Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2020-01-02
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, January 2, 2020 at 6:00 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance _X__Lisa Holland _X__And rew S eal _X_Rhonda McCarvel ___Vacant 2. Adoption of Agenda - Adopted 3. Consent Agenda [Action Item] - A. Approve Minutes of December 19, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Magical Minds Daycare (H- 2019-0119) by Richard and Karena Gardner, Located at 2571 E. Taormina Dr. C. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Off the Field (H-2019- 0112) by Off the Field, LLC, Located at 2204 E. Lanark St. 4. Action Items Land Use Public Hearing Process: After the Public Hearing is opened the staff report will be presented by the assigned city p lann er. 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 Sky Mesa Highlands (H-2019-0123) by HHS Construction, LLC, Located at the NW corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. 1. Request: Annexation of 31.96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots and 2 other lots on 30.6 acres of land in the proposed R-4 zoning district. Recommended approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled February 4, 2020 B. Public Hearing for Hensley Station (H-2019-0120) by Northern Land Development, LLC, Located at 462 N. Black Cat Rd. 1. Request: Annexation of 7.17 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 65 building lots and 6 common lots on 6 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Recommended approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled February 4, 2020 5. Other Items A. Election of Commission Officers [Action Item] Elected Chairperson: Ryan Fitzgerald Elected Vice Chairperson: Lisa Holland Meeting Adjourned at 7:54 PM Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting January 2, 2020. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of January 2, 2020, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald. Members Present: Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli and Commissioner Reid Olsen. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Sonya Allen and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland ___X___ Reid Olsen __X___ Andrew Seal ___X___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Rhonda McCarvel ___X___ Bill Cassinelli ______ Vacant Fitzgerald: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning meeting for the date of January 2nd 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 don't have any changes to the agenda, so -- so can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented. Cassinelli: So moved. Milam: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of December 19, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 4 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 2 of 40 B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Magical Minds Daycare (H-2019-0119) by Richard and Karena Gardner, Located at 2571 E. Taormina Dr. C. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Off the Field (H-2019- 0112) by Off the Field, LLC, Located at 2204 E. Lanark St. Fitzgerald: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have three items on the Consent Agenda. The approval of minutes for December 19th, 2019, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Magical Minds Daycare, H-2019-0119, and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Off- The-Field, H-2019-0112. Would anyone like any of those removed from a Consent Agenda? If not, can I get a motion to approve the Consent Agenda? Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: That was quick. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same? Motion passes. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Fitzgerald: At this time I would like to explain the public hearing process that we go through this evening. We will open each item individually and , then, start with the staff report. The staff will report their findings regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code with the staff's recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case for the approval of their application and respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so and, then, after the applicant has finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Hopefully as we talked about it, there is an iPad in the back. If you haven't signed up, please, do so if you would like to testify for an application this evening. We have two applications that kind -- or surround large areas. Is there anyone here representing an HOA this evening? No? Okay. So, we will skip over that. After all testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to have an opportunity to respond to any public testimony or questions and, then, close the discussion. At that time we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have a chance to deliberate and hopefully make a recommendation to City Council on -- on the application presented to us. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands (H-2019-0123) by HHS Construction, LLC, Located at the NW corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 5 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 3 of 40 1. Request: Annexation of 31.96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots and 2 other lots on 30.6 acres of land in the proposed R-4 zoning district. Fitzgerald: So, with that let's open the public hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands, file number H-2019-0123, and we will start with Sonya and the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The first application for you tonight is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 30.6 acres of land. It's zoned to RUT in Ada county and is located at the northwest corner of South Eagle Road and East Lake Hazel Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the west are single family residential homes zoned R-4. To the north is single family residential in the development process. Sky Mesa Subdivision, zoned R-8 and another parcel zoned RUT in Ada county. To the east is Eagle Road and single family residential properties zoned R-4 and R-15. And to the south is rural residential properties zoned RUT in Ada county. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is low density residential, which calls for three or fewer units per acre. The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 31 .96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district for the development of 74 new single family residential detached homes at a gross density of 2.45 units per acre, which is consistent with the low density residential future land use map designation. There is an existing home and accessory structure on this site. The home is proposed to remain on a lot in the proposed subdivision and that is -- if you can see my pointer here, it's this lot right here. The preliminary plat is proposed as shown consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots, and two other lots on 30.6 acres of land. Originally the plat was planned to develop in one phase, but it's now proposed to develop in two phases as shown on the plan there on the right. The average lot size in the development is 11,000 square feet, with a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. Access is proposed via the extension of stub streets to the north in Sky Mesa Subdivision. Via East Taconic Drive from Eagle Road. Emergency access only is proposed via Eagle Road and that's in the location noted here. The existing home is seeking a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3A3 from City Council for their access driveway via Eagle Road to remain until such time as the property redevelops . At such time access would be taken internally from within the subdivision and the access would be closed. The UDC does require new uses to take access from internally within the subdivision , so that's the reason for the request for the waiver. Detached sidewalks are proposed along all internal streets and along Eagle and Lake Hazel roads. Staff recommends the sidewalk is extended across the frontage of the lot adjacent to Eagle Road where the existing home was proposed to remain. A 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along Eagle and Lake Hazel roads. Staff is recommending the buffer is extended across the frontage of the lot adjacent to Eagle in a common lot where the existing home is proposed to remain, except for the area where the driveway is located if Council approves the waiver for their driveway to remain. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space and site amenities and one site amenity is required to be provided within this development. A total Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 6 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 4 of 40 of 6.55 acres or 21 percent of qualified open space, consisting of half the street buffer along Eagle and Lake Hazel roads, eight foot wide parkways along internal streets and common areas over 50 feet by 100 feet in area are proposed in excess of UDC standards. A large part of the common area includes two areas with significant slo pes that are proposed to be landscaped in accord with UDC standards to count toward the qualified open space standards and that is these light green areas here and here along the southern boundary. A 675 foot long pedestrian pathway is depicted on the landscape plan through the common area on Lot 14, Block 3, and that is this area right here. Because it does not connect to an existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle route outside the development as designated on the pathways master plan, it does not count as a qualified site amenity. Therefore, the applicant is now proposing to not provide a pathway in this area. Because no other qualified site amenities are proposed and because removal of the pathway will essentially make the common area unusable, staff is not in favor of removal of this pathway. The development is proposed to be included in the Sky Mesa homeowners association and is going to be granted access to all amenities in that development, consisting of two swimming pools and clubhouses, sports fields, consisting of a ball field, basketball court, walking path, playground structure, and a swing set. The distance to these amenities range from 950 to 2,400 feet away from the northwest corner of this development. Because this will, essentially, be another phase of Sky Mesa and amenities were provided above the minimum standards for that development , staff is amenable to the applicant's request, provided that pathway is still provided within that linear common open area. The Grimmett Lateral runs along the west and north boundaries of this site within a 30 foot wide irrigation easement that is proposed to remain open on the west side and be piped along the north side . Along the west boundary this easement lies approximately 17 feet off the property line, resulting in approximately a 47 foot wide encroachment and building setback for the affected lots. So , you can see that area and see my pointer here clear along this boundary here. Fencing is proposed along the east side of the easement line within building lots, resulting in a very large area that will be unusable for homeowners of these lots that they will have to pay taxes on, although it may provide an amenity of sorts with the wildlife. And this is just a side note . When the East Ridge Estates Subdivision directly to the west was approved on the adjacent property in 2017, Council did approve a waiver for the easement to be located within adjacent building lots on that side . So, just a side note, but -- the UDC 11-3A-6E requires irrigation easements wider than ten feet to be included in a common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area , unless modified by City Council at a public hearing. The applicant is requesting approval of a waiver to th is requirement to allow the easement to be located within adjacent building lots. If Council does not approve the waiver, the easement should be placed in common lots. UDC 11 -3A-6B requires all laterals to be piped, unless used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1. The applicant is requesting Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to leave the Grimmett Lateral open. Council may grant a waiver if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. If Council does not approve the requested waiver the lateral should be piped. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that demonstrate the architecture and building materials for single and two story structures proposed within development that include a mix of materials and colors with stone veneer wainscot. Because all of the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 7 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 5 of 40 proposed units are detached they are not subject to designer view. Written testimony has been received on this application from Rick Thurber. He is a property owner that abuts the southwest corner of their proposed development. He is requesting the proposed irrigation system, which will replace the current one, has at least 60 psi to operate his sprinkler system, instead of the 52 psi proposed. And he also request homes constructed on lots directly north of his property be restricted to a single story in height , so as not to obstruct his views and similarly trees that are planted be of a variety they won't grow tall to obstruct his views. Todd Tucker, the applicant, also provided a response to the staff report and I will just let the applicant cover that in his presentation. Staff is recommending approval with a requirement of a development agreement per the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Sonya, can you kind of clarify those lots on the west side and that easement -- I'm -- I guess that's the -- yeah, the -- those -- there you go. Those lots. Can you cover that again how that -- how that will affect those lots that -- you mentioned they are going to be unusable for the homeowners, but yet they are on their lot, so they will be -- they will be taxed on that. Can you just clear all that up for me , please? Or expound on it I should say. Allen: Well, as I stated, they -- the code requires this area to be located in a common lot, unless Council waives it. The applicant is requesting a waiver, although the applicant did I believe say in their response that they were amenable to placing it in a common lot now, but I -- I'm -- I'm not sure how that leaves their buildable area for their lot. So, I would rather them speak to that. But, yeah, it creates a 47 foot, approximate, encroachment within -- within those building lots, just as I said. I'm not sure if there is any other clarification that I'm not addressing. Cassinelli: If it -- and with that if it becomes a common lot what -- how does that impact the lot sizes that -- Allen: It will exclude that area. Cassinelli: Correct. But will they be -- will they -- will they still meet the minimum lot sizes? Allen: They will be required to. I haven't done the calculations. I assume they will, but I haven't done the calcs. Cassinelli: Okay. What I -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 8 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 6 of 40 Allen: If they don't they will have to make revisions to the lots to comply. Fitzgerald: I think the history of this neighborhood is they are -- if they are fenced off they become like tumbleweed entrapments and they aren't well taken care of and so that if they are not in a common lot it allows the people to still take care of them, so they don't fall into disrepair, because I think that was -- some of these had that problem in the past and that they became giant tumbleweed traps and they just sat there and vegetation grew and it was a fire hazard and so I think that was why the Council gave them a waiver in the past. But Sonya can probably clarify that further. But I think there is -- there is some that have them and some that are fenced off with -- with a common lot behind them and I don't think the common lot works that well. Allen: Chairman, the applicant was also considering improving it as a water amenity and placing it in a common lot, would be the ideal situation. Then it would be maintained better. But there are parameters in our code that have certain requirements for the water amenity so far as slopes and depth and -- and all that. So, that is something the applicant can speak to a little further, too. Fitzgerald: So, is there alternative compliance that can go in this -- Allen: It's just a Council waiver. Fitzgerald: Okay. