess. I mean I'm -- I'm willing to go forward with the majority of the panel here, but I'm -- I'm looking at seven people. I guess I would feel different if it was seven pages of people that couldn't be here. Fitzgerald: I -- I tend to trust our staff in regards to comments that -- that they have received and I think it's been -- Bill wouldn't have brought it to our attention if it wasn't an issue to take in account. So, I -- the applicant -- I appreciate where he's going, but we -- they have another opportunity to go to Council and have that conversation, but we are supposed to help that process before it gets to Council, so I think we need to have all the information in front of us to make a good decision. So, I don't have a problem continuing this a little bit longer just to make sure we get public comment. Seal: And I mean to add to that, I think a continuance to allow for more public comment, if we get -- again, if we only get the folks that are -- that have written comment in here, that -- that might change my mind as far as, you know, what I'm thinking on this project already. So, I just want to make sure that we get -- we see what the actual public comment is and allow those people to come in. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I -- for this piece of property with as many times as it's been in front of us and as many voices as we have heard, I think one more shot is just fine. Fitzgerald: That's kind of where I'm going, too. Holland: Mr. Chair, before we make a motion to do anything else here, is there any comments of anything we want the applicant to address before it comes back before us Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 150 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 40 of 43 again? I would say it would be nice to see the -- the change that staff recommended about the allocation of green space shift to the right, just so the map is -- the rendering is up to date. But I don't know if there is anything else we want to ask them to work on with staff before they come back. Fitzgerald: Thoughts, Mr. Seal? Seal: I mean -- I'm looking at the agency comments, I mean I'm looking at the West Ada School District and I mean every school that they list on there is over capacity at this point. I understand they are opening other schools, but if I lived in this area the last thing I want is for my kid to be bused somewhere else and that seems like that's what -- what's being offered as a solution to that is that the -- the capacity will be there, but we are going to have to bus some kids out. And as far as the ACHD report, as I'm reading it -- maybe I'm reading it wrong -- we have got better than D listed in both of these, which is 425 vehicles per hour. McMillan is already at 501. And, again, we are getting some information in these reports that's pretty old. I mean if you look at the -- the traffic count -- and we are basically almost a year and a half off on the traffic counts, we have got McMillan at 4,900 and, then, we have got -- excuse me -- Goddard Creek Way at 33, so -- and that's the older set of data. So, it looks like almost all the traffic that's coming off McMillan is almost traversing Goddard Creek Way. So, I mean to me those two things right there cause me enough pause to go, whoa, how many more things do we want to be putting in here. That said, a continuance might offer, you know, the ability for the applicant to, you know, dig deeper into that and get more information from -- from the agencies as far as some kind of written testimony from them as well or written input or even somebody to come and testify on behalf. That would make me feel a little better about, you know, the application that's put in front of us. Fitzgerald: Okay. Additional thoughts? I mean we can get into the merits if we want to. I'm not sure if it's necessary at this time, if we -- depending on where we want to go, because I have had -- I have looked at this project -- or this property at times, I have seen much more dense and more challenging projects for that and I think the chat -- or than the one we are looking at right now and diversity of -- of product in the area I think is -- especially on an ownership project or ownership side -- I can't talk. The ownership side -- it's refreshing and there is not a single family home right up against it, which is another -- so, there is -- there is components of it that I think are well thought out, especially with the green space, because it's not a requirement, and so there are positives in my opinion on this project that they have done a good job of working through, so -- McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I would agree and I do have a question for staff. Did I hear it was -- the density was 8.8. So, just -- other than the setbacks, this is pretty darn close to an R-8, instead of an R-15. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 151 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 41 of 43 Parsons: Mr. Chairman and Commission, that's correct. Yeah. The R-15 is for the dimensional standards as you mentioned, for the townhomes. Fitzgerald: Six to 15; is that right? Parsons: Six to 15 in that -- with that land use designation, yes. That's the target densities. Holland: Mr. Chair, one more questions for staff. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: On the west side of this property do we have any knowledge of what would happen with that other blank canvas there? Fitzgerald: Storage units. Holland: Is that the storage units? Parsons: Yeah. Mr. Chair, Commissioners, that's the storage unit and they had to put in a 25 foot landscape buffer up against this R-4 piece. So, the applicant is going to have their 12 foot setback, plus a 25 foot setback on that boundary. So, there will be adequate separation there as well. Fitzgerald: Additional thoughts? Holland; Mr. Chair, I think I -- we have seen lots of different applications on this specific piece of ground over the years and I would agree that there could definitely be more density that someone else could provide here, so I -- I like that they have kind of taken a thoughtful look at having a product that wouldn't put as much strain and adding the additional parking always makes us happy as a commission, so I appreciate the green space that they didn't need to meet code in there, but they were top one, adding a dog park and some extra open space. I don't know, again, that we are deciding on one thing or another, just throwing out some comments. I think it -- the biggest challenge is traffic for sure and how do we make sure that that doesn't overload Goddard Creek Road on -- Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Based on our previous comments, I would entertain a motion to continue this, if that's what the will of the Commission -- so, if that's where we want to head. Does someone want to make that motion or is there additional thoughts we want to share? Seal: Mr. Chair, what -- do we want to ask what dates are available? Fitzgerald: Yeah. Bill, can you give us an idea of where we are headed on dates, so I can make it as less of an impact for Scott, if that's where we go. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 152 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 42 of 43 Parsons: Yeah. Chairman, Commissioners, you know, I appreciate your willingness to continue this out. Certainly I don't -- my preference, to be honest with you, is to move it to the next available hearing, which is the 7th, and the reason why as we have gone through the presentation, the neighbors asked for that, so let's give them a week to regroup and come back and see what happens here. I don't think the applicant should have to renotice and repost the site just for a week -- a couple weeks continuance. Fitzgerald: Okay. Parsons: One, we can't meet the noticing requirements of the code to do that anyways, if we had to do -- we would have to bump them out a month, so that's not fair to the applicant. And, again, I want to be respectful to the neighbors. They asked for that. I appreciate -- again, I'm appreciative of what the Commission is doing. But, again, let's -- let's move on to the next date. The 7th. Let's get this thing moving forward. Let's hear what the additional testimony is and we will see -- we will go from there. Fitzgerald: Mr. Noriyuki, are you available on the 7th? Does that work for you? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: And, Bill, can we get it at the top of the agenda? Parsons: Absolutely. We can make it the first item on the agenda if you would like. Fitzgerald: That would be great. Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Yes. Weatherly: As a note I just wanted to let you know, even though we wouldn't be noticing -- renoticing in the newspaper or on postcards, we would have a renotice of continuance on our website and we can also post it again on NextDoor as a continuance as well. Fitzgerald: Thank you very much. I think that's important. I appreciate it. With all that information we have, do I have a motion? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move to continue file number H-2019-0068 to the hearing date of 11/7/2019, so that we can hear specific input from the neighborhood. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda November 7, 2019 – Page 153 of 282 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 24, 2019 Page 43 of 43 Fitzgerald: I have a motion -- McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: And a second. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay -- same. Motion passes. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Thank you all. We appreciate you being here tonight and I need -- Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: -- a motion. Yes, Commissioner Holland. Holland: I move we adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Fitzgerald: I have a motion for adjournment. Do I have a second? McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: All in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: And we get to go home. Thank you. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:33 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED _-sl;;, K�AW ATTEST: Adrienne We 'ther Chris Johnson i _Deputy Clerk DATE APPROVED Q�aPTED Ali 0Q ST r CVEE IDIAN*-- Z �DAHD SEAL/ the EIDIANDAHO ?- PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 3 Item Title: Consent Agenda Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 3.A . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Appr ove M inutes of October 3, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission M eeting AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Meeting Minutes Minutes 10/21/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 3 of 117 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 3, 2019 Page 38 of 38 Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close closed the public hearing for October 3rd, 2019. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. Goodnight. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:43 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED N DATE APIPROVED xY 4W ATTES CHRIRJOFAWON - INTURIM CITY CLERK Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 24, 2019 Changes to Agenda: • Item #4A: Skyward Subdivision (H-2019-0087) – Applicant requests continuance to Nov. 21st in order to revise their plans based on discussions with Staff. • Item #4B: Silverstone Apartments (H-2019-0104) – Applicant requests continuance to Nov. 21st in order to have more time to review & analyze the staff report and recommendations contained therein. Item #4C: Adera Storage (H-2019-0094) Application(s): ➢ Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.61 acres of land, zoned C-C, located at 1680 W. Ustick Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: SFR rural/ag, zoned RUT West: Vacant/undeveloped property approved for SFR, zoned R-8 South: Ustick Rd. & Ada County EMS, zoned C-C East: Vacant/undeveloped land, zoned RUT & C-C History: This property was annexed in 2009 with the requirement of a DA; a modification to the DA was recently approved by City Council to allow the development of the storage facility as proposed. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C Summary of Request: A CUP is requested for a self-service storage facility in the C-C district which will contain up to 424 units ranging in size from 8’ x 10’ to 20’ x 10’. An additional building for interior storage containing approximately (36) 10’ x 10’ units may be developed at the NEC of the site; in the alternative, retail uses may be developed instead – the Applicant would like flexibility with this in the future. One temporary full access is proposed via N. Linder Rd.; an emergency only access is proposed via W. Usti ck Rd. The existing stub street at the west boundary of the site is not required to be extended until the subject property is subdivided in the future. The proposed parking for the facility complies with UDC standards. A 25’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along Linder & Ustick Rds.; a 25’ wide buffer to future residential uses is proposed along the west boundary of the site. A detached sidewalk is required along Linder Rd. along the northern portion of the site where there is no sidewalk; an attached sidewalk exists along Linder on the southern portion of the site. A multi-use pathway exists across the SWC of the site adjacent to the Creason Lateral which has been piped. The Applicant proposes to replace the portion of the attached sidewalk existing sidewalk along Ustick Rd. between the existing pathway and the intersection with a 10’ wide multi-use pathway. Conceptual building elevations and perspective drawings have been submitted as shown for the storage facility. The facades of the structures facing the adjacent public streets have the appearance of store fronts rather than the rear of storage units, which is a much more appealing view than typical for storage facilities. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. Compliance with the specific use standards for self-service storage facilities is required as noted in the staff report. Hours of operation are restricted to the hours between 6:00 am and 11:00 pm. Written Testimony: Chad Olsen, Applicant (in agreement w/staff report) Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0094, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24, 2019, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0094, as presented during the hearing on October 24, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0094 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4D: Verraso Village North (H-2019-0105) Application(s): ➢ CUP Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.7 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 3543 E. Tecate Ln. on the west side of N. Records Ave., south of E. Ustick Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Les Schwab Tires and Culver’s restaurant, zoned C-G West: Retail stores/restaurant, zoned C-G South: Townhome style MFR, zoned C-G East: Records Ave. & a sports field associated with the LDS church, zoned R-8 History: A MFR development consisting of 56 units in a 3-story structure was previously approved to develop on this site. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-R Summary of Request: Modification to the existing CUP (H-2018-0070) to reduce the number of dwelling units in the MFR development from 56 to 36 and update the development plan for the site. The previous design was for a common garage on the 1st floor with 1 & 2-bedroom living units on the 2nd & 3rd floors. The proposed design is for 3-story townhome style structures with private 2-car garages (& parking pads) on the 1st floor and 3-bedroom units above on the 2nd & 3rd floors along a shared driveway. The gross density of the development is 21.3 units/acre, which is consistent with that desired in the MU-R FLUM designation (6-40); the gross density of the previous plan was 33 units/acre. One access is proposed via E. Tecate Ln., a private street; and an emergency only access is proposed via Records Ave., a collector street. A private driveway is proposed for internal access to the proposed units. Off-street parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards; a minimum of 72 (36 covered & 36 uncovered) spaces are required; a total of 144 spaces (72 covered & 72 uncovered) are proposed – twice as much as required. A 20’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along Records Ave. Private usable open space & common open space are proposed in accord with UDC standards. A minimum of 0.20 of an acre of common area is required; 0.24 of an acre is proposed consisting of a 20’ wide landscape strip along the southern boundary of the site, a 50’ x 20’ central open space area and a dog park located at the SWC of site. A minimum of 3 amenities are required; 2 are proposed consisting of a 20’ x 69’ pet area and a pet parlor – at least one other amenity is required from either the open space or recreation categories – Commission may require more if they deem appropriate. A couple of different conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown although these may not be constructed – they were provided for illustrative purposes to depict the specific design elements for the development. Further refinement will occur with submittal of the CZC/DR applications and must comply with the design standards in the ASM. Written Testimony: Chad Olsen, Applicant – in agreement w/staff report Staff Recommendation: Approval w/condition in staff report Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0105, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24, 2019, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0105, as presented during the hearing on October 24, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0105 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4E: Goddard Creek Townhomes (H-2019-0068) Application(s): ➢ Development Agreement Modification (does not require action from the Commission, only Council) ➢ Rezone ➢ Preliminary Plat ➢ Private street and Alternative Compliance (does not require action from the Commission/Council – Director decision) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.62 acres of land, zoned R-4, located at the NWC of W. McMillan Rd. & N. Goddard Creek Way. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Apartments (Selway), zoned R-4 West: Future self-service storage facility, zoned C-C South: McMillan Rd. & SFR, zoned R-4 East: Goddard Creek Way & SFR, zoned R-8 & L-O History: This property was part of the Lochsa Falls development approved in 2002 and received annexation w/a DA, CUP/PD and preliminary plat approval; the PD allowed offices as a use exception in the R-4 district. In 2017, a map amendment was approved from Office & HDR to MU-C and the property was included as a lot in Goddard Creek Sub. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C Summary of Request: A modification to the existing DA is requested to allow the development of SFR attached homes & townhomes to develop on the property instead of the previously approved office uses; and to exclude the subject property from the terms of the existing DA and enter into a new one that just governs development of this site and not the larger Lochsa Falls development. A rezone of 5.03 acres of land is requested from the R-4 to the R-15 zoning district. The proposed development plan consists of a mix of SFR housing types (attached & townhomes), which along with the multi-family to the north, the SFR detached homes in the vicinity, and the storage facility planned to the west, provides a mix of uses and residential housing options in the area consistent with the MU- C designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 41 building lots & 8 common lots on 4.62 acres of land in the proposed R-15 district. Access is proposed via a private street, W. Apgar Creek Ln., via N. Goddard Creek Way, a collector street; direct access via McMillan Rd. is prohibited. Private streets (24’ wide) & common driveways are proposed for internal access within the development. Although private streets are not typically intended for single-family developments, because the development is proposing a common mew through the site design & access via McMillan in restricted, Staff is of the opinion the private streets are appropriate. As a condition of approval, Staff is requiring the townhome units proposed on Lots 36-49 be oriented with the front of the units oriented toward the mew. Because on-street parking is not allowed with 24’ wide street sections and parking is a concern in this area due to the existing apartment complex to the north not having adequate parking, the applicant is providing an off-street parking area w/16 spaces at the south end of the townhome units to ensure adequate parking for guests is provided within the development. Although the UDC does not require common open space & site amenities to be provided because the property is below 5 acres in size, the Applicant is proposing approximately 20% of qualified open space & a tot lot, picnic shelter & dog park as amenities. Conceptual building elevations/renderings were submitted for the proposed townhome units; none were submitted for the SFR attached units. Because Staff recommends the front of the townhomes are oriented toward the abutting mew, the elevations submitted do not contemplate this design. Therefore, Staff recommended in the staff report that the Applicant provide 3 distinct elevations for the development that meets this condition prior to the Commission hearing; revised drawings were submitted as shown. All structures are required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. Written Testimony: • Scott Noriyuki, Applicant – in agreement w/staff report • 9 letters of public testimony included in the public record in opposition to the proposed development for the following reasons: ➢ Preference for office uses rather than more homes due to traffic & overcrowding of schools or lower density housing; ➢ Safety concerns pertaining to traffic travelling at a high rate of speed on Goddard Creek Way with cut-through traffic to Chinden and the proposed development contributing to the traffic volume; residents using Kelly Creek park & amenities; crime & vandalism, trash; and, ➢ Existing parking issues in the area which will be exacerbated by the proposed development. A few letters also requested the Commission continue the public hearing to a subsequent meeting because some of the nearby residents are unable to attend due to parent/teacher conferences scheduled for tonight. Staff Recommendation: Approval per the conditions in the staff report Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2019-0068, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 24, 2019, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2019- 0068, as presented during the hearing on October 24, 2019, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0068 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Zoning Map Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Preliminary Plat Rendering/Landscape Plan EIDIANDAHO +t - PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 9 P\ - Item Title: Public Hearing For Skyward Subdivision (H-2019-0087) By The Land Group, Inc., Located East of S. Eagle Rd. approximately 1/4 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. Meeting Notes: Ia d\O) I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.A . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Skyward S ubdivision (H-2019-0087) by T he L and Group, Inc., L ocated east of S . E agle Rd., approximately ¼ mile south of E . L ake Hazel Rd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 42 of 117 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 10/24/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4 - Project Name: Skyward Subdivision AZ, PP Project No.: H-2019-0087 Active: ❑ There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=335 10/28/2019 EIDIAN?- DAHJ PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 0 2) Item Title: Public Hearing For Silverstone Apartments (H-2019-0104) By Dale Evans Contruction., Located at 4107 E. Overland Rd. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.B . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Silverstone Apartments (H-2019-0104) by Dave Evans C onstruction, L ocated at 4107 E . Overland Rd. AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taf f R eport 10/25/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 43 of 117 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 10/24/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4 - Project Name: Silverstone Apartments MCU Project No.: H-2019-0104 Active: ❑ There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=332 10/28/2019 Page 1 STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: 10/24/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Kevin Holmes, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0104 Silverstone Apartments MCU PROPERTY LOCATION: 4107 E. Overland Rd., in the NW ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 21, Township 3N., Range 1E. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Modification to the Conditional Use Permit (H-2016-0060) to increase the number of dwelling units in the multi-family development from 112 to 204, increase the acreage from 5.61 acres to 10 acres, and update the development plan for the site. NOTE: The applicant is currently processing a Development Agreement Modification application for the subject property (H-2019-0099) which is scheduled for the October 22, 2019 City Council meeting. Any approvals related to this Conditional Use Modification shall be dependent upon the MDA being approved by Council. As part of that application submittal, staff recommended changes to the development plan, specifically the loss of MF units and increase in open space. The requested changes are also reflected in this report. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 10 Future Land Use Designation MU-RG Existing Land Use Multi-Family Residential, Commercial Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning N/A Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 8/15/2019; 9 attendees Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 44 of 117 Page 2 Description Details Page History (previous approvals) H-2016-0060 (AZ, CPAM, CUP); H-2017-0104 (RZ, PP, MDA, MCU); DA Instrument #2017-076698, 2017-024757 & Addendum Instrument #2018-012457; H-2019-0054 (FP) A CZC and DES (A-2019-0307) has been approved for the construction of the first phase (112 units). B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) No  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Access with the first phase was granted to Overland Road; Phase 2 accesses from S. Movado Way, a collector roadway C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 45 of 117 Page 3 Zoning Map Planned Development Map III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Silverstone Apartments, LLC 7761 W. Riverside Dr., Suite 100 Boise, ID 83714 B. Owner(s): Bienapel Family Limited Partnership 2674 S. Andros Way Meridian, ID 83642 Silverstone Apartments, LLC 7761 W. Riverside Dr., Suite 100 Boise, ID 83714 C. Representative: Evans Construction 7761 W. Riverside Dr., Suite 100 Boise, ID 83714 IV. NOTICING A. Newspaper notification published on: 10/4/2019 B. Radius notice mailed to properties within 300 feet on: 10/1/2019 C. Applicant posted notice on site on: 10/10/2018 D. Nextdoor posting: 10/1/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 46 of 117 Page 4 V. STAFF ANALYSIS This site consists of 10 acres, zoned C-G with a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of MU-RG. The western portion of the site (approximately 5.61 acres) is currently being developed with 112 units consistent with previous approvals. Phase 2 consists of the eastern 4.39 acres is proposed to develop with the additional 92 units. The requested modifications to the development includes an increase in the number of approved multi-family units from 112 to 204, increase the acreage from 5.61 acres to 10 acres, and update the development plan for the site. With the increase in the number of units, the applicant is also proposing to increase the amenity package to include the following: 1) clubhouse with fitness facility, 2) children’s play structure, 3) sports court, 4) pool, 5) dog walk, and 6) an open grassy area measuring 50’ x 100’. The clubhouse will contain the leasing office and mail center. The units will be distributed among five (5) three-story 24-plexes, five (5) three-story 12-plexes, and three (3) two-story 8-plexes. The bedroom count consists of 66 one-bedroom units and 138 two- bedroom units. NOTE: The site plan approved with the first phase depicts two multi-family structures in the northeast corner. In the new plan, these two buildings have been consolidated into one single structure. The CZC approved with the first phase may need to be revised to incorporate the single structure or the site plan submitted with phase 2 can reflect the change to the layout of the buildings as currently proposed. A. Comprehensive Plan Policies This site is designated Mixed Use – Regional (MU-RG) on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The purpose of this designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. Fox example, an employment center should have support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-RG designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the developments. This site is proposed to develop with 204 multi-family residential units at a gross density of 20 dwelling units per acre (d.u./acre) in accord with the desired density of the MU-RG designation of 6 to 40 dwelling units to the acre. Further, the high-density development should contribute to the mix of residential uses in this area adjacent to retail, employment and restaurant uses near major intersections (Eagle & Overland Roads and Eagle & Cloverdale Roads). Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 47 of 117 Page 5  “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B, pg. 56) The proposed multi-family units will contribute to the variety of rental options available within the City.  “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F, pg. 45) City services will be provided and extended with development of this site.  “Require new residential development to meet development standards regarding landscaping, signage, fences and walls, etc.” (3.04.01H) Street buffer landscaping is required adjacent to E. Overland Rd. and S. Movado Way in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Separate permits shall be obtained for signage in compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3D-5.  “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) Because of its location close to the Silverstone Business Park, the El Dorado Business Park, Gramercy commercial developments, and the future development of Eagle View Landing, this property is ideal for providing higher density housing options.  “Require screening and landscape buffers on all development requests that are more intense than adjacent residential properties.” (3.06.01G) The proposed development abuts less intense single-family development at the south boundary. With phase 1, the applicant received approval to construct a 10-foot wide landscape buffer. Fencing has been constructed with the single family development along the south boundary however, staff believes a 25-foot landscape buffer and trees that touch at maturity should be installed along the west and southern portion of the phase 2. B. Specific Use Standards The specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 apply to development of this site as follows: A minimum of 80 square feet of private useable open space is required to be provided for each unit. Private balconies or patios are proposed for each unit but floorplans have not been provided to confirm they meet this requirement. The floor plans approved with the first phase depicted patios and balconies that meet this requirement. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal, the applicant shall provide floorplans to confirm the balconies/patios meet this requirement. Development with 20 units or more are required to provide a property management office, maintenance storage area, central mailbox location (including provisions for parcel mail) that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access, and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. The property management, leasing office, and mailboxes are located in Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 48 of 117 Page 6 clubhouse, centrally located on the site. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict the location(s) of the directory map of the development and the maintenance storage area. At a minimum, 250 square feet (s.f.) of outdoor common open space is required for each unit containing more than 500 and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area. All of the 204 proposed units are within this range. Therefore, a minimum of 51,000 s.f. (or 1.17 acres) of common open space is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C. The applicant has not provided an open space exhibit demonstrating compliance with the above requirement. Further, staff has recommended the applicant reduce the number of units by twelve to increase the open space within the development. Prior to the Commission hearing, the applicant shall provide such an exhibit showing calculations for open space meeting the following requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. Two hundred fifty (250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred (500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred (400) square feet in area, and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet (20'). For multi-family developments with more than 100 units, the decision making body shall require amenities commensurate to the size of the development. A total of 204 units are proposed. Six (6) amenities proposed: 1) clubhouse with fitness facility, 2) children’s play structure, 3) sports court, 4) pool, 5) dog walk, and 6) open grassy area measuring 50’ x 100’. Staff recommends that the 24-plex “Building J” shown on the proposed site plan be replaced with a three-story 12-plex, located on the southern half of the current building’s footprint. The northern half of the footprint should be revised to show an open lawn area with landscaping along the eastern edge to provide additional open space with the development. This is consistent with staff’s recommendation of the development agreement modification. 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 three-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24- inches for every three linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plans. The landscape plan submitted with this application meets this requirement. The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. The applicant shall submit documentation of compliance with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. C. Dimensional Standards The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and for multi-family developments listed in 11-4-3-27. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 49 of 117 Page 7 The setbacks in the C-G district are 0 feet, except for the 20-foot required street buffer along S. Movado Way, 35-foot entryway corridor landscape buffer along E. Overland Rd. and a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along a portion of the west and southern boundary of phase 2 in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3. In addition, the multi-family specific use standards requires a 10-foot building setback along the perimeter unless a greater setback is required by title 10 (International Building Code). D. Access Access is depicted on the site plan via: E. Overland Rd.(approved with Phase 1), an arterial roadway; S. Movado Way, a collector street; emergency access only is proposed via a connection to E Esperanto St. to the south. Meridian Fire Department has commented on the access to the development and supports the applicant’s proposal. Staff finds the access is sufficient to serve the proposed development. E. Parking: The UDC requires off-street vehicle parking to be provided on the site in accord with the standards listed in Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family developments. Based on 66 one- bedroom, 138 two-bedroom units, and the1,834 square foot clubhouse a minimum of 379 spaces are required. The applicant has provided 325 covered stalls and 52 uncovered stalls for a total of 375, two short of the requirement. Staff is recommending that 12 units be removed from “Building J”. With this reduction, the site will meet the requirements of code, 355 required and 377 provided. Table 11-3C-5 lists the required parking stall and drive aisle dimensional standards. Per this table, two-way drive aisles with 90 degree parking are to be 25-feet wide. In addition, the Fire Department requires drive aisles to be 26’ around buildings over 30-feet in height. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal, the applicant shall provide a revised site plan demonstrating conformance with both of the above requirements. One bicycle parking space is required to be provided for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces or portion thereof, per UDC 11-3C-6G. Based on a total of 377 proposed parking spaces, a minimum of 15 bicycle parking spaces should be provided for the development. The site plan depicts 70 bicycle parking spaces dispersed throughout the development, far exceeding the City’s requirements. F. Sidewalks/Parkways: A five-foot wide detached sidewalk exists on this site along S. Movado Way and E. Overland Rd. in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. Any existing curb cuts not being used should be removed and reconstructed with landscaping and required sidewalk per ACHD standards. G. Landscaping: A minimum 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer is already constructed along S. Movado Way, a collector street, and a minimum 35-foot landscape buffer is required Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 50 of 117 Page 8 along E. Overland Rd., an entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. In addition to the required street buffer landscaping, the applicant is required to construct a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along a portion of the west and south boundary of phase 2. To ensure adequate buffering from the more intense multi- family project to the abutting single family residences, staff recommends that the applicant construct the full 25-foot wide buffer width comprised of trees that touch at maturity, unless waived by Council during the hearing of the MDA application. H. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing shall only be permitted on the interior edge of the street buffer, not within it, in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2(c). I. Utilities and drainage: All utilities and drainage facilities are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18 and UDC 11-3A-21. J. Lighting: All outdoor lighting shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. K. Building Elevations: Building elevations were submitted for the multi-family structures and clubhouse. Building materials for the multi-family structures and the clubhouse consist of fiber cement horizontal lapped and board batten siding and stucco with architectural laminated fiberglass roof shingles. Future structures built on the site are required to comply with the City’s design standards and guidelines in effect at the time of development and obtain design review approval. Note: the elevations approved with phase 1 and identical with the ones proposed for expansion. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit modification application in accord with the Findings in Section IX per the provisions in Section VIII. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 51 of 117 Page 9 VII. EXHIBITS A. Approved Site Plan (H-2017-0104) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 52 of 117 Page 10 B. Proposed Site Plan Remove twelve units to include more open space. Construct 25’ landscape buffer along a portion of the west and south boundary. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 53 of 117 Page 11 C. Proposed Landscape Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 54 of 117 Page 12 D. Proposed Elevations (no change since previous approvals) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 55 of 117 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 56 of 117 Page 14 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division 1. Development of the site shall substantially comply with the site plan, landscape plan, and conceptual building elevations included in Exhibit A, with the conditions of approval listed herein, and the provisions of the development agreement and any modifications thereof. 2. The submitted site and landscape plan, included in Section VII, Exhibits C & D of the shall be revised as follows: a. Replace “Building J” with a three-story 12-plex to be located on the southern end of the current buildings footprint. The northern half of the footprint shall be revised to show an open lawn area with landscaping along the eastern edge. a. The applicant shall construct a 25-foot wide landscape buffer to the residential uses to the west and south boundary of phase 2 constructed to the standards of UDC 11-3B-9 with trees touching at maturity, unless waived by City Council. 3. The architectural character of the proposed structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 4. Prior to the Commission hearing, the applicant shall provide an exhibit showing calculations for open space meeting the requirements of UDC 11-4-3-27C. 5. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal, the applicant shall provide floorplans to confirm the balconies/patios are a minimum of 80 square feet. 6. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal, the applicant shall provide a revised site plan depicting the locations of the directory & map of the development and the maintenance storage shed. 7. The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27, including but not limited to the following: a. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. b. The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. The applicant shall submit documentation of compliance with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 57 of 117 Page 15 8. The applicant shall provide amenities as proposed, in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D. 9. Any fencing constructed on the site shall be consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7. Any fencing proposed along Overland Road and S. Movado Way shall be installed along the interior edge of the 35-foot and 20-foot wide landscape buffers. 10. The interior parking area shall comply with the required stall and drive aisle dimensions listed in UDC Table 11-3C-5. These dimensions shall be depicted on the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 11. The applicant is required to submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications for approval from the Planning Division prior to submittal of a building permit application. NOTE: The site plan approved with the first phase depicts two multi-family structures in the northeast corner. In the new plan, these two buildings have been consolidated into one single structure. The CZC approved with the first phase may need to be revised to incorporate the single structure or the site plan submitted with phase 2 can reflect the change to the layout of the buildings as currently proposed. 12. The applicant shall submit a drainage plan to Meridian Land Development for review and approval to ensure adequate drainage can be maintained on site in accord with UDC 11-3A-18. 13. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 14. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2) years to commence the 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. 15. 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. 16. Prior to development commencing with the development of phase 2 (4.39 acres), the applicant shall record the development agreement that contains the provisions approved with file #H-2019-0099. 17. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval approved with H-2016- 0060, H-2017-0104, H-2019-0054 and A-2018-0307. 18. The applicant shall record a final plat prior to obtaining occupancy of the first structure. NOTE: City Council has approved a final plat for the boundary of the first phase. The applicant can either submit a new final plat application for review and approval or modify the boundary of the first phase to incorporate the additional land area with a final plat modification application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 58 of 117 Page 16 B. Public Works Division 1. A streetlight plan is required for this development. Type 1 streetlights are required every 200' on Overland Road. Davit poles may be used to avoid overhead power conflicts. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer’s expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor’s work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. For all other agency comments (CDHD, WASD, NMID, DEQ, ITD) click on the following link: http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/Browse.aspx?dbid=0 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 59 of 117 Page 17 IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E): The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district as required by the UDC (see Analysis Section V for more information). B. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent and harmonious with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this site. C. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions listed in this report, the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the 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 (see Analysis Section V for more information). D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services 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. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds the proposed use will not involve excessive traffic, noise, or odors that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare. 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. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30- 2005, eff. 9-15-2005). Staff finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 60 of 117 Page 18 loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance in this area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 61 of 117 E IDIANAH ?- PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 A C Item Title: Public Hearing for Afdera Storage (H-2019-0094) By Chad Olsen. Located at 1680 W. Ustick Rd. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a self-service storage facility consisting of 300+/- units on 4.61 acres ofland in the C -C zoning district. Meeting Notes: rte✓ I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.C . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Adera Storage (H-2019-0094) by Chad Olsen, L ocated at 1680 W. Ustick Rd. C lic k Here for Applic atio n 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 (Revised)S taf f R eport 10/21/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 62 of 117 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 10/24/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-C Project Name: Adera CUP Project No.: H-2019-0094 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 1 Go Back To List I Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=323 10/28/2019 City - Signature I Wish To Sign In Address State- For Against Neutral Name Testify Date/Time Zip Janie 5030 n Goddard 10/24/2019 X pollmann Creek way 5:53:23 PM 3045 N Springtime 10/24/2019 Carl Wibel X X Way 6:20:31 PM 1762 west canyon 10/24/ Chris ranch street meridian X X 6:36:588M PPM idaho 83646 Go Back To List I Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=323 10/28/2019 Page 1 STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: 10/24/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Adera Storage H-2019-0094 PROPERTY LOCATION: 1680 W. Ustick Rd. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted an application for a conditional use permit for a self-service storage facility on 4.61 acres of land in the C-C zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 4.61 Future Land Use Designation MU-C Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Self-service storage facility Current Zoning C-C Proposed Zoning NA Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) Creason Lateral crosses southwest corner of site & has been piped Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 04/25/2019 - no attendees; and 7/23/19 – one attendee History (previous approvals) AZ-09-0.5 (JJA Land, Ord. 10-1445, DA #110031366) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 63 of 117 Page 2 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) Yes  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Full (temporary) access via N. Linder Rd.; emergency access via W. Ustick Rd. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 64 of 117 Page 3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant Chad Olsen – 104 E. Fairview Ave., #233, Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Buyrite, LLC – 16130 N. Elder St., Nampa, ID 83687 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING A. Newspaper notification published on: 10/4/2019 B. Radius notice mailed to properties within 300 feet on: 10/1/2019 C. Applicant posted notice on site on: 10/11/2019 D. Nextdoor posting: 10/1/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): A CUP is requested for a self-service storage facility in a C-C zoning district as required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. B. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: None C. Existing Zoning C-C D. Proposed Use Self-service storage facility containing up to 425 units ranging in size from 8’ x 10’ – 20’ x 10’ consisting of 47,762 square feet. An additional building for interior storage containing (36+/-) 10’ x 10’ units consisting of 3,648 square feet may be developed at the northeast corner of the site; in the alternative, retail uses may be developed instead. Note: The number of storage units noted is based on the calculation table included in Section VII.B which is different than that depicted on the site plan; the site plan should be updated based on final design. The Applicant would like flexibility to develop up to 425 storage units on the site. E. Dimensional Standards: See 11-2B-3 for the C-C district F. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff’s analysis/comments in italic text) 11-4-3-34: SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITY A. Storage units and/or areas shall not be used as dwellings or as a commercial or industrial place of business. The manufacture or sale of any item by a tenant from or at a self-service storage facility is specifically prohibited. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 65 of 117 Page 4 B. On site auctions of unclaimed items by the storage facility owners shall be allowed as a temporary use in accord with chapter 3, article E, "Temporary Use Requirements", of this title. C. The distance between structures shall be a minimum of twenty five feet (25'). The site plan complies with this standard. D. The storage facility shall be completely fenced, walled, or enclosed and screened from public view. Where abutting a residential district or public road, chainlink shall not be allowed as fencing material. The rear of the storage structures will serve as a wall and will screen the proposed facility from public view. The emergency gate shall be provide screening of the facility with an acceptable screening material. E. If abutting a residential district, the facility hours of public operation shall be limited to six o'clock (6:00) A.M. to eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. F. A minimum twenty five foot (25') wide landscape buffer shall be provided where the facility abuts a residential use, unless a greater buffer width is otherwise required by this title. Landscaping shall be provided as set forth in subsection 11-3B-9C of this title. The site plan depicts a 25’ wide buffer; landscaping within the buffer should be provided in accord with UDC standards. G. If the use is unattended, the standards in accord with section 11-3A-16, "Self-Service Uses", of this title shall also apply. The use will not be unattended. H. The facility shall have a second means of access for emergency purposes. An emergency access is proposed via W. Ustick Rd. in accord with Fire Dept. requirements. I. All outdoor storage of material shall be maintained in an orderly manner so as not to create a public nuisance. Materials shall not be stored within the required yards. Stored items shall not block sidewalks or parking areas and may not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. J. The site shall not be used as a "vehicle wrecking or junk yard" as herein defined. K. For any use requiring the storage of fuel or hazardous material, the use shall be located a minimum of one thousand feet (1,000') from a hospital. G. Site Plan: A site plan was submitted that depicts how the site is proposed to develop with storage units, internal driveways, access and parking (see Section VII.A). The boundary of the site needs to be enlarged to include the 0.15 acre area on the south side of the Creason Lateral. The H. Access: One temporary full access is proposed via N. Linder Rd.; an emergency only access is provided via W. Ustick Rd. The existing stub street (W. Crosswind St.) at the west boundary is not required to be extended until the subject property is subdivided in the future. I. Parking: Per UDC 11-3C-6B.1, parking is based on gross floor area of office space for self-service storage facilities. An 896 square foot office is proposed, therefore, a minimum of one (1) parking space is required; 13 spaces are proposed with one of those being an ADA space in excess of the minimum standards. The parking calculations depicted on the site plan should be revised to reflect the number of spaces required based on the square footage of the office only (i.e. 896 square feet). Note: If the interior storage ends up being replaced with retail uses, a minimum of one parking space per 500 square feet of gross floor area will be required. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 66 of 117 Page 5 The 2-way drive aisle in the parking area should be widened from 20 to 25 feet in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-5. A minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space is required to be provided on the site per UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. J. Sidewalks: There is an existing 5-foot wide attached sidewalk along W. Ustick Rd. and along the portion of N. Linder Rd. nearest the Linder/Ustick intersection. A minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk should be constructed along the portion of Linder Rd., an arterial street, where sidewalk does not exist to the north property boundary in accord with UDC 11-3A-17C. K. Pathways: There is an existing 10-foot wide multi-use pathway adjacent to the Creason Lateral that runs across the southwest corner of this site. The Applicant proposes to replace the existing sidewalk along Ustick Rd. with a 10-foot wide sidewalk to the intersection; Staff recommends it’s constructed as a detached pathway with a landscaped parkway. A new public pedestrian easement is required to be submitted to the Planning Division for the existing/proposed pathway. L. Landscaping A 25-foot wide street buffer is required to be constructed along N. Linder Rd. and W. Ustick Rd., landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A minimum density of one tree per 35 linear feet is required along with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover; a calculation table should be depicted on the plan demonstrating compliance with this requirement. The proposed plan appears to be short trees and does not depict any vegetative groundcover but does include shrubs. A 25-foot wide buffer is proposed to future residential uses along the west boundary of the site as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and 11-4-3-34F. The buffer is required to be comprised of a mix of evergreen & deciduous trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover; the buffer area should result in a barrier that allows trees to touch at the time of tree maturity. The plan doesn’t depict any trees along the west boundary; the plan should be revised accordingly to comply with UDC standards. M. Waterways: The Creason Lateral runs across the southwest boundary of this site and has been piped. An easement for the Irrigation District should be depicted on the plans if one exists. N. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. Fencing is not depicted on the plan. O. Utilities All utilities for the proposed use are required to be installed at or below grade in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. The proposed development is required to connect to the City water and sewer systems, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (See UDC 11-3A-21) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 67 of 117 Page 6 P. Building Elevations Perspective views of the proposed storage facility were submitted as shown in Section VII.C. The facades of the structures facing the adjacent public streets have the appearance of store fronts rather than the rear of storage units, which is a much more appealing view than typical for storage facilities. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Note: The multi-family structures shown in the background of the perspective view from Ustick Rd. were not approved with H-2019-0092. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII of this report. VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan (dated: 9/21/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 68 of 117 Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 69 of 117 Page 8 B. Landscape Plan (dated: 9/21/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 70 of 117 Page 9 C. Building Elevations & Perspectives Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 71 of 117 Page 10 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS A. Planning Division 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the provisions in the Development Agreement associated with H-2019-0092 (Adera) and the conditions contained herein. The Development Agreement shall be recorded prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application for this site. 2. The Developer/Owner shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 34, Self-Service Storage Facility. The application submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications shall demonstrate compliance with these standards. 3. The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. A minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk shall be depicted along the portion of Linder Rd. where sidewalk does not exist to the north property boundary in accord with UDC 11-3A-17C. b. Depict a minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space on the site per UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 72 of 117 Page 11 c. A minimum density of one tree per 35 linear feet is required along with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover within the street buffers along W. Ustick Rd. and N. Linder Rd. as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C; a calculation table should be depicted on the plan demonstrating compliance with this requirement per the application checklist. d. The buffer to future residential uses along the west boundary of the site is required to be comprised of a mix of evergreen & deciduous trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover that results in a barrier that allows trees to touch at the time of tree maturity as set forth in UDC 11-3B-9C in accord with UDC 11-4-3-34. e. The boundary of the site needs to be enlarged to include the 0.15 acre area on the south side of the Creason Lateral. f. The parking calculations depicted on the site plan should be revised to reflect the number of spaces required based on the square footage of the office (i.e. 896 square feet). g. The number of storage units included in the Development Data on the site plan should be updated based on the number at final design, not to exceed 425. h. Depict an Irrigation District easement for the Creason Lateral if one exists. i. Depict the proposed 10-foot wide pathway along W. Ustick Rd. detached from the curb with a landscaped parkway. j. A detail of the proposed emergency gate shall be included that provides screening of the facility in accord with 11-4-3-34D (chainlink with slats does not qualify as an acceptable screening material). k. Remove Day Lily as a shrub and show it as a plant instead in the Plant Schedule on the landscape plan. l. The 2-way drive aisle in the parking area shall be widened to 25 feet in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-5. 4. The hours of operation for the storage facility shall be limited to 6:00 am to 11:00 pm in accord with UDC 11-4-3-34. 5. A public pedestrian easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division for the multi- use pathway and recorded prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy; the easement shall extend to the Ustick/Linder Rd. intersection where the new pathway is proposed. 6. Flexibility shall be granted for the future interior storage depicted on the site plan at the northeast corner of the site to be converted to retail if desired by the Applicant. 7. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. B. Public Works Department 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 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 73 of 117 Page 12 materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2. 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. 3. All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being developed 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, and at a minimum, a compacted gravel road base shall be in place prior to applying for building permits. 7. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 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. 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. 10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 11. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 12. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 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. 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 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 74 of 117 Page 13 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. 15. 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. 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 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 1. Fire Flow: Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with International Fire Code Appendix B to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix C. 2. Water Supply: Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department or their designee in accordance with International Fire Code Section (IFC) 508.5.4 as follows: a. Fire hydrants shall have a Storz LDH connection in place of the 4 ½” outlet. The Storz connection may be integrated into the hydrant or an approved adapter may be used on the 4 1/2" outlet. b. Fire hydrants shall have the Storz outlet face the main street or parking lot drive aisle. c. Fire hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. d. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10’. e. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18” above finished grade to the center of the Storz outlet. f. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the Meridian Water Dept. Standards. g. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3. Roadways: In accordance with International Fire Code Section 503.2.5 and Appendix D, any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. Cul-D-Sacs shall be 96’ in diameter minimum and shall be signed “No Parking Fire Lane” per International Fire Code Sections 503.3 & D103.6. 4. Roadways: All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles, and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 75 of 117 Page 14 5. Roadways: Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have traffic calming devices installed without prior approval of the Fire Code Official. National Fire Protection IFC 503.4.1. 6. Access: Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs, and access roads with an all-weather surface are required to be installed before combustible construction material is brought onto the site, as set forth in International Fire Code Section (IFC) 501.4. 7. Access: All electric gates are required to be 20’ in width and equipped with a Fire Department key switch as set forth in International Fire Code Section 503.6 & National Fire Protection Standard 1141, Section 5.3.17.3. 8. Access: This project will be required to provide a 20’ wide swing or rolling emergency access gate as set forth in International Fire Code Sections 503.5 and 503.6. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox padlock which has to be ordered via the website www.knoxbox.com. All gates at the entrance to fire lanes shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from the roadway and shall open away from the roadway, unless other provisions are made for safe personnel operations as set forth in National Fire Protection Association 1141, Section 5.3.16 - 2017 edition. 9. Access: Provide a Fire Department Key box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy as set forth in International Fire Code Section 506. 10. Addressing: The applicant shall work with Public Works and Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance and is placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property, as set forth in International Fire Code Section 505.1 and Meridian Amendment 104-4-1. D. Police Department http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177230/Page1.aspx http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178356/Page1.aspx E. Park’s Department http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177504/Page1.aspx F. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=177195&dbid=0 G. Central District Health Department (CDHD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177499/Page1.aspx H. Ada County Highway District (ACHD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177537/Page1.aspx I. Idaho Transportation Department (ITD): http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178103/Page1.aspx J. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177499/Page1.aspx Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 76 of 117 Page 15 IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the C-C district (see Analysis, Section V for more information). b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent with the future land use map designation of MU-C and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2B-2 in the C-C zoning district. Further, Staff finds the proposed use of the site is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed storage facility will provide a needed service within close proximity to residential uses. Additional retail uses will be provided in the future to contribute to the mix of uses desired in this area. c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed self-service storage facility should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect 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 essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 77 of 117 x cn z 0 � CD 1'^ VJ 0 r C) D 0 u cu N N v N co G N n V cn 0 0 (11 r �. :I_:.�:".�"::��:� UT!..::. --------- '. TV. (11 r �. :I_:.�:".�"::��:� UT!..::. .fir__::. :.p.: �:�.:.:._.. •.�.:.:...Y:".'.:.'. ..�p 3 491 O 10 WR;t a 3 N p L_ L =..................-- .,e..:-:....fie._-':-'-. =: •;_:. .•fir-:.'.:�;';- 1 2t Q Q N O In O =. . - N MON Al - _ - _ - - NW59}!mss-NV(dhye�- •...._.--. ,' `_' B c / =..................-- .,e..:-:....fie._-':-'-. =: •;_:. .•fir-:.'.:�;';- 1 2t Q Q N O In O =. . - N MON Al - _ - _ - - NW59}!mss-NV(dhye�- •...._.--. ,' `_' .,e..:-:....fie._-':-'-. =: •;_:. .•fir-:.'.:�;';- 1 2t Q Q N O In O =. . - N MON Al - _ - _ - - NW59}!mss-NV(dhye�- •...._.--. ,' `_' N N --�-• o0 00 t0 0 pOOp�> 00000 d o0O p s 0 CO W V (A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55,5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ................a•..a.a. N CAO VCII ACT (fOiO (T W �(D OtD-• Wp W tD (T W (A AO W ->•N c WO CTV O D O CD8 0(AT CIV CTN VCT O CA V CP N-+ N 0 ( O N V N N A O --410 m V O N V( WOWM::Z mW W W VCDV CAV W6]N s N NV�UMWNn A A N M OV N W W W W C O O N V a . . a . . . . . • . . . . . ♦ . . . t • • • t i ...................... ' i fII s a• a a a.♦♦ t t s a s s• . x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 • . C. I W m())(A OD W W AIDQ OVi 6Vi V d(D fA0(T (T WNW Ul O i NACT CD CO W N OCD V V V V QA C1 CO N� !tD 0N V O V V tO W A(JIA ONM tAANp W d(JN[A /Z EIDIAN3DAHO -- PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 5 D Item Title: Public Hearing For Verraso Village North (H-2019-0105) By Chad Olsen. Located at 3543 E. Tecate Lane Meeting Notes: �,� \ VA—A- I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.D . Presenter: Estimated Time for P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Verraso Village North (H-2019-0105) by Chad Olsen, Located at 3543 E . Tecate L n. C lic k Here for Applic atio n 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 taf f R eport 10/21/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 78 of 117 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 10/24/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-D Project Name: Verraso Village North MCU Project No.: H-2019-0105 Active: ❑ There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 1 of 1 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=329 10/28/2019 Page 1 STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: 10/24/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Kevin Holmes, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0105 Verraso Village North MCU PROPERTY LOCATION: 3543 E. Tecate Ln., in the NW ¼ of Section 4, Township 3N., Range 1E. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit modification to reduce the number of dwelling units in the multi-family development from 56 to 36 and update the development plan for the site. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.7 Future Land Use Designation MU-R Existing Land Use Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Residential, Multi-Family Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning N/A Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 8/19/2019; 1 attendee History (previous approvals) H-2018-0071; A-2018-0339; H-2016-0132; A-2016-0287; H- 2015-0016; MFP-11-002; FP-09-002; PP-08-007; DA Instrument No. 106137048; AZ-05-061 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) Yes Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 79 of 117 Page 2 Description Details Page  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Access is depicted on the site plan via E. Tecate Ln., a private street; emergency access only via N. Records Ave., a collector street, is proposed. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 80 of 117 Page 3 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Chad Olsen - 12790 W. Telemark Street, Boise, ID 83713 B. Owner: Envision360, LLC - 12790 W. Telemark Street, Boise, ID 83713 C. Representative: Same as applicant IV. NOTICING A. Newspaper notification published on: 10/4/2019 B. Radius notice mailed to properties within 300 feet on: 10/1/2019 C. Applicant posted notice on site on: 10/11/2019 D. Nextdoor posting: 10/1/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS This development is the 4th phase of the Verraso Village multi-family development. This particular site consist of 1.7 acres, zoned C-G with a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of MU-R. The applicant requests a modification to the previously approved conditional use permit (H-2018-0070) to reduce the number of multi-family units from 56 to 36 and update the development plan for the site. The previous approval’s design consisted of a common garage on the first floor and living units on the second and third floors. The 56 units were comprised of one and two bedroom units with private balconies (Exhibit A). The new proposed plan has private two car garages on the bottom story with units above. The 36 units are all three story, three bedroom, and attached in rows along a shared drive. Each unit includes two parking pads outside the private garages. The development’s gross density is 21.3 units per acre, consistent with the MU-R designation. A. Comprehensive Plan Policies This site is designated Mixed Use – Regional (MU-R) on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The purpose of this designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. Fox example, an employment center should have support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as support retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the developments. The developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3-5 of the Comprehensive Plan. This site is proposed to develop with high-density multi-family residential uses at a gross density of 21.2 dwelling units per acre (d.u./acre); anticipated density in the MU-R designations is between 6 and 40 dwelling units to the acre. The proposed development consists of 36 dwelling units on 1.7 acres of land; the structure is proposed to be three stories in height. The proposed multi-family development should contribute to the mix of uses in this area adjacent to retail, employment and restaurant uses near major intersections (Eagle & Ustick Roads and Eagle & Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 81 of 117 Page 4 Fairview Roads), consistent with the plan for MU-R designated areas. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics):  “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B, pg. 56) The proposed multi-family units will contribute to the variety of rental options available within the City.  “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F, pg. 45) City services will be provided and extended with development of this site.  “Require appropriate landscaping and buffers along transportation corridor (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.) A 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer is required along N. Records Avenue, a collector street.  “Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels.” (3.06.01F, pg. 53) The proposed multi-family development should be compatible with existing multi-family residential units to the south.  “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D) Access is proposed via E. Tecate Ln., a previously approved private street along the site’s north boundary. No public access is provided to N. Records Ave., a collector 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) The proposed high-density development is located near major access thoroughfares [N. Eagle Road (State Highway 55) and E. Ustick Road & E. Fairview Ave. (both arterial streets)] and is within walking distance of Kleiner Park, a 60 acre City park, and The Village at Meridian shopping center to the south. B. Specific Use Standards The specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 apply to development of this site as follows: A minimum of 80 square feet of private useable open space is required to be provided for each unit. Private balconies are proposed for each unit that meets this requirement. Development with 20 units or more are required to provide a property management office, maintenance storage area, central mailbox location (including provisions for parcel mail) that provides safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access, and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. The property management and leasing office and maintenance storage area is located in the northwest corner of this site. A central mailbox location is depicted on the site plan next to the leasing office. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict the location(s) of the directory & map of the development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 82 of 117 Page 5 At a minimum, 250 square feet (s.f.) of outdoor common open space is required for each unit containing more than 500 and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area. All but one of the proposed units are within this range at 1,199 s.f.. Therefore, a minimum of 9,100 s.f. (or 0.20 of an acre) of common open space is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C. The applicant proposes a 20-foot wide strip of landscaped area along the entire southern boundary of the property, a 50’ x 20’ central open space, and a dog park located at the southwest corner of the property to meet the common open space requirements. These areas comprise approximately 10,582 s.f. (0.24 of an acre), meeting the UDC requirement. For multi-family developments between 20 and 75 units, three amenities are required to be provided with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D.1. The applicant proposes an approximately 20’ x 69’ pet area at the west end of the building and a pet parlor, both of which staff would classify as quality of life amenities. Staff recommends the addition of at least one other amenity for either the open space or recreation categories. Per UDC 11-4-3- 27-D3, the Commission does have the latitude to consider other improvements as long as they provide a similar level of amenity. 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 three-feet wide and have an evergreen shrub with a minimum mature height of 24-inches for every three linear feet of foundation. The remainder of the area shall be landscaped with ground cover plans. The landscape plan submitted with this application meets this requirement. The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. The applicant shall submit documentation of compliance with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. C. Dimensional Standards The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 and for multi-family developments listed in 11-4-3- 27. The setbacks for the C-G district are 0; however, the 20-foot required street buffer along N. Records Way will serve as a setback on the east side of the development. D. Access Access is depicted on the site plan via E. Tecate Ln., a private street; emergency access only is proposed via N. Records Ave., a collector street. E. Parking: The UDC requires off-street vehicle parking to be provided on the site in accord with the standards listed in Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family developments. Based on 36, three bedroom units, a minimum of 36 covered and 36 uncovered (or covered) spaces are required for a total of 72 spaces; a total of 72 covered vehicle spaces and 72 uncovered are proposed, double what is required by code. All but two of these spaces are reserved for the individual units. The number of proposed parking spaces complies with UDC standards. One bicycle parking space is required to be provided for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces or portion thereof, per UDC 11-3C-6G. Based on a total of 144 proposed parking spaces, a minimum of six bicycle parking spaces should be provided for the development. The site plan does not depict any bicycle parking. A minimum of six bicycle-parking facilities, built to the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 83 of 117 Page 6 standards of UDC 11-3C-5C, shall be included on the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. F. Sidewalks/Parkways: A five-foot wide detached sidewalk exists on this site along N. Records Avenue in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. The site plan depicts a four-foot wide attached sidewalk along E. Tecate Ln., a private street. The western most building on Tecate Ln. depicts landscaping that could obstruct pedestrians walking to the front entrances of the units or to the adjacent commercial area. The applicant should remove the parking pads from the rear of these units, widen the drive aisle from 20 feet to 25 feet and shift the building further to the south to provide additional open space on the site and ensure safe access for traveling pedestrians in the development. Even with the reduction in parking, the applicant still exceeds the parking standards of the UDC. G. Landscaping: A minimum 20-foot wide landscaped street buffer is required (as proposed) along N. Records Avenue, a collector street, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. One tree is required per 35-feet per the aforementioned standards listed in code. The landscape plan shall be revised to include a minimum of five trees along N. Records Ave. A minimum of two tree species will be used to meet this requirement, in accord with Table 11-3B-5-3. H. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. New fencing is depicted on the site plan but no details are provided. A detail of the fences shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. I. Utilities and drainage: All utilities and drainage facilities are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-18 and UDC 11-3A-21. J. Lighting: All outdoor lighting shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11. K. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): The applicant has submitted several conceptual building elevations for the multi-family structures within this development. These applications may not be the ones the applicant intends to build. They were provided for illustrative purposes to depict the specific design elements for the development. Further refinement will occur at staff level during review of the design review application submitted with a concurrent CZC application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit modification application in accord with the Findings in Section IX per the provisions in Section VIII. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 84 of 117 Page 7 VII. EXHIBITS A. Previously Approved Site Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 85 of 117 Page 8 B. Proposed Site Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 86 of 117 Page 9 C. Proposed Landscape Plan D. Conceptual Elevations (not approved) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 87 of 117 Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 88 of 117 Page 11 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Division 1. Development of the site shall general comply with the site plan, landscape plan, and conceptual building elevations included in Exhibit A, the conditions of approval listed herein, the provisions of the development agreement (Inst. #106137048) and amended development agreements (H-2015-0016, Inst. #2016-106279; H-2016-0132, Inst. #2017-056982). 2. The architectural character of the proposed multi-family structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 3. The developer shall comply with the specific use standards for multi-family developments listed in UDC 11-4-3-27, including but not limited to the following: a. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. b. The development is required to record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. The applicant shall submit documentation of compliance with this requirement with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 4. The applicant shall provide one more amenity from the categories of open space or recreation listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D, in addition to the two amenities proposed (dog park and dog parlor). 5. Any fencing constructed on the site shall be consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7. 6. The interior parking area shall comply with the required stall and drive aisle dimensions listed in UDC Table 11-3C-5. 7. The site plan, dated 06/11/2019, included in Exhibit VII.B shall be revised as follows: a. Revise Note 6 with correct unit and building count. b. Depict the location(s) of the directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. c. Depict bicycle parking as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C; a minimum of six bicycle parking spaces should be provided for the development. d. The western most building on Tecate Ln. depicts landscaping that could obstruct pedestrians walking to the front entrances of the units or to the adjacent commercial area. The applicant shall remove the parking pads from the rear of these units, widen the drive aisle from 20 feet to 25 feet and shift the building Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 89 of 117 Page 12 further to the south to provide additional open space on the site in front of the structure to ensure safe access for traveling pedestrians in the development. 8. The landscape plan, dated 06/28/2019, included in Exhibit VII.C shall be revised as follows: a. A minimum of five trees, of at least two different species, shall be added to the twenty-foot landscape buffer along N. Records Ave. b. The two-gallon “Evergreen Shrubs” used on the plan shall be identified by its species name. 9. The applicant is required to submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications for approval from the Planning Division prior to submittal of a building permit application. 10. The applicant shall submit a drainage plan to Meridian Land Development for review and approval to ensure adequate drainage can be maintained on site in accord with UDC 11-3A-18. 11. Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 12. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2) years to commence the 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. 13. 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 st ructure until the Building Official has issued a Certificate of Occupancy. B. Public Works 1. A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat and/or building permit application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. Streetlights are required on public roads, including E. Tecate Lane. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 90 of 117 Page 13 IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E): The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and the dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district as required by the UDC (see Analysis Section V for more information). B. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent and harmonious with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this site. C. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions listed in this report, the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the 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 (see Analysis Section V for more information). D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services 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. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds the proposed use will not involve excessive traffic, noise, or odors that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare. 