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: A following onto that. So, if it's covered, then, if -- if that is covered, then, essentially, the fencing is not required or anything, it just becomes grass or a backyard; is that correct? Or is it still something that has to be fenced off and maintained? Allen: Height -- if the irrigation -- if the easement holder will allow grass that is a possibility, yes. However, there still is an easement, I believe, that will exist there. So, I'm not sure what that will entail. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland; Mr. Chair. Sonya, the -- the lot that's remaining on Eagle Road, how large is that parcel? Allen: The applicant can probably speak to that . I don't have a full size plat here to tell you. I'm sorry. Holland: That's okay. We can ask when the applicant comes up. Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 9 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 7 of 40 Fitzgerald: Sonya, do you -- in the phasing -- I could probably ask the applicant this, too, but was there a discussion with fire department on secondary access and where that's going to take place for the phasing? Allen: Yes, Chairman, Commissioners, the -- the fire department did include in their conditions that they would have to provide a secondary emergency access that's approvable by the fire department for anything over the -- I believe it 30 homes. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Allen: So, this is where the emergency access is. It's in second phase. If they do phase the development, then, they will have to construct that access. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions for staff? Not at this time at least. Would the applicant like to come forward. Mr. Tucker, would you like to come join us, sir. Tucker: Sonya, can I control it from here or do you run it? Allen: You control it. Tucker: Okay. Is this supposed to be on? Allen: Yeah. Is it not on? Tucker: No. Allen: Oh, I'm sorry. Try to get that on for you. Give us just a minute. Fitzgerald: Todd, we will start your ten minutes now and -- Tucker: I think I would still be well under the time, so -- it's not on. I tried to -- I turned it on I thought and it said no signal and, then, it went back to dark. So, I didn't know if there is an underlying computer and this is just a monitor -- I don't know. Fitzgerald: We were having computer challenges when we walked in and they had to be restarted, so I think we are -- we forgot that one. So, if you will give us a moment, then, we will -- Allen: And IT help is in the building. He's headed this way. Fitzgerald: Do you want to control it -- or do you need to be able to see it? Allen: I think you can see it -- Tucker: I can't see anything. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 10 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 8 of 40 Fitzgerald: I know, but do you want to -- can you control it if he is -- or do you need to be able to see it? Tucker: I don't necessarily -- I can start and probably not necessarily need to see some of it. Fitzgerald: Sonya, can he sit by you and talk through the presentation, so he can see it and use Bill's microphone? Allen: Yes, you can. Fitzgerald: So, Sonya will hang you out here all night. Todd, thanks. It brings back old memories. You will have PTSD, man. Tucker: I'm flexible, so this works. Well, good evening, Chairman and Members of the Commission. My name is Todd Tucker. I represent the developer of this property and my business address is 729 South Bridgeway Place, Eagle, Idaho. 83616. We are pleased to present these applications to the Commission tonight and we just wanted to thank the staff, specifically Sonya, and all of her hard work on this. We know they are very understaffed at this time and so we are really appreciative of the work that we are going to -- you know, working on this application. As Sonya noted, we are requesting annexation with the zoning of R-4 and there is an associated preliminary plat with a residential subdivision of 75 single family detached lots. Sonya did a good job of covering the annexation and the rezone request. So, I will just skip to the preliminary plat and some of the items that we wanted to discuss regarding some of the conditions of approval. The image -- this image shows how the proposed subdivision will fit in with the surrounding development. The total size of the subdivision is 30 -- a little bit over 30 acres. There will be 75 residential lots. One of those is currently improved with a single family home and some accessory buildings and there are 13 common lots with approximately six and a half acres of qualified open space , which is approximately 21 percent of the -- of the project and the average lot size is 11,000 square feet. Here is a few examples of the types of homes that we will be constructing within -- within the subdivision. As you can see from this map, the Sky Mesa Highlands -- I guess I should go back. The -- the out parcel -- or the lot that's located on Eagle Road, it's approximately an acre in size. Answer that question from earlier. As you can see from this map , the Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision is outlined in red. The other phases of the Sky Mesa project are outlined in blue and those phases have already been approved and are mostly developed at this time. The two parcels highlighted in the yellow are the large community amenities that have already been constructed . Since the Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision is another phase of the overall Sky Mesa project, residents within Sky Mesa Highlands will have full access to all of the amenities located within the Sky Mesa Project. Those amenities consist of two swimming pools, with clubhouses, playground equipment, open fields that can be used for playing soccer or football or playing catch. Baseball. There is a basketball court -- full court basketball court and a swing set. As you can see from the -- the pictures on the slide, in the upper left and bottom right-hand corners those are the swimming pools that are -- that are existing. In the upper right is a -- is a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 11 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 9 of 40 playground and, then, the bottom left is -- is an aerial shot of our new community center that was just constructed not too long ago that has a pool , the ball fields, soccer, basketball courts and, then, swing sets. I -- I provided a -- Monday a letter -- this Monday -- with comments on the staff report, specifically four items related to some of the conditions of approval. This exist -- the existing access onto Eagle Road, the pedestrian pathway, the phasing plan and the Grimmett Lateral and I will go through each of those at this time. The first item is the requirement to remove the existing access to Eagle Road for Lot 29, Block 1. This is an existing parcel of land that is improved with the home and a few accessory buildings. The Ada County Assessor's Office records show that these -- some of these structures were initially constructed in 1910. There are no changes proposed with the property at this time and the owner of the property ne eds to keep the existing access to Eagle Road for the functionality of the property. The photos on the left show what the property looks like from the street and the image on the right is an aerial photo. Again, as Sonya noted, we do we have some conditions of approval that require extending the landscape buffer along Eagle Road in front of this parcel, as well as the sidewalk and we are amenable to do that, we would just like to leave the access open so that this property can still have access onto Eagle Road until such time as it redevelops and, then, we understand that that -- that access would come from internal to the subdivision. I do have Travis Hunter here with me tonight also and he has a few comments also to address, the -- that -- the need or the desire to keep that access open onto -- onto Eagle Road. So, I will turn over just a few minutes to Travis. Fitzgerald: And is that working now? I think he gave us the thumbs up and it -- yeah. Mr. Hunter, so sorry to -- you guys are both -- we appreciate your patience. Hunter: Yeah. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. This parcel that you guys see on the screen, it's located on the eastern boundary of the property. It's owned by Don and Lori Cantrell. They are the sellers of the 29 acres that we are purchasing to develop this plat. This property has been used as a residence for the last several decades and it's -- historically and currently the main access is off of Eagle Road. When we -- when we actually originally submitted this application for the project, we did not include this residence in our application as we were not purchasing it, nor developing it. However, in the process staff informed us that we -- we did need to include it in the application -- I believe because it's owned by the same party who is selling us the land to develop it. So, when we -- when we informed Mr. and Mrs. Cantrell that we must include the separate parcel, they became fairly concerned that this residence would lose access to Eagle Road -- so much so, in fact, that we actually included it in the purchase and sale agreement as a contingency, you know, where if it did lose access to Eagle Road, you know, the whole thing could be unwound. So, at this time we consulted Kevin Holmes on staff -- I don't believe he's still with you guys -- but he told us that this should be an issue we can work through. However, it's ultimately up to Planning and Zoning and the -- and the City Council members. So, you know, as we have already -- already stated, we have -- we have designed our plat to where this parcel will have direct access from our neighborhood, so in the event when -- you know, when the property is subdivided or developed in the future, it can access directly through our neighborhood and the main access off of Eagle Road will be discontinued. So, yeah, just -- we just wanted to respectfully ask that -- you Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 12 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 10 of 40 know, as -- because it's only one family that's living in there and they have historically used it, that we could just allow them to remain -- for that access to remain off Eagle Road until future use. So, just a little bit of background. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Tucker: All right. The next item I would like to discuss is the pedestrian pathway located along or within Lot 14, Block 3, of the subdivision. We originally proposed this pathway to be located within this common area, because we thought we needed it as an amenity for -- for the -- the subdivision. However, after examination of the staff report that stated that it was not required, because it doesn't connect to any -- anything on the pathways master plan and, therefore, it does not count towards our qualified -- qualified amenity, we also feel that the pathway -- well, the pathway is located approximately five feet from the rear yards of those homes that you -- that are directly to the north of it. Because this is a common open space lot the rear yard -- fences for these lots must be open vision and having a pathway that close to a home's rear yard with an open vision fence does not provide those residents with very much privacy in our opinion. If you will look to the -- the photo on the left, that illustrates our point. The manhole you see is approximately five feet from the fence. So, if there was a pathway running where that -- that manhole is to the -- to the north, that's how close pedestrians would be to the backyards of these homes with no -- with no solid fences back there. As such we were just proposing to remove the pathway. This would still remain as a common lot and open space, we are just proposing to remove the -- the actual pathway. When we originally submitted the application we had not planned on developing the subdivision in phases. However, after more consideration we decided that it would be best if we broke it into two separate phases. On the screen is our proposed phasing plan and we understand that we will have to provide secondary access until such time as phase -- sorry -- phase B is platted and we feel we have a couple of different options that would fully comply with the fire department's requirements and -- and we are fine with doing that. We would work with the fire department and make sure that we provide them with the secondary access that they need to comply with the fire code. Our last issue is with the requirement to pipe the Grimmett Lateral as it runs along the western boundary of the subdivision . We are requesting to leave this portion of the lateral open. We feel it will be a nice amenity to the homes that abut it. As was discussed earlier, you had some questions about what would that do to the -- to those lots if it was placed in a common lot. You know, after -- after looking -- reading the staff report, I think we are amenable to putting it in a common lot and we designed it in such a way that even if it was put in a common lot it wouldn't negatively affect these lots. These lots to that -- to that easement line, it's 127 feet deep. So, even -- that's without the additional 47 feet within the easement . So, these lots are exceptionally deep. If it is put within a common lot they would still be 127 feet deep lots and we would have to fence it. We have discussed that with the irrigation company and even if it is -- even if it is piped and landscaped we would still have to put a fence there and so -- so, that will be -- that will be fenced with a wrought iron fence. We just think it would be a nice amenity to have kind of this babbling brook running behind their lots. Also for -- you know, you could sit out on the backyard and listen to the water and -- and look at it. The image on the left shows what the -- what the -- the lateral looks like at this Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 13 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 11 of 40 point without any water in it. You can see it's -- it's fairly shallow and -- and it would not -- we don't believe it would provide a hazard or a safety concern. It will be fenced and there -- there will not be gates allowed in those rear yards to access the property. They would just be able to enjoy the view back there. So, we feel it would be safe. In summary, we are in agreement with the staff report, with the exception of a few conditions of approval. We understand that City Council will have the final decision on these issues, but we respectfully request that the Commission recommend these conditions of approval be either modified as shown on the screen or deleted and we -- we thank you for your time and -- and I can -- I can stand for any questions that you might have. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Mr. Tucker. Any questions for the applicant? Olsen: Yes. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: Yes. On the -- on the existing property or the home that's going to remain , the -- the existing structure that's already there and the easement -- or, excuse me, the access to Eagle Road, is there some -- do you -- do you -- what kind of -- what kind of an agreement do you have with the homeowner that at the time that they no longer need the property or use the property it will come into your control? Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Olsen, to my knowledge we don't have any agreement with them right now. I can -- let me check with our ownership real quick. We have no relation to that -- that parcel at all. So, there is enough -- we don't have any agreement with the current owner of the property that at such time that they wish to redevelop it or -- or sell it that we have the right to purchase it -- Olsen: And access could stay there? Tucker: No. The access -- we are recommending a condition of approval that states that at such time that that property redevelops the access would have to come from -- internal from the development. We are just requesting that it remain open at this time. The current owner of the property, they are the ones selling us the property that we are developing, but we are not purchasing this property and so they would wish to have that access remain open onto Eagle Road. What we are proposing is to allow us to leave that access open at this time, but at such time that it does redevelop , whether it be us or another developer, that -- that access would be provided internally from our subdivision and we have -- we have submitted an exhibit to show how that would happen , extending that common driveway from the north to the south. But at the time that it's redeveloped, then, the access would be closed onto Eagle Road. We are just requesting that it remain open at this time. Olsen: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 14 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 12 of 40 Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Commissioner McCarvel. I see your finger on the button. McCarvel: Just -- do you have that -- do you have a picture of what that could look like with that access to the -- where that will be? The remaining acre. Tucker: Let me go -- let me see if I can -- McCarvel: I'm assuming it would be through that common lot, but -- Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner McCarvel, we submitted an exhibit to the Planning staff, but I didn't include it in our presentation, but you are correct. If you can -- let's see. Does my mouse work? Yeah. So, this common driveway would be extended to the south and would terminate here and, then, it would provide bollards, because the fire -- it's too long for the fire department, so we would have to extend it -- carry it out to connect to the public roadway. So, at that point it would terminate and, then, it would just be an emergency vehicle access connecting out with bollards. So, the -- the common driveway would extend from the north to the south over that -- over that property to provide vehicle access and we are not sure if it would be subdivided into two lots or just remain as one lot -- one larger lot that someone may want to redevelop. But if it is redeveloped, then, the access would come internally from that -- that existing common drive to the north. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Potentially that could be subdivided into three lots. Is that -- so, now you're looking at -- is that coming off that common lot, that shared driveway -- Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, yes, it could be three lots based on the zoning. However, it's -- it's not quite wide enough. All of the lots within the subdivision are 65 feet wide. That lot is not wide enough to put three 65 foot wide lots in there. They would have to be a little bit narrower than that. But I believe -- we can check with Sonya, but I believe the Unified Development Code does allow up to six lots to take access from a common driveway and the fire department -- we ran this by the fire department and they were amenable to this as long as we continue to provide access through -- access through that common lot to the south out to the street. So, like I said, we would terminate the common driveway with bollards and, then, it would be -- have emergency vehicle access that would connect down to the street, so that they could -- they could get their vehicles through. Cassinelli: So, the fire department was in agreement with you on that? Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, that was correct. Cassinelli: Okay. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 15 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 13 of 40 Holland: Mr. Chairman. One question. Would you clarify for us again what your proposition is for the Grimmett Lateral? That you would be okay with it being a common lot there or do you prefer it stay within those buildable lots? Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Holland, at this -- we did request when we submitted the application that it could be a common -- or, sorry, that it -- to be an easement included in the rear yards of that. After reading the staff report, though, I think we are amenable to putting it in -- in a common lot. That's not our main concern. Our main desire is to be able to leave it open, whether it's in a -- in the lots or in an easement at this point is -- is not that important to us. It's mainly the -- the main importance is that we be allowed to keep it open. Holland: Thank you for clarifying. Fitzgerald: Tom, in regards to the pathway that's on the screen right now -- so, I -- I'm pretty sure there is an easement that goes across here, so you can't move that thing to the south; correct? Move the pathway further to the south. Tucker: Mr. Chairman, there is a -- there is a slope that runs to the south. So, that's a fairly steep slope that's coming down and -- and we put it in the flat area. That's why it's -- where it's located where it is is to have a flat area at the rear of those -- of those lots and so moving the pathway would be difficult, because it would be in the side of a slope. Fitzgerald: Okay. Any additional questions? Allen: Mr. Chairman, excuse me if I may. I put a copy of the applicant's concept plan they submitted on the screen for you. That shows how that property could possibly redevelop in the future with two building lots and the -- and the common driveway and that was approved by the fire department. McCarvel: Thank you, Sonya. I thought I had remembered seeing that. Allen: It is in the staff report. McCarvel: Yeah. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for the applicant? Thank you, sir. Allen: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Oh. Allen: Additionally, if I may clarify something the applicant said. The UDC does not require open vision fencing adjacent to pathways. They could do a four foot closed vision fence or they could do a four foot closed vision with two foot open vision, like lattice on top. So, there are other options than just the open vision fencing. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 16 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 14 of 40 Fitzgerald: Right. Allen: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, three people have signed in tonight, two of which wish to testify. Sherrie Ewing being the first. Fitzgerald: Good evening, ma'am. How are you? Please state your name and your address for the record, please. Ewing: Good evening, Commissioners. I am Sherrie Ewing and I live at 2934 East Lake Hazel Road. I am in the Diamond Ridge Subdivision, which is on the south side of the proposed development here. And when we were first approached with this we were told that all of the houses would be built with the rooftop no higher than our ground level. That's what we were told by the owner. And then -- so, he said he was not going to sell unless that was in part of the agreement, so when Todd Tucker came to our neighborhood meeting at my house we asked him about this and he said that he would respond back with a letter, but that one point was not ever addressed. So , we would like to see if this is part of the proposal or if the -- my neighbor, the seller, decided -- or it was changed, because I know he's going to be very upset if that's the case. So, that's point number one. Also I would like to know -- after the sale of this land who is going to maintain our irrigation that comes into our subdivision? This was also a point that we needed addressed when Mr. Tucker was at our house and that also did not get spoken to. Because if there is a snake in the pipe, which happens often, and the water system goes down, we are hosed. We need somebody to fix the pump and -- and get it on and off and somebody to call. So, we just wonder what that's going to be. The other question that I have is from our house there is an elevation change, which is on the south side of the development. It's a hill. And they said that they were going to landscape it. Well , I'm wondering what this landscaping is going to look like. If it's a bunch of trees I'm going to be really upset. And if it's low life bushes or whatever or how is it going to get mowed? How is the weeds going to be controlled? I have lots of questions on that -- that landscaping. Currently our irrigation system , as Mr. Patel sent a letter into the Commissioners, is 60 psi and that's going to be proposed at 52 psi, which is not going to keep his sprinklers running, the kind of sprinklers he has. So, he asked me to talk about that. The other question that I have is how many feet is it from our back fence line to the road that is proposed right below the hill from us. I know that on -- I know that on the map that I got it said that one inch was from here to here, but it -- I didn't see anything that said how far one inch was on the -- so, I don't know what that is. Fitzgerald: And, ma'am, can you finish up your comments and, then, we will try to get your questions answered. Ewing: I think I'm finished. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 17 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 15 of 40 Fitzgerald: Thank you so much. We appreciate it. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, I apologize, I just realized that the second person signed into testify is Todd Tucker, so -- Fitzgerald: Is there anyone else who would like to testify on this application in the audience? Going once? Going twice.? Mr. Tucker, would you like to come back up and answer some of those questions? And I was very remiss. I should have asked you about the 60 psi question as well. That's in our public testimony, so -- Tucker: Mr. Chairman, no problem. I think I can answer these. So, I will just kind of go through them chronologically as she addressed them. The issue with the roof height , we do have an agreement in our purchase and sale agreement that the homes along that stretch of the street there have to be -- the height of those homes, the roofs have to be at least five feet below the ground elevation of Mr. Cantrell's property. So , that will be a scenic easement that is recorded that -- that protects those -- protects those views. So, the height of those -- those homes have to be at least five feet below the floor -- or the ground elevation of Mr. Cantrell's lot, which is roughly the same height as the other lots adjacent to him to the east and to the west. The landscaping that will be provided in that area will be a dry land seed mix. It will be -- we do -- per the -- per the code, the UDC, we will have to provide some trees. We will be planting those trees at the base -- or at the bottom of the slope, any trees that have to be provided for that to count as qualified open space. We will plant those at the bottom of the slope , not at the top, so it -- as to also keep that -- keep that view -- those views open. That will be probably worked into that scenic -- scenic view easement as well. As far as the -- the psi for Mr. Patel's property, we -- we can accommodate that. We can -- we will do whatever we need to, do whether it is, put in a bigger pump or a booster pump, but we will accommodate -- do our best to accommodate that 60 psi to provide what he currently has at his property and, then, as far as the distance from the back of those homes on Lake Hazel to the street, it's -- it's roughly 60 feet to the -- to the street that's closest to them and, then, it's a 50 foot wide right of way. So, it would be 110 feet to the homes. But the easement itself -- or the slope itself is 60 feet. Fitzgerald: Ditch maintenance. Did you guys -- do have the -- is that the HOA that's managing -- Tucker: The HOA will manage that. That's correct. Fitzgerald: Do you want to finish -- do you -- close up any other comments before we ask any other additional questions we have? Tucker: I don't think so. Again, you know, our -- our main -- our main issues, our main requests, are for modification of those conditions of approval. Mainly the biggest one is that we can -- you know, we are requesting that -- that this body modify that -- that commit -- recommended condition of approval that says that we can keep -- keep access open onto Eagle Road for that existing lot until such time as that property redevelops and, then, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 18 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 16 of 40 we take it -- we will change the access, so that it comes from internal to the subdivision and, then, that will be allowed to keep the Grimmett Lateral open. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions for the applicant? Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: The -- the trees that you will plant there -- I mean will you be in agreement to provide -- or to put in trees that are -- you know, I guess low growth -- I'm not an arborist, but sort of a low growth tree that -- Tucker: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, we will comply with whatever the code requires. I'm not a hundred percent sure on Meridian's landscaping code. We do have to provide trees. I don't know if it specifically calls out what class of tree we have to provide. If it doesn't, then, we will provide trees that will not grow up a certain height and block -- and block their views. Cassinelli: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, did you have a question, ma'am? Holland: I did, but I'm forgetting what I was going to ask. Fitzgerald: Todd -- while you're -- so, I lived in a neighborhood that had a -- a pretty big common lot walk through with a pathway on it and I thought it was a good place for, you know, kind of a ride through the neighborhood. Is there -- because there is not an amenity specific package, because there are -- you have an overabundance of them in Sky Mesa, one and two, would you be amenable to keeping that pathway? Because I think having that it gives the -- the interconnectivity. I just -- I think it would be a negative to lose it. So, thoughts? Because I think there is a balance there. We are not asking you to put additional amenity packages in this application per se, but I think having that -- that pathway is a good thing. So, any thoughts? Tucker: Mr. Chairman, my initial thought is that we would probably be amenable to putting the pathway in if we could get some sort of waiver or variance for the -- the fence that's along it. You know, I mentioned that it needs to be a clear vision fence. It doesn't. It can be a solid fence if it's only four feet tall. That still doesn't do very much for privacy in the backyards of those homes. So, I know that -- that, you know, Meridian city -- and we think it's wise to follow, you know, those ideals behind crime prevention through environmental design that -- that there be eyes on the street, that there be people to view and look into those areas. We are just -- just our concern is that, you know, protecting the privacy of our homeowners in there and so I think if this board or commission would be amenable to granting a waiver or a variance to allowing us to put a six foot solid fence back there, I think we would feel much more comfortable with having the pathway that close to the rear yards. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, now you have your question? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 19 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 17 of 40 Holland: I do. Mr. Chair, I was -- I was wondering if you had a chance to talk to the irrigation district at all about keeping it open versus piping it. Because we -- we had them come and speak to us a few months back where they expressed some concerns about keeping laterals open for safety. They didn't want to see kids, dogs, et cetera, floating in them. So, I would love to hear your thoughts about how those conversations went, if you have talked to them already. Tucker: Sure. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Holland, we have visited with them several times and met with them on site. They are amenable to allowing it to remain open on that stretch. The east-west portion of the lateral that runs along the northern boundary of our subdivision, we -- they are requiring that we pipe that, but this portion that we are requesting to remain open they are okay with us leaving that open for that small stretch of land. Holland: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I -- Todd, there was a -- that path that's in there right now and what we are looking at with the landscape plan doesn't show the lot numbers, but there are -- there is two lots at the end of the cul-de-sac there. One of the -- it did show connectivity into the cul-de-sac from that common area. As a part of that -- as a part of what you're asking us to remove the pathway, does that also remove any connectivity or is there still a stretch of common area that can be accessed from that large common strip to the cul-de-sac? Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, we are requesting that that -- that that would be removed as well. If the pathway goes away then -- then that connection would go away. If not, then, it would remain and I think we have a condition of approval that states that we need to put that in a common lot, which makes sense. We just -- we didn't show that, but -- yeah, our intention would be for -- for the access to go away. Mainly it's the -- the -- the pathway -- I guess, you know, if we still provide an access to that area that people could get back there if they wanted to -- I don't know that we have too much heartburn over that, but our main concern is just encouraging people to walk along this pathway directly, you know, five feet from people's backyards where they can see right in -- right into the yards. Cassinelli: And an additional question to that. Had you -- have you looked at -- I mean you -- you are showing that this landscape plan has a pathway five feet from the -- from the rear of the property. What about putting that down -- moving it out. I mean you don't have to put it right there. Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, that -- yeah, that kind of goes back to Commissioner Fitzgerald's question about moving that pathway. That's a fairly steep slope that's coming down from the south to the north, so it would dramatically change our grading plan on what we need to do on that slope area, because that is a -- a fairly steep slope that's coming down at that point and so that's why we put it where we put it, is to try Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 20 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 18 of 40 to minimize the amount of grading that we have to do and get it -- still get it in a flat -- flat spot. So, moving it to the south would be -- would be fairly difficult and require quite a bit of modification to our -- our grading plan. Cassinelli: So, that common lot there is -- is really not a -- it's not a real usable area. Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, usable as far as running around and playing in it, no. It would be -- it would be more for aesthetics and for preserving of kind of natural open space within the development, instead of manicured open space. We do -- to count it as open space we do have to -- to seed it and so we will provide -- you know, we will -- it won't just be weeds, we do have to provide something -- landscaping in there, but as far as usable, able to -- to run around and play in there, no. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions? Commissioner Seal, do you have a question, sir? Seal: Just on the path and -- I'm a fan of having the path in there for, you know, the exact same reason you said, having that connectivity to go through and I just -- I wonder -- after looking at it why does the path not continue onto the road on the other side. I mean that's -- to me it looks like you could have -- especially for kids and they are, you know, going over to each other's houses or people are walking back and forth in the community, just to have that interconnectivity in there would be -- to me it would be great. Tucker: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Seal, additionally we wanted that and we designed it that way or -- or drew it up that way. It's just the slope. So, from -- from the street down to where the -- the cul-de-sac ends is approximately a 17 foot drop in elevation and so that's why we emptied it out into the cul-de-sac is because just making that grade up to the street wasn't -- wasn't possible. We could put the trail there, it just wouldn't meet any standards. We could put in, you know, stairs or something, but it just wouldn't meet any standards. That's why we -- that's why we altered it and emptied it into the -- into that cul- de-sac, instead of connecting it to the street. It's just a grade differential right there. Seal: Okay. Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Thank you very much. Tucker: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Appreciate it. Any additional questions for staff or thoughts before we get a motion to close the public hearing? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 21 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 19 of 40 Holland: I move we close the public hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands, H-2019-0123. Seal: Second. Cassinelli: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2019-0123, Sky Mesa Highlands. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Fitzgerald: So, team -- Cassinelli: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I have a question for Sonya real quick. Can you confirm the -- that taking six lots off a private drive is within the UDC? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, the maximum number of lots accessed off a common driveway is six. Their common -- or their concept plan only shows two, though, which would be five. Cassinelli: But is -- I mean it -- given zoning the -- in an acre they could -- somebody could come along and potentially put three in there, so it would -- that still would work. Allen: Yes. Cassinelli: Is that correct? Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I know we have got a lot of different things on this to address as far as deleting certain things or potentially not and I just want to make a comment on leaving that irrigation ditch open. I managed the one in our HOA and it's got a pipe section and the open section and that size it's much easier to maintain on the open section. It causes a lot less problems. You can see it if you have got a problem . The minute you pipe it, then, you have got to scope it every time there is a blockage and I -- that size I don't see posing any real hazard for safety. Fitzgerald: And those are Council waivers. McCarvel: Yeah. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 22 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 20 of 40 Fitzgerald: Both those are Council waivers. McCarvel: Yea. I just wanted to throw that out there. Yeah. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I don't want to cut you off if you are still -- McCarvel: I'm good. Holland: I was going to say I think I agree. I'm not too concerned about keeping the water open, especially if the irrigation district is okay with it. I don't see a big concern there. I do have a little heartache with the existing access to Eagle, because that property may or may not redevelop and, then, we end up having one of those awkward parcels that just sits there with access to Eagle Road and it looks kind of unconforming. I'm not set on that one way or another, but as far as the pathway goes I think I would like to see the pathway stay in there, because there is not -- there is not really a lot of other amenities that this neighborhood is offering and they are big enough lots that it doesn't necessarily need more play structures and green spaces, but, you know, I have been to several friends' houses who have the backyard that's four feet with the lattice behind it. We have sat back there for barbecues. It's never been a problem. And part of the reason they chose that specific house is because they liked having the pathway behind their house. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Holland: So, it was easy to walk back behind and they could watch their kids playing back and forth on the street with their bikes. We have a pathway that runs next to our house and I haven't had it be a problem. So , I don't see that being a huge issue. I unde rstand it could be challenging for them, but I think they could put in a vinyl fence back there if they didn't want to have the wrought iron or open vision fencing. Fitzgerald: What I could test -- I lived in Woodbridge and it was -- the pathway was right there and it had split rail -- like two foots -- or basically they were tiny fences and that was -- I love that kind of walking path and it provides interconnectivity and places for kids to go, but also if there is somebody back there -- you can access it, it's not just an empty space, so -- Holland: One follow-up comment to that. I don't like the idea of doing a six foot wood fence. Fitzgerald: And, then, you have a problem. And, then, you have a safety issue. Yeah. Commissioner Cassinelli. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 23 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 21 of 40 Cassinelli: On that note -- but before moving onto other things I guess -- I would -- I'm in favor of keeping the path. I don't know if I -- I like Commissioner Seal's idea of extending it to that road, but I don't think that's a -- you know, that -- that -- that's a -- not a mandatory thing. I wouldn't -- it would be nice, but I think as long as it goes into that cul-de-sac -- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Cassinelli: But I would be fine with just a four foot solid fence, so they could do vinyl or whatever. I wouldn't want to go -- I don't know if I would want to push it even to have the two foot lattice on top of that. Through my neighborhood we have got a lot of walking paths and there is four foot fences. It's never -- I mean those homes never have a problem selling. In fact, when you're walking through there it's kind of -- you know, people in their backyards -- I mean everybody is friendly and it's just -- it just opens that up. I don't think it's a negative at all. Fitzgerald: And I'm cool with letting them work with staff to figure out what that fence is going to look like. But I agree, I think it's -- I think it's a positive, not a negative. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I agree with what's been talked about on there. I don't -- I think leaving the path in there is something that would be beneficial to all the community members. I live in a house that has common property on two sides and I have a four foot fence with two foot lattice and we actually enjoy it, because it gives us more access to -- you know, it makes our backyard look bigger than it actually is essentially and we do have a lot of people that walk along the side or in the back of it and we have everything from a hot tub to kids playing back there and, you know, you get used to it in some instances and others it's -- it's kind of nice to have that openness. Better -- better neighborhood feel. One of the things I wanted to address in here is that there hasn't been any report submitted by ACHD and there is a few places in the staff report talking about how that -- I mean, basically, there is some likely compliance issues that need to be addressed by ACHD as far as the access to the north, as well as some of the grade issues that are in there for providing correct water and -- and things like that. So, I'm a little hesitant to -- you know, I don't know that we necessarily want to move forward with it knowing that that could be an issue, but I mean I'm looking at -- specifically I'm looking at Item G in the staff report. It says the applicant has submitted a concept plan showing how access will provide from the north, which should be vetted through ACHD and it quotes the section that's in there for that. There is also some verbiage in there that relates to some of the water -- page -- Fitzgerald: Sonya, do you have any thoughts, comment, concern on that component? Do you feel like we are missing pieces? Allen: Chairman, no, I don't. I have discussed the issue with ACHD and -- and they didn't seem to have any issues. If they end up having issues after their staff report comes out Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 24 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 22 of 40 it's certainly something we can work with. I wouldn't recommend continuance for that reason. Fitzgerald: Okay. Seal: Last thing is just the -- leaving the lateral open, rather than closed. I mean for the testimony that we have received in the past from the irrigation district where they would really prefer that everything be, you know, covered, that's -- I always have that in the back of my mind when we talk about stuff like this. Seeing a picture of it and seeing what it could provide for -- I mean, essentially, aesthetic beauty for a lot, I wouldn't mind having it back there to look at and if there is ducks and birds and things like that especially -- but what would be the -- what would be the requirements on that? I mean is -- since it's going to be fenced and it's going to be a small area, will they be required to put trees and shrubs and things like that in there? Is it something that they are going to have to maintain and mow or is it going to be more of a -- just kind of a wild type of area? That was more to Sonya. Fitzgerald: I could provide comment, but it won't be a -- Seal: Just trying to get an idea of -- I mean if I'm looking at it from my backyard and it's -- and it's fenced and it's supposed to provide something that's aesthetically pleasing, I just want to make sure it's something that's going to be -- remain aesthetically pleasing, instead of, you know, a trap for -- for things to blow in there and get caught. Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, if it's in a common lot the homeowners association is required to maintain it. If it's in an easement on a building lot, the homeowners may or may not, you know, maintain it. Fitzgerald: And that's why I -- if we are going to do that it's going to be fenced or leave it open, I think it needs to be in a common lot for that purpose and that's where I think we got into it on one of the original Sky Mesas where they had -- they were all individual lots with all individual fences and nothing ever got taken care of . It was a big trap for weeds and tumbleweeds. So, I think with the applicant's comments that they are amenable to a common lot, I think that's where we go -- or that's where I would suggest we go. Seal: Will the common lot need landscaping, trees, things like that in it or is it just going to be open? Allen: If you require it to be landscaped and if the irrigation district will allow the landscaping within their easement, then, it could be. Fitzgerald: I think it remains. Allen: The -- the applicant also seemed amenable to improving it as a water amenity. So, that's defined in our code is the banks and all places adjacent to and located on the development can be no steeper than one foot vertical per every four feet horizontal and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 25 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 23 of 40 it has to have a depth and velocity in all places adjacent to and located on the development such that the product of the maximum depth multiplied by the peak velocity does not exceed four. So, you know, they are looking at that, too. But if -- if the Council allows it to remain open it still would be a nice amenity to look at, it's just not something that the homeowners are being taxed on and not being able to use -- kind of the difference. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Allen: Their setbacks -- just as a side note. Their setbacks are different -- are affected differently whether it's on an easement or common lot. If it's on an easement the setbacks are measured from the property line, which a great part of that is encompassed by the easement. If it's in a common lot, then, it's measured from that lot line back. Fitzgerald: That's a great call. Thank you for that clarification. Commissioner Olsen. Olsen: I'm comfortable with most of what's being said. The -- the concern I have still is about the access. It seems to me that it's pretty open ended and without some kind o f a termination on -- or the concept that when it's going to be subdivided or develop ed, that may never happen. That may stay a house or residence for, you know, how long and if -- I don't know if there is anything we could do about that or some kind of a requirement we could put on it. If there was a life estate or something like that on it -- it would work. But, apparently, they don't own that property, so I'm not sure what, if anything, we can do with that. Fitzgerald: The state preempted us on life estates a couple years ago, unfortunately. So, I'm not sure you can even deed restrict that anymore to that point. But I appreciate what you're saying. Olsen: Okay. Fitzgerald: I am torn on the access, because I think we are a little ways away from ACHD or ITD ever getting out there, but -- but I understand the concern. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I am not a hundred percent that the access needs to go in. That's a Council decision anyway, but I think I would like to see the -- at least the sidewalk go all the way through. Fitzgerald: Up the hill or -- McCarvel: No. On Eagle. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 26 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 24 of 40 Holland: It's in the conditions. McCarvel: Is it -- okay. Fitzgerald: Yeah. McCarvel: So, we don't have to eliminate one or the other, we can -- I mean or both, we can eliminate one -- Fitzgerald: I mean we can make a recommendation, but that's Council's -- McCarvel: Yeah. Fitzgerald: -- that's Council's decision on whether they give access or not or remain that access open or not. Seal: Mr. Chair, I would agree with -- with that and specifically because of the outbuildings and some of the equipment that might come through there. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Seal: Trying to get it through the little side streets -- I mean I can't even imagine -- it doesn't look like there is going to be a lot of farm equipment that's in there anymore, but if you try and get, you know, a large truck towing a trailer through there that's going to be -- that's not going to be a fun trip for anybody that has to make it , so -- speaking from experience. One quick thing on the -- on the emergency access that's to the north, I mean I wasn't going to say anything, but the more that I look at it, all of the access is coming from that street that's up above on the north and having the ability to come through that common lot as an emergency access is okay, but I just -- I don't understand why there is not something down more to the south to provide access in there, just in case there is something that's going on where they can't get access through the -- the streets that are in there, if there was something that was going on on that corner that common lot is very close to that road. So, to me that's -- it just seems like the common lot for emergency access and the -- and the main road for access are -- they are very close and there is only two houses separating them. So, if, for instance, the two houses between them caught on fire now what do you do? You can't get access to through the main road, because there is a house on fire you can't get access through the common lot. There is just -- there is just not a lot of space provided there for emergency access for the rest of the subdivision. So, it's a concern. I mean it's not a deal breaker for me , it just seems that that would be better served to be down south in the subdivision, instead of as far north as it is. Fitzgerald: So, the only thing I would say that I'm not concerned as much is there is not -- they are not accessing Eagle Road anywhere. This is coming up through Sky Mesa's main arterial or collector road. That's -- it's way -- their access -- it's actually providing additional emergency access to their existing neighborhood. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 27 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 25 of 40 Seal: Oh. Okay. Fitzgerald: So, they are accessing it through here. Seal: Got you. Fitzgerald: And, then, over here or -- so, it's actually providing access to these folks, too. Seal: Okay. Fitzgerald: So, are we anywhere close to making a motion? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: A couple more things I don't know if we want to include, but we could certainly put it in our motion about the scenic easement that the applicant talked about, having the homes five feet below the ground elevation if we want to make sure that that happens. I don't think that that was in the staff report, but I will look at Sonya to correct me if I'm wrong. Fitzgerald: I think it's got to be part of the DA, if that's -- it's something that was -- Cassinelli: It was in there in the -- in the application. Yeah. Fitzgerald: So, I think that -- and, then, I think the psi -- or the 60 psi irrigation component is another one that should be in there as well. Holland: You want to put both of those things in the motion? Fitzgerald: I don't think there is anything wrong with doing it, so that we are clear on what we expect. Cassinelli: And, then, does the rest of what we have talked about being -- is that -- that's all in the agreement with what staff has in the report or are we -- Fitzgerald: I think they are -- Cassinelli: -- looking to delete a number of things, but -- Seal: Mr. Chair, I have got -- I mean I just wrote down the stuff, but the piping the -- that lateral is something that they want to take out and it sounds like we are in agreement with that and it sounds -- and maybe -- I don't know if we want to make a recommendation that that is made into some kind of water feature -- I mean can we make the recommendation that they move in that direction or -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 28 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 26 of 40 Fitzgerald: That's going to be Council's final decision, but we can make a recommendation if that's what you guys so choose. Seal: To me that solves a lot of problems all at once, where it's made into a water feature. So, it's something that's going to be more maintained, more aesthetically pleasing, something that's going to be -- you know, people aren't just going to look at it and ignore it, it's something that they are actually going to have to take time -- it might be -- hopefully it's no more of a financial burden on the HOA to maintain it, but at the same time I think it's something that could look very nice. Cassinelli: And that was A8? Seal: A8. A-2-A was the common lot for the micro path. They wanted to delete that, but that's something that we wanted to have remain. Fitzgerald: Yeah. And I think the existing driveway access -- I think really -- unless you guys really have a strong feeling, I think you leave that to Council to decide. Let them -- they make the big bucks, they get to -- no, I'm just joking. Cassinelli: I want it to eventually go away, the access off of Eagle Road, but -- Fitzgerald: I think they eventually have to go away. Cassinelli: Yeah. Fitzgerald: But I understand there is a balance there, what you're trying to -- there is useful utility components of that lot where he's got a lot of outbuildings that have tractors and RVs and whatever else is in there and I kind of agree -- I agree with Commissioner Seal's comments that that's going to be challenging if you start trying to take it out of a common drive, whatever their -- the equipment they are hauling is in out and out of there it's going to be fun driving through a neighborhood to do that, so -- McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I just want -- before we start deleting things, one of the items we are addressing is Item A-3-A and there is actually two items labeled A-3-A. They got the A twice in there. Yeah. So, we just want to make clear that we are trying to make -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Make sure we are addressing which one in the -- when you're making your motion let's just make sure we outline what it is. So Sonya knows where we are headed. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 29 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 27 of 40 McCarvel: Yeah. Because the first A refers to the existing driveway on Eagle Road and, then, the second A-3-A addresses the sidewalks and I think we wanted the sidewalk, but -- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Commissioner Olsen, do you have any other additional -- okay. McCarvel: Did you get that, Sonya? Fitzgerald: Additional thoughts? Or, Commissioner Holland, are you ready to take a shot at this thing? Holland: Mr. Chair, I can attempt it. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, ma'am. Holland: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council file number H-2019-0123 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 2nd, 2020, with the following modifications: One, that the applicant would keep the pathway that was proposed that connects at a minimum from the cul-de-sac through to the east side, common lot number 14, and that they would work with staff on the fencing requirements for that subdivision and what the pat hway division would look like. Two, that they would work with ACHD and the fire department to resolve concerns with traffic and secondary accesses and phasing before going onto Council. Three, that they would modify condition A8 to remove the condition for piping Grimmett Lateral and that the applicant would work with staff and the irrigation district on landscaping possibilities or potential water features there. Four, that there would be a scenic easement requirement that homes would be five feet below the ground elevation of Mr. Cantrell's and also neighboring lots with the trees planted at the base of those -- of that common easement lot and that they would accommodate the 60 psi for the property owners to the south. Fitzgerald: Nice work. Seal: I second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to -- I'm sorry, I'm losing my mind. I have a motion and a second to recommend approval of file number H-2019-0123 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 2nd, 2020. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Thank you all very much. We appreciate it. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Hearing for Hensley Station H-2019-0120) by Northern Land Development, LLC, Located at 462 N. Black Cat Rd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 30 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 28 of 40 1. Request: Annexation of 7.17 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 65 building lots and 6 common lots on 6 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Fitzgerald: Everybody good? Keep plowing forward? Okay. Moving on to H-2019-0120, Hensley Station, and let's start with the staff report. Sonya. Allen: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. The next application is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. This site consists six acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 462 North Black Cat Road. Adjacent land use and zoning is -- to the north is the railroad tracks and single family rural residential zoned R1 and RUT in the county. To the south and east is the Compass Charter School, zoned ME, and to the west is Black Cat Road and agricultural land zoned RUT in Ada county. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is medium high density residential, which is eight to 15 units per acre. Annexation of 7.17 acres of land is requested with an R-15 zoning district for the development of 65 residential units at a gross density of 10.8 units per acre , consistent with the medium high density residential future land use designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 65 building lots and six common lots on six acres of land for the development of single family residential attached and townhome dwellings. The plat is proposed to develop in one or two phases. The applicant is unsure at this time. If it is phased, the phasing plan is shown there on the left. Access is proposed via West Aviator Street, a collector street, along the southern boundary of the site. An emergency only access is proposed via Black Cat Road, an arterial street, and that is proposed right where my cursor is at here. Private streets are proposed for internal access. Off-street parking is proposed in accord with UDC standards. An additional ten spaces are proposed for guest parking along the southern end of the MEW . A 25 foot landscaped street buffer is required along Black Cat Road and a 20 foot wide buffer is required along Aviator as proposed. The director approved a request for alternative compliance to allow the street buffer along Aviator Street to be located in adjacent building lots, rather than in a common lot is typically required, which will allow the townhomes to be placed closer to the street to enhance the streetscape consistent with new urbanism design and the design standards in the Ten Mile plan. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space and one site amenity is required to be provided with development. A total of .71 of an acre or 12 percent is proposed consisting of half the street buffer along Black Cat Road, the 35 foot wide common MEW and the common area at the northeast corner of the side. Amenities are proposed to consist of a fire pit with two benches and a 15 -by-15 foot shade structure with picnic tables. A variety of structure configurations are proposed consisting of three single family attached structures, which are two units in each structure, for a total of six units and those are on that plan there on your left. Nine four-plex structures in two different configurations. Type one with rear loaded facing a MEW , consisting of eight units, and type two front loaded facing the street consisting of 28 units. One rear loaded -- a five-plex structure containing five units and a three rear loaded six-plex structures containing a total of 18 units. And those are the concept elevations there. Building Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 31 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 29 of 40 elevations consist of a variety of horizontal and vertical siding and stucco with stone veneer accents. Color schemes are the same on each of the buildings throughout. All structures, single family attached and townhome dwellings proposed in this development are subject to the design elements in the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan and the design standards listed in the architectural standards manual, which include a requirement for porches to be provided for each unit facing West Aviator Street. Porches should be a dominant element along at least 30 percent of the front facade of the buildings. Revisions to the elevation should be made to comply with this. Building materials, particularly at the street level facing Aviator Street, should be high quality, such as terra cotta, natural stone, clay fired units or other approved masonry materials for architectural design or accents. The strongest use of such should be reserved for street level windows and entries. Written testimony has been received from Kent Brown , the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with the requirement of a development agreement per the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Any questions for staff? Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Mr. Chair. Before -- I do have a question for Sonya, but before I go there I just want to -- full disclosure. I want to let my fellow Commissioners know that I sit on the board of the neighbor to the south, Compass Charter School, but I don't feel that that will in any way sway any decisions I have, but I wanted to let my fellow Commissioners know and if they have an objection, feel I should recuse myself, I would be happy to do so. Fitzgerald: Any concerns? We appreciate your information and I think we are good. Cassinelli: Thank you. And so a question for Sonya. Sonya, in a development like this private -- private road that's -- are we following all the guidelines on that? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, yes, it does comply with UDC standards. Cassinelli: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for Sonya? Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Brown, would you like to come forward, sir. And I guess -- I'm assuming that you are speaking. Please state your name and your address for the record, please. Brown: For the record Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood, Meridian, Idaho. We are excited about this project. One of the reasons is instead of having a multi -family development, these are townhouses and so they are for sale. We see that as a need in the Meridian market. We have talked with staff about that -- is that you provide different housing types, but these -- if you understand townhouses, the land underneath it is -- is owned by the person or the resident or the -- the owner. Condos is airspace that you purchase. So, the purpose in this is to provide something else in the marketplace with the prices being so high throughout and yet provide something that's high quality and we believe that we have achieved that. We are in a unique location being there off of Black Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 32 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 30 of 40 Cat and adjacent to the railroad tracks. We feel that this is a really good location and it really complies with the -- the Ten Mile corridor plan in the fact that it's providing residential housing close to employment centers. That first slide that Sonya showed showing future land use and where the employment is and where you are promoting for -- for that really shows that this is kind of in -- in the area that it's supposed to be. It changes as you go on the other side of the railroad tracks and you have more single family, R-4, R-8 zoning versus what's on the south where you have R-15 and -- and higher densities that are approved in there, as well as commercial sites. To the west of us is supposed to be employment center and industrial, which is pretty consistent throughout Meridian along the railroad tracks and so we feel really good about having this located here and having good access to the Ten Mile interchange. Just a few items. We have tried to -- instead of just picking one or two buildings, I think we have listened to staff and have been doing this long enough that we have got different building types. We have a duplex . We got three of them. We have got front and rear loaded units that provide different types of privacy for -- for those types of users. As you were discussing the pathway, there -- there is difficulty selling next to a pathway. Some people just don't like having anybody, but others are okay with that. So, the units that we have in the middle their private space is shared and there are certain people that like that. My son and daughter-in-law with my grandkids lived in a facility very similar to this in Ogden and they liked it in the fact that the kids played right out in front. The kitchen is right there, they could look out the window and they could see them and they -- they knew they were there, yet if the neighbor kids came out it was of similar age, they could play in that area. Didn't need to be a big space, but it was something that they appreciated it and they liked and actually used even more than going to a private park that was provided within the development. The north, west and east sides of the development have what would be considered very traditional backyard private space. The school owns the property -- the charter school has the property to the east of us and currently that's shown as I believe a sports field. So, this is backing up to that. We have the railroad tracks along the north. Again having that ability, we have -- we have got a shorter fence in there that you can see out into that space and, then, you have the berm and buffer that's along Black Cat and that's providing the buffering that it needs, but also for the private spaces there. The residents and the streetscape, realistically that's what the Ten Mile plan calls out as Sonya has talked about that they are looking for porches and they want, you know, to be able to look at that. We feel that that works really well with the school. There are certain times that the school is really busy, but usually when you are home in the evening and you want to sit out on the porch in the front of the unit that's along Aviation it's pretty quiet, because everybody's gone home from the school. We are in agreement with the staff report and stand for any questions that you might have. We feel that this is a really good location for what we are proposing. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Mr. Brown. Commissioner Holland, go right ahead, ma'am. Holland: Mr. Chair. Mr. Brown, could you talk just a little bit about what buffering you will have to the north between the rail line and where the homes will be? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 33 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 31 of 40 Brown: We have the -- the backyard that's there. There -- we will have it fenced. We have proposed a five foot -- isn't that what we ended up with, a five foot fence back there, Sonya? I think it's a wrought iron five foot fence. Four and two. So, it has the lattice on the top. Holland: I think my only concern -- I think the development looks like it's well laid out. I like the pathway that goes through the middle. My only concern is whenever there is homes that are kind of backed up to rail lines -- and I know you have got some right of way between where the homes end and where the rail line is, just the noise and sound that comes through from rails and sometimes that can be a challenge. That's my only comment right now, but -- Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I have a similar question on the -- the common area that's there. Is that going to be completely fenced, since it is right by the rail line? Brown: Yes. It's going to be fenced and, then, also there is a drain that goes through there and that drain is going to be fenced. Seal: Okay. Brown: So, yes, so that you can't go onto the rail line area that's out there. Seal: Just a quick question on the amenity that's in there. Since this is going to be probably a lot of starter families and things like that, has any -- would you consider putting any kind of playground equipment in there or something that's more outfitted for younger kids? Brown: I don't know that that really is the demographic when you consider the -- what I'm being told -- at least this is coming back from real estate people that we still have 51 percent of people that are coming here are coming empty nesters basically. This provides somebody with a means, as long as they are physically able to go up the stairs to have that. I don't know. I think that we have tried to choose an amenity that fits the development. So, we haven't looked at doing a playground or something like that. We figured that the -- those kind of eat up that space and it's -- it's kind of a natural area already existing with the existing trees and we are trying to -- to save that portion, if you will, that's in there. There are other trees that are around this project along the south and along the west and those aren't really savable trees, they are trash trees if you will and so those are being removed. But we feel that there is already pretty much an -- already a private park space that's existing that we are not waiting for trees to grow, they are existing mature trees. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 34 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 32 of 40 Fitzgerald: Additional questions? Thank you, sir, very much. We appreciate it. Brown: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk, do we have anyone who would like to testify? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we have one person signed in, but nobody wishing to testify. Fitzgerald: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to testify? Sir, please come forward. We appreciate you being here. State your name and your address for the record. Petersen: My name is David Petersen and my address is 4096 West Gillette Drive, Meridian. And it's in the Castlebrook Subdivision, which is on the other side. It's fairly removed from this particular location. Shall I start? Fitzgerald: Yes. Absolutely. Go right ahead, sir. Petersen: All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Commissioner and -- and the board. I'm very much against this just because of the population density that is proposed. We lived in Virginia for ten years and there are a lot of townhomes there and we do believe that -- or at least I do that townhomes are pretty much populated by starter families and what you are going to see -- I will see if this mouse will work -- is these streets will be the play zones of these starter families. Yes, they will play right up here in the -- in the common area, but the streets will be the place for bicycle races and all kinds of soccer activities and stuff like that and as well as cars not fitting in the driveway or in the garages . You know, Meridian area has a lot of multi-car families and you are going to see that this street becomes very congested. But my main concern is Aviation being the main route here. Already with the school here we see the -- at the beginning of school when parents are dropping off their kids and, then, at the end of school when they are picking them up this place is very congested all along here and the railroads are right about here and the cars trying to turn in and out of here are backed up clear -- you know, almost half a mile trying to get through there, which is not only a safety hazard, but it's just difficult for the rest of us that try to get in and out of that area. I just don't see it being genuous and, you know, I see disingenuous about trying to meet a population density that is just not really fit for this type of traffic area. The other thing is I'm seeing -- and this is kind of related to it, but not definitely, but the kids at the school they need a place to work out and do their track and so forth and right now they have been running right along the road here. I mean right along the road to try and get over to a more widely widespread common area. So, it would be good when this field is made into an activity field, but, then, you're going to find all these people -- the kids especially from this townhouse area getting over in that school area. They need a place to play. They do need playground equipment . They don't -- they -- the common area is nice, but they do need playground equipment there. So, I first of all don't think it's good for the traffic pattern. I don't think it's good for the population density. And I think that's just about it. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 35 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 33 of 40 Fitzgerald: Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Anyone else would like testify this evening? Sir, please come forward. Please state your name and your address and the floor is yours, sir. Hibbard: Jason Hibbard. 641 North Puma Avenue. Just kitty corner of this development north of the tracks on the west side and I share the same sentiment is the traffic concern. I'm curious if a traffic study has been performed on this site. Due to the new school, the added light, the additional traffic due to widening Franklin Road, the stop sign still at the tracks that -- continually backing up trying to access off of Pine or El Gato, the traffic is just crazy backed up and I don't see a resolution coming for it, much less sidewalks to the -- to the school for students. My kids do attend Compass. They are in grade school currently, but, you know, when they do transfer to the high school there is no safe walking path to get them to the school. So, there is no sidewalks provided. He is providing sidewalks, I guess, but there is no safe travel across the tracks and so those are a bit of my concerns. If there is like a left turn for the southbound traffic and maybe a right turn for the northbound traffic to get -- to keep that traffic flowing could help this development, but I know it's coming around this area, that's just my concerns with the traffic is this whole valley that everybody knows about, so -- Fitzgerald: Appreciate it. Hibbard: Thanks. Fitzgerald: Thank you very much. Anyone else that would like to testify on this application? Mr. Brown, would you like to come back up and close us out, sir. Brown: So, ACHD has looked at this site, they have this site as being acceptable levels of -- for traffic. We can -- we can all -- because we have a driver's license can say that -- that it's different, but they are -- they are acceptable with that. We are proposing sidewalks on our portion. They do state in their report that they are looking at improving and widening Black Cat Road between 2021 and 2025. We will be lucky to have even a first phase -- people actually living there by 2021. With -- that's going for with -- with approvals from -- from you and the City Council. Some of the things that I'm involved with with other projects -- I know that Pine is soon to make that connection through and currently there is over 5,000 vehicle trips that ACHD is having that are kind of stuck down there and now they will have a safe route out to Ten Mile and they won't have to go across the railroad tracks and I know that that will have a huge effect. Those kin d of things still have to come before you. You haven't seen those applications, but they are in the process of coming. But like this, they are projects that aren't really going to be built until 2021 anyway when ACHD is looking at those -- some of those things being addressed. We are looking that -- for the most part the buyers that we are anticipating buying are -- are going to be young families that maybe they do have one or two kids, but those one or two kids are not attending school yet. They are -- they are younger couples. There is single family housing that is close by that if families want to move into they are just on the other side of Franklin Road and that housing is out in this area and available. So, we view that this being a different buyer than having a whole bunch of kids in here and that's Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 36 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 34 of 40 why we have proposed the amenities that we have. Was there something else that I missed? The garages, we got space in the garages. We also have space in front of the garages for parking. And, then, we have guest parking. So, we believe that we are over parked, if you will, on this site. Fitzgerald: What's the length of those driveways just, so you -- we can keep our -- Brown: Twenty foot setback from the road is what the garages are, so -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Brown: It's not little dinky things that they can't park on. Fitzgerald: Yeah. You have a full set driveway. Brown: Yeah. Fitzgerald: Okay. Additional thoughts or should we request questions? Brown: The -- the interesting thing -- and you guys have just recently gone through the comp plan and the amendments and everything and you have the potential. So, this calls for medium high density on this piece of property and for this general area and that's 15 -- 15 units per acre. We are at ten. We -- there are other product types -- if we were just trying to put density on this site there are other product types that we could have used. We think that we are meeting a need that -- that isn't being addressed currently in Meridian and feel that the townhouses are going to -- to be something that is going to be basically exciting for people to be able to get in and get a house and meet a different market. Everything in here is maintained by an HOA, so it's not -- even though they own it, their dues are paying for those -- the lawn to be mowed and those kind of things. So, we feel that we got a really nice project and ask for your approval. Fitzgerald: Questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. W e appreciate it. Can I get a motion? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I move we close the public hearing for Hensley Station, 2019-0120. McCarvel: Second. Cassinelli: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 37 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 35 of 40 Fitzgerald: I have a motion and multiple seconds. Thank you. On Hensley Station -- to close the public hearing on Hensley Station, H-2019-0120. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Fitzgerald: And this application is before you for consideration . Do you have opening thoughts? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: As being a person that runs along Black Cat Road, I'm happy to see that there are going to be more sidewalks to run through there. I would love to see something that extended across the railroad tracks, because it is -- it is -- I mean it's just dangerous to run across there. So, I mean I personally wouldn't allow my kid to walk across there. So, knowing that there is going to be improvement to the road from '21 -- 2021 to 2025 is promising. Hopefully we can do something, especially with Compass being in there and, you know, everything that's being built to help move that along closer to the 2021 side of things. Is that something -- is there -- is there a process for that, Sonya, that the city can go through to help move that along through ACHD or is that something that -- Fitzgerald: I think rooftops drive that, to be totally honest. Seal: The more -- okay. I mean there is -- there is a lot of them in there and that -- that section is extremely dangerous to walk, run, bike, you name it, it's just -- it's horrible considering the amount of traffic that goes across it right now. He actually touched on the fact that there is -- in the report there is a piece in there -- there is no -- no credit for the existing trees for mitigation, but I'm glad to see that they are actually keeping some of those existing trees in there, because it's -- I mean it's actually a really neat little property that's in there. So, seeing something that goes into -- I mean the biggest concern I have on it is, honestly, the -- the -- just the amenity not being something that's more driven for -- you know. Or at least having something in there that's more for kids. I just think that there is going to be some smaller families in there with kids that aren't in school yet that are going to be in there. They are going to be in the subdivision all day, so having something for them to go and play on is going to be something that's going to be needed, especially since there is not, you know, a viable walkway or something even to get over to El Gato or something like that where you have more space to -- to walk around and do things like that. So, I just think that that amenity needs to be something better. I don't know what better would be, but something more for kids. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland? Holland: Mr. Chair. I think one -- one nice thing about being located next to the school is that there tends to be open space with schools and I know when they came forward to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 38 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 36 of 40 us they were planning to put in a sports field at some point, which likely would be used in the evening hours for neighboring residents. So, I think that helps a little bit to me on the open space needs there. But I would agree, I would love to see a play structure of some sort. I don't know that I want to require it, but it would be nice for them to consider something there. My only concern is still with the rail line and making sure that there is an adequate buffer there, because I know how fast some of those trains can come through and how loud they are and anything we can do to have a better noise buffer , whether that's a -- instead of just requiring a wood fence there, maybe it's -- I don't know, some sort of concrete fence to give a little bit better sound barrier or something. Just a thought. I don't know that I have anything I want to require there either, but certainly something I want Council to consider as they look at this application. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: One point on the railroad is the speed limit for that area right there is 35 miles an hour. They can't go any faster than that, so -- which is still plenty fast enough for a train, but at the same time it's not like the ones you see going along at, you know, 60 plus miles an hour. They are pretty controlled and they are actually pretty small. I don't know. I don't think there is any limitation on the number of cars they can carry, but usually you see half a dozen maybe, if not less. Holland: Mr. Chair? I know it's not a main line that runs there, it's just an offshoot, but -- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Holland: -- one other comment, too. I think the other challenge -- I would love to see the sidewalk continue up to the north, too, above the railroad tracks, but the challenge is that that's Union Pacific right of way, so in order to do that you have got to work out an easement with UP and that can take a while. Fitzgerald: Years. Commissioner McCarvel, go right ahead. McCarvel: Mr. Chair. I would -- I guess I would like to see maybe something -- a play structure, like you said, for the open space, but I would tend to agree that this is going to be just as much empty nesters moving into something like this as it is young families with what we have moving in here and -- and just the -- the needs of some empty nesters wanting to downsize somewhat and have the HOA take care of their mowing and such. Fitzgerald: I like MEW products. I think it gives us a different look than what we are -- and I think -- I appreciate the applicant's trying to be responsive to our latest Comprehensive Plan changes, because I think that is -- the Ten Mile interchange is not very far away and I understand the traffic concerns and -- understandable. And I know that we are -- ACHD is behind in a lot of those cases, but I do like the product and I know that we need something like this. We have talked about it a couple times where we have Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 39 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 37 of 40 seen like -- if we can pick up a project and move it somewhere else we would like that and so I do think MEW products are cool and I think they have done a good job of trying to park it -- guest parking and provide adequate parking throughout , because that's something we talked about a lot. I think it -- as that whole corner redevelops I think it will fit in there. The -- I think if you are going to buy a townhome next to a railroad you know what you are getting. So, the market's going to kind of manage that. But I do understand the play structure thing. I think -- the play structure comments, I think that's a -- there is a balance there. So, trying to find that out is -- is important. Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Kind of echoing some of your comments, I do like the product. I do like the idea of townhomes. We did talk about that. I think it was one or two meetings ago where it doesn't exist here and it exists -- I -- the traffic concerns coming out of there, they are real. I have made my personal opinion about A CHD more than once, but I mean I -- I think that they should have -- I think that in their requirements there should at least be a temporary turn lane to widen that just enough. It's done elsewhere. I think -- but I don't -- that's out of our purview to require that, so -- but I think it's -- I think it should be done coming in and out of there to have a -- a turn lane in the center. But it is going to be widened. Supposedly. At some point. Fitzgerald: Sooner rather than later. Cassinelli: I know a year ago that wasn't even on their -- that wasn't even on their radar, but now it is, which is good to see. I'm a little concerned about the guest parking. I would like to see more than ten spots. I don't know that that's enough. And, then, I also echo my fellow Commissioners, I would like to see a little bit more amenity. I think it would be hugely popular to have something else in there other than just a picnic area. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Olsen, do you have thoughts, sir? Olsen: Just two. On the amenity it seems to me that even the empty nesters have grandchildren that come over and play and I think it would be a good idea to have the play -- the playground facilities. As far as the traffic goes, I assume there is really nothing that we can do and/or say, even about the traffic, so -- though I sympathize with that and I drive that Ten Mile route frequently. Other than that, I like the product, I think it's a good project. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Unless somebody else has something to add -- take a crack at this. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, sir. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of the City Council file number H-2019-0120 as presented in the staff report for Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 40 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 38 of 40 the hearing date of January 20th, 2020, with the following -- the following modifications: That they work with the staff to provide an amenity more conducive to children. Cassinelli: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to recommend approval of file number H-2019- 0120 for the hearing of January 2nd, 2020. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Appreciate it. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Other Items A. Election of Commission Officers [Action Item] Fitzgerald: Now we have the fun and exciting next -- last component of the day. Elections. Yea. McCarvel: I was going to say -- Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel, go right ahead, ma'am. I think we have -- we have to take these as a -- the Chair and the Vice-Chair second, according to the -- our city attorney who keeps me in line. Cassinelli: So, are these individual? Fitzgerald: Yes, sir. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I nominate Ryan Fitzgerald as chairman for 2020. Cassinelli: Second. Holland: Second. Fitzgerald: I haven't screwed up the last three meetings, is that what you're saying? I'm happy to keep doing it. McCarvel: You have a motion and a second. Fitzgerald: There is a motion and a second. Okay. I have a motion and a second that I retain my position as chair of the Commission for 2020. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 41 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 39 of 40 Cassinelli: And he's happy to do it. Fitzgerald: I'm happy to do it. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed same. Okay. Fine. I will sit down. I'm joking. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Fitzgerald: So, now we have the Vice-Chair position. Do I have comments or thoughts or motions? They are all in order. I think Commissioner Holland is exceptional. Seal: I would agree. Holland: You haven't tested me, so I don't know about that. Fitzgerald: You should hear how amazing you are in my interviews this week. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I nominate Commissioner Holland as Vice-Chair. Olsen: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second for Commissioner Holland to be Vice-Chair of the P&Z Commission. All those in favor -- Cassinelli: I have a concern with -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Oh, there is comments. Cassinelli: Yeah. Who is going to -- who is going to make the rocket motions if she's -- Seal: I'm working on it. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal -- Commissioner Seal is on it. Cassinelli: Will you take notes and pass them down? Fitzgerald: Do we have any additional comments? Concerns? So we have to take better notes than we are doing. I think Commissioner Seal is working on it. Seal: I'm working on it. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 16, 2020 – Page 42 of 147 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 Page 40 of 40 Fitzgerald: So, a motion and a second for Commissioner Holland to be the Vice -Chair of the P&Z Commission for 2020. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. You can't vote no. Okay. Anymore motions? Olsen: Move to adjourn. Seal: Second. Olsen: Move to adjourn. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:54 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROV . l ATTEST CHRIS JOHNSON - CI Y CLERK I I 12D DATE APPROVED p.UGUST� o� of EIDIAN+=DAHO- PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 3 A Item Title: Approve Minutes of December 19, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 3.A . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Approve M inutes of December 19, 2019 P lanning and Zoning C ommission M eeting AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate Meeting Minutes Minutes 12/23/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 3 of 124 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 19, 2019 Page 29 of 29 Fitzgerald: Just access. Parsons: Okay. Fitzgerald: Are we good with that motion and a second? Yes? All those -- I have a motion and a second to approve and recommend approval of H-2019-0121, Bach Storage. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Thanks. We appreciate it. Have a good -- Merry Christmas. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Have a great evening. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I move we adjourn. Holland: Second. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:12 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED /r i �_ , ATTESA i By Ad�ienr"eatherly, Deputy Clerk a 1 2 120 a DATE APPROVED O� %FD AUGUST Q r pQ` �� G 2 City of IDAHO �Z� SEAL �/ EIDIANn-- DAHJ PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 3 B Item Title: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Magical Minds Daycare (H-2019-0119) By Richard and Karena Gardner. Located at 2571 E. Taormina Drive. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 3.B . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - F indings of F act, C onclusions of L aw for M agical M inds Daycare (H-2019-0119) by Richard and K arena Gar dner, L ocated at 2571 E . Taormina Dr. AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate F indings Findings/Orders 12/23/2019 E xhibit A E xhibit 12/23/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 33 of 124 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0119 Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for an In-Home Group Daycare for 7 to 12 Children on 0.28 of an Acre of Land in the R-8 Zoning District, Located at 2571 E. Taormina Dr., by Richard & Karena Gardner. Case No(s). H-2019-0119 For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: December 19, 2019 (Findings on January 2, 2020) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the “Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,” codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision, which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0119 Page 2 upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission’s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant’s request for conditional use permit is hereby approval in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two (2) Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.1. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two (2) year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) two (2) year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of December 19, 2019 By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 2nd day of January , 2020. COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER RYAN FITZGERALD, VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER REID OLSEN VOTED Weatherly, Deputy Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: OXXX&� �WOWA Dated: City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASENO(S). H-2019-0119 CD4 Cr�%C,%CLj' J Page 3 EXHIBIT A Page 1 HEARING DATE: 12/19/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0119 Magical Minds Daycare LOCATION: 2571 E. Taormina Dr. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for an in-home group daycare for 7 to 12 children on 0.28 of an acre of land in the R-8 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 0.28 Future Land Use Designation LDR Existing Land Use(s) SFR home Proposed Land Use(s) SFR home with group daycare Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 8/26/2019; 19 attendees History (previous approvals) None 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) One access via E. Taormina Dr., local street STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 37 of 124 Page 2 C. Project Area Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant/Owner: Richard & Karena Gardner – 2571 E. Taormina Dr., Meridian, ID 83642 B. Representative: Same as Applicant/Owner Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 38 of 124 Page 3 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published 11/29/2019 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 11/26/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 12/9/2019 Nextdoor posting 11/26/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) LDR (Low Density Residential) – The purpose of the LDR designation is to allow for the development of single-family homes on large lots where urban services are provided. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 dwelling units or less per acre. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): “Plan for and encourage services like health care, daycare, grocery stores and recreational areas to be built within walking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) The proposed daycare will be within walking distance of adjacent residential homes. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and associated improvements on this property. D. Proposed Use Analysis: A group daycare (for 7-12 children) is listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as a conditional use in the R- 8 zoning district. (Note: The Applicant proposes to operate a pre-school, which is classified in the UDC as a daycare.) See narrative included in the application for more specific details on the proposed use. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9, Daycare Facility, applicable to the proposed use are as follows: A. General standards for all child daycare and adult care uses, including the classifications of daycare center; daycare, family; and daycare, group: 1. In determining the type of daycare facility, the total number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator's children, is the determining factor. The Applicant’s narrative states the plan is to hold a morning and afternoon class of 7-12 children each. 2. On site vehicle pick up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. There are 4 off-street parking spaces in the driveway (parking pad) that are not utilized by the Applicant where clients may park and drop off and pick up children; 2 additional spaces are available along the curb in front of the house if needed. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 39 of 124 Page 4 3. The decision making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours of operation as conditions of approval. 4. The applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code. Said proof shall be provided prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. 5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence, the hours of operation shall be between six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. This standard may be modified through approval of a conditional use permit. The Applicant proposes to operate the daycare/pre-school during school hours and have a morning and afternoon class; hours of operation won’t exceed those stated. 6. Prior to submittal of an application for an accessory daycare facility in a residential district, the applicant or owner shall hold a neighborhood meeting in accord with subsection 11-5A-4B of this title. Notice of the neighborhood meeting shall be provided to all property owners of record within one hundred feet (100') of the exterior boundary of the subject property. A neighborhood meeting was held for this application. The applicant shall not exceed the maximum number of clients as stated in the approved permit or as stated in this title, whichever is more restrictive. B. Additional standards for daycare facilities that serve children: 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot (6') non- scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. There is a 6’ tall wrought iron fence along the rear yard adjacent to the Ten Mile Creek and 6’ tall vinyl fence along the sides of the rear yard to screen abutting properties in accord with this standard. 2. Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. There is no play equipment in the front yard; play equipment should not be placed in the rear and side required yards (i.e. building setback areas along property lines). 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk. F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Not Applicable G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is provided via E. Taormina Drive, a local street. H. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Parking exists on the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for a 5- bedroom single-family dwelling. A total of 3 garage spaces and a parking pad outside the garage that can accommodate 4 spaces exists on the site. The Applicant/Owner states they only use the garage spaces for their personal vehicles; therefore, 4 off-street parking spaces will be available for client parking. On-street parking is also available (see exhibit in Section VII.A). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 40 of 124 Page 5 I. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Ten Mile Creek and a multi-use pathway exists off-site along the rear yard of the subject property. J. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): A photo of the existing home on this property is included in Section VIII.C; no additions are proposed with this application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on 12/19/2019. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Richard Gardner, Cynda Johnson b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: Richard Gardner e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. In favor of a pre-school in the neighborhood. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. None 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. None Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 41 of 124 Page 6 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan (dated: 8/9/2019), Floor Plan & Parking