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. (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 in this area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 91 of 117 EIDIAN+_- � J PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA October 24, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 8 C Item Title: Public Hearing Continued from October 3, 2019 for Goddard Creek Townhomes (H-2019-0068) By SI Construction. Located at the NW Corner of W. McMillan Rd and N. Goddard Creek Way Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.E . Presenter: S onya Allen Estimated Time for P resentation: Title of I tem - Public Hearing Continued from October 3, 2019 for Goddard C reek Townhomes (H-2019-0068) by S I C onstruction, L ocated at the NW Corner of W. M cM illan Rd. and N. Goddard Creek Way C lic k Here for Applic atio n 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 taf f R eport 10/23/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 92 of 117 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 10/24/2019 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-E Project Name: Goddard Creek Townhomes MDA, PP, RZ, PS Project No.: H-2019-0068 Active: ❑ Page 1 of 2 Go Back To List Export To Excel http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=342 10/28/2019 City - Signature I Wish To Sign In Address State- For Against Neutral Name Testify Date/Time Zip 5030 N Goddard Janie 10/24/2019 Creek Way X Pollmann 3:21:03 PM Meridian ID Daniel 2382 w Apgar 10/24/2019 X Fisher Creek Drive 5:52:24 PM Penny 2382 W Apgar 10/24/2019 X Fisher Creek Dr 5:54:16 PM 2347 W Apgar Angie 10/24/2019 Creek Dr Meridian X Ludlow 5:55:38 PM I'd 83646 Harper 10/24/2019 X Dohse 5:56:14 PM Nick 10/24/2019 X Dohse 5:56:34 PM Rodney 10/24/2019 X Ludlow 5:57:03 PM 1762 west canyon Chris 10/24/2019 ranch street X Williams 6:37:45 PM meridian idaho Go Back To List Export To Excel http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=342 10/28/2019 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools © 2019 - City of Meridian, Idaho Page 2 of 2 http://internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInFormDetails?id=342 10/28/2019 Page 1 HEARING DATE: October 24, 2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0068 Goddard Creek Townhomes LOCATION: Northwest corner of W. McMillan Rd. and N. Goddard Creek Way. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION  Modification to the recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #102012598) to allow the development of single family attached homes and townhomes instead of offices;  Rezone of 5.03 acres of land from the R-4 to the R-15 zoning district; and,  Preliminary Plat consisting of 41 residential building lots and 8 common lots on 4.62 in an proposed R-15 zone; and  Private street to provide access to the townhome development. STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 93 of 117 Page 2 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 4.62 Future Land Use Designation MU-C Existing Land Use vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential Current Zoning R-4 Proposed Zoning R-15 Lots (# and type; bldg/common) 41 SFR building/8 common Number of Residential Units (type of units) 41 (SF attached and townhome units) Density (gross & net) 9.52 units/acre (gross); 11.92 (net) Open Space (acres, total [%] / buffer / qualified) 1.045 acres, 22.62% Amenities Children’s play structure, pedestrian pathways, covered picnic and barbeque area, passive open space and dog park Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) None Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: February 7, 2019; 10 attendees History (previous approvals) This property was granted annexation, preliminary plat, and a conditional use permit as part of the Lochsa Falls Subdivision in 2002 (AZ-02-010, PP-02-009, CUP 02-012) and has a development agreement (Instrument #103012598). These approvals granted office uses in the R-4 district. In 2017, the property received CPAM approval from Office and High Density Residential to Mixed-use Community. A PP and FP were also approved. A concurrent RZ, CUP and MDA was proposed to develop the property with 76 multi-family units however, that request was withdrawn. A PP and FP were also approved (H-2017-0007 and H-2018-0014) to develop the self-storage protion of the development. Written Testimony Written response from 9 residents in opposition of the project (see public record). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 94 of 117 Page 3 Community Metrics Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 95 of 117 Page 4 Description Details Page Ada County Highway District  Staff report (yes/no) Yes  Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No West Ada School District  Distance (elem, ms, hs) Willow Creek Elementary: +/- 1 miles Sawtooth Middle School: +/- 1.2 miles Rocky Mountain High School: +/- 1.1 miles  Capacity of Schools Willow Creek Elementary: 650 students Sawtooth Middle School: 1000 students Rocky Mountain High School: 1800 students  # of Students Enrolled Willow Creek Elementary: 685 students Sawtooth Middle School: 1043 students Rocky Mountain High School: 2485 students  Anticipated school aged children generated by this development The project is anticipated to add 35 students. Wastewater  Distance to Sewer Services 0  Sewer Shed White Drain Trunkshed  Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s 41  WRRF Declining Balance 13.69  Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facili ty Plan Yes  Impacts & Concerns None Water  Distance to Water Services 0  Pressure Zone 2  Estimated Project Water ERU’s 41 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 96 of 117 Page 5 B. Project Area Maps  Water Quality Concerns Yes – The current plan results in two 330 LF dead ends which is a concern for water quality. This concern can be mitigated by looping the water mains together at the north edge of the site and connecting to existing water main in W Apgar Creek Ln.  Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes  Impacts & Concerns Applicant to extend and connect proposed water on the east side of the site to the existing water in W Apgar Creek Ln to provide redundant connection. Also, loop proposed water mains at the north edge of the site. Applicant to eliminate water mains in shared drives, replace with water services. Connect water to the north. Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 97 of 117 Page 6 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Owner: Gibson Family Revocable Living Trust PO Box 88 Notus, ID 83656 B. Representative: Scott Noriyuki, Northside Management 6810 Fairhill Pl. Boise, ID 83714 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 9/13/2019 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 9/17/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 10/14/2019 Nextdoor posting 9/17/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is designated MU-C on the future land use map. The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the Zoning Map Planned Development Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 98 of 117 Page 7 urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings. Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use - Neighborhood areas, but not as large as in Mixed Use – Regional areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to, but also walk or bike to (up to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. When the FLUM was changed in 2017, staff had analyzed the viability of three different land uses on the subject property. At the time, of the FLUM change, the plan consisted of multi-family and a self- service storage facility. In determining the appropriateness of the land use change staff determined that other commercial and office uses approved next to the storage and multi-family development would serve as the third land use type to support the requested FLUM change. Prior to City Council’s action on the previous development, the applicant of the multi-family project withdrew their CUP application. Therefore, the subject 4.62 acre parcel is still governed by the original development agreement which allows office to develop on the property. The applicant now desires to develop the site with 41 single family attached and townhome units. Staff has evaluated the existing land uses and zoning in the area to determine if this stand-alone residential project is attainable. This area is primarily developed with single-family homes with the exception of the apartment complex to the north. Because the applicant is proposing to provide housing diversity in the area and include useable open space and amenities as part of the development, staff believes the plan is consistent with the MU-C designation. The project also falls within the target density of 6 and 15 dwelling units per acre; as proposed gross density is 8.87 dwelling units to the acre. DESIGN: The design of structures on this site is required to comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual. The development should incorporate high quality architectural design and materials consistent with the MU-C designation. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & ACTION ITEMS: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property (staff analysis in italics):  “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 development will contribute to the variety of residential categories that currently exist in this area (i.e. low and medium density). Staff is unaware of how “affordable” the units will be.  “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) Because of its location in close proximity to nearby shopping centers (the corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. McMillan Road), and major transportation corridors, this property is  “Require common area in all subdivisions.” (3.07.02F) The subject property is under 5 acres in size and the UDC does not require that the applicant provide common open space. To ensure the project is compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods, the applicant is proposing to provide 24 percent common open space for the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 99 of 117 Page 8 development and include three amenities as follows: tot lot, covered picnic area and dog park.  “Amend the Unified Development Code and Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to ensure a wide variety of housing types can be developed and properly zoned and land is available” (3.07.01A) The area in the vicinity of W. McMillan Road and N. Ten Mile Road is limited in housing options. The proposed project would promote housing diversity and provide greater opportunities for residents to live near their place of employment and shopping centers.  “Adopt land use designations that will allow for housing opportunities for all income levels.” (3.07.01D) Few of the major employment areas within the City are adequately supported with enough housing options. Density near employment centers allow for workforce housing and promote community resiliency, potentially reducing commute times and expenses, and allowing for increased community and economic engagement.  “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D) The UDC (11-3A-3) restricts access to arterial streets when access is available from a local street. Access tto and from the development is provide along the north boundary via a private street (W. Apgar Creek Lane). Access is not proposed to McMillan Road. REZONE The applicant requests to rezone of the 5.03 acres of land from the R-4 zone to the R-15 zone consistent with the MU-C FLUM designation. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION The applicant is requesting to modify the recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #102012598) to development the site with 41 single family attached homes and townhomes instead of offices. The applicant is requesting to exclude the subject property from the boundary recorded DA and enter a new one that governs the site. Staff’s recommended DA provisions are include in Exhibit VIII. below. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat consists of 41 building lots and 8 common lots on 4.62 acres in a proposed R-15 zone. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. The proposed plat complies with these standards. Access (UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed via a private street, W. Apgar Creek Lane and access via McMillan Road is prohibited. Therefore, internal private streets are proposed on Lot 34, Block 1 for internal access within the development. Private streets are not typically intended for single-family developments; however, because the development is proposed to be designed with a common mew and access is restricted to McMillan Road, staff is of the opinion the internal private street is appropriate. However, the townhome units proposed for lots 36-49 should be oriented with the front of the units on the mew. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 100 of 117 Page 9 Private streets are required to comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private street is 24 feet wide with 5-foot sidewalks on both sides. To ensure adequate guest parking is provided, the applicant is proposing a guest parking area along the north side of the private street across from Lots 16-20, Block 1. Additionally, the private street standards prohibit common driveways from taking access from private streets, unless approved by the director with an alternative compliance application. Alternative compliance has been requested in accord with 11-3F-4A.6, to allow the two (2) common driveways to be accessed off the private street. Because this a mew development and is a small compact, infill development, the Director approves the request for alternative compliance. Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3) All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. Two (2) common driveways are proposed that comply with UDC standards. Common driveways should be a maximum of 150’ in length or less, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Dept. An exhibit is required to be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures. Driveways for abutting properties that are not taking access from the common driveway(s) should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer. A perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveway(s) is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the easement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat. Signage should be provided at the ends of the common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes as requested by the Fire Department. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Landscaping is required within street buffers (11-3B-7C), and within common open space areas (11-3G-3E) in accord with UDC standards. Note: The only required landscaping for the site is the 25-foot wide landscape buffer along McMillan Road. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G-3): The UDC does not require the applicant to provide any qualifying open space because the project is less than 5 acres. However, the applicant recognizes that this is an infill development and the surrounding residential developments have ample open space. In order to complement the surrounding developments, the applicant is proposing to provide approximately 20% of qualified open space within the development; this also includes the following amenities: tot lot, covered picnic shelter and dog park. The existing utilities to serve this development are stubbed in from McMillan Road. The alignment of these utility stubs are offset from the central open lot (Lot 18). In order to facilitate, the logical expansion of City services, staff recommends that the applicant relocate this open space along the east boundary of lot 20. Further, the applicant should coordinate with the fire department to determine if the access road for the Public Works Department can be utilized as the secondary emergency access. Staff is supportive of the amenity package and qualified open space for this development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 101 of 117 Page 10 Parking (UDC 11-3C): Parking for single-family dwellings is required based on the number of bedrooms per unit. For 1- bedroom units, a minimum of 2 spaces per unit are required with at least one of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad. For 2-3 bedroom units, a minimum of 4 spaces per unit are required with at least 2 of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pads. Each of the units are required to comply with the parking standards set forth in UDC 11-3C-6. Because of the proposed 24-foot wide street section, on street parking is restricted. As mentioned above, the applicant is providing 16 guest parking stalls to provide additional parking for the development. Parking stalls are required to measure 9’ x 19’ in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-5. NOTE: Parking is concern in the area. The City has received multiple complaints from residents in the area because the existing apartment complex does not have adequate parking. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 7. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII-B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for each lot within the development. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations are proposed as shown for the townhomes. The applicant has not provided elevations for the single-family attached units. As noted above, staff also recommends that the applicant orient the front of townhomes abutting the mew. The townhomes submitted with the application do not contemplate this design. Therefore, staff recommends that the applicant provide three distinct elevations for the development. Prior to the Commission hearing, the applicant should provide the two additional elevations planned for the development. All structures within the development are required to comply with the residential design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. An administrative design review application must be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications; one design review application may be submitted for the overall development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 102 of 117 Page 11 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone, development agreement modification and preliminary plat and the Director approved the private street and alternative compliance applications per the conditions included in Section VIII. in accord with the Findings in Section IX . Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 103 of 117 Page 12 VII. EXHIBITS A. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 104 of 117 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 105 of 117 Page 14 B. Preliminary Plat (date: 10/15/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 106 of 117 Page 15 C. Landscape Plan (date: 10/18/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 107 of 117 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 108 of 117 Page 17 D. Rendering & Conceptual Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 109 of 117 Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 110 of 117 Page 19 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. Within six (6) months of Council’s approval of the findings for the rezone and prior to submittal of a final plat application, the developer shall sign and obtain Council approval of the development agreement with the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall comply with the preliminary plat, landscape plan, color rendering and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated 10/15/19 shall be revised as follows: a. The existing utilities to serve this development are stubbed in from McMillan Road. The alignment of these utility stubs are offset from the central open lot (Lot 18). In order to facilitate, the logical expansion of City services, the applicant shall relocate this open space on the east boundary of Lot 20. Further, the applicant shall coordinate with the fire department to determine if the access road for the Public Works Department can be utilized as the secondary emergency access. b. Depict zero lot lines on those lots that have shared walls. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated 10/18/19 shall be revised as follows: a. Provide the details of the site amenities with the submittal of the final plat application. b. Applicant shall relocate Lot 18 further to the east per site specific condition 2a. above. c. Applicant shall provide the common open space and amenities as proposed. d. All fencing constructed in the development shall comply with UDC 11-3A-7. 4. Private streets within the development are required to comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Exception: Alternative Compliance was approved to UDC 11-3F-4A.6 to allow the common driveways off of the private street. 5. Parking is only allowed in the designated guest parking area as shown on the attached plans. The private streets shall be posted with “no parking” signs. 6. Off-street parking shall be provided for this site as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-5 and 11-3C-6. 7. An exhibit shall be submitted with the final plat application for the lots accessed by the common driveway that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D. Driveways for abutting properties that are not taking access from the common driveway(s) shall be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 111 of 117 Page 20 8. Provide address signage at the street for homes on Lots 11-14 and 21-23, Block 1 accessed by the common driveway for emergency wayfinding purposes. 9. A perpetual ingress/egress easement shall be filed with the Ada County Recorder for the common driveway, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 10. All structures within the development are required to comply with the residential design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. An administrative design review application shall be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications; one design review application may be submitted for the overall development. 11. The front of the townhome units proposed on Lots 36-49, Block 1shall be oriented towards the mew. 12. The applicant shall provide three (3) distinct elevations for the development. Prior to the Commission hearing, the applicant shall provide the two additional elevations proposed for the development. B. PUBLIC WORKS Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. As currently proposed, the water and sewer serving this project connects to existing mains in W. McMillan Road and then traverses northerly into the development. Meridian city standards requires a minimum of a 14-foot wide compacted gravel roadways over each utility within a 20-foot wide easement (30-feet for two utilities). No large trees are allowed within the easement area. Applicant should reconsider the location of Common Lot 20, Block 1 to be in alignment with the existing sewer and water mainline stubs. 2. The current plan results in two 330 LF dead ends which is a concern for water quality. This concern shall be mitigated by looping the water mains together at the north edge of the site and connecting to existing water main in W Apgar Creek Lane. Applicant to eliminate water mains in shared drives, replace with water services. General Conditions of Approval 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 112 of 117 Page 21 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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 UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 17. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 113 of 117 Page 22 18. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Work with the addressing agent to install city approved signs at the common driveways. 2. The Common driveways shall be signed "No Parking Fire Lane". 3. Fire Flow: One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3,600 square feet require a fire- flow of 1,000 gallons per minute for a duration of 1 hours to service the entire project. One and two family dwellings in excess of 3,600 square feet require a minimum fire flow as specified in Appendix B of the International Fire Code. Fire Hydrant spacing shall be provided as required by Appendix C of the International Fire Code. 4. Roadways: All entrances, internal roads, drive aisles, and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28’ inside and 48’ outside, per International Fire Code Section 503.2.4. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 114 of 117 Page 23 5. Roadways: Private Alleys and Fire Lanes shall have a 20’ wide improved surface capable of supporting an imposed load of 80,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked “No Parking Fire Lane” per International Fire Code Sections 503.3 & D103.6. 6. Roadways: To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project which serves more than 30 homes, as set forth in International Fire Code Section D107.1. The two entrances should be separated by no less than ½ the diagonal measurement of the full development as set forth in International Fire Code Section D104.3. The applicant shall provide an additional stub street to the property. 7. Roadways: Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have traffic calming devices installed without prior approval of the Fire Code Official. National Fire Protection IFC 503.4.1. 8. Access: Secondary emergency access routes shall be protected from illegal entry by a gate or collapsible bollards as set forth in IFC 503.5. An example would be the MaxiForce Collapsible bollards that is hydrant wrench activated or an approved equal. 4. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT (WASD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177333/Page1.aspx 5. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/177314/Page1.aspx 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; Staff finds the proposed density and associated R-15 zoning designation is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan in regard to the MU-C future land use map designation for this site. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds that the proposed map amendment and subsequent development will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the northern portion of the City. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 115 of 117 Page 24 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. Because this application is for a rezone, this finding is not applicable. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT (UDC 11-6B-6) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; Staff finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, transportation, and circulation. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section VII, of the Staff Report for more information. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property upon development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 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. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. C. PRIVATE STREET (UDC 11-3F-4) In order to approve the application, the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 116 of 117 Page 25 The design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. See analysis in Section V for more information. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons, property, or uses in the vicinity; and Staff does not anticipate the proposed private streets would cause any hazard, nuisance or other detriment to persons, property or uses in the vicinity if they are designed as proposed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B. 6. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The location of the private streets does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the regional transportation plan. Both ACHD policy and the UDC prohibits access to McMillan Road if local street access is provided. With the development of the property to the north, staff finds that local street access has been provided via a private street. 4. The proposed residential development (if applicable) is a mew or gated development. The proposed residential development includes a mew. D. ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE 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 Access to this development is provided by a private street and the UDC restricts access to McMillan Road, an arterial street. Because the property is not served by internal public streets, the Director finds strict adherence to the UDC is not feasible and approves the request for the common driveways to take access from the private streets as proposed. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the infill development proposed by the applicant as a whole provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements in that it contributes to the unique character of the area, provides open space and amenities in excess of UDC standards and provides diversity in housing types available within the City. 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 means will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use/character of the surrounding properties and will actually contribute to the character and variety of housing types in this area of the City. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 24, 2019 – Page 117 of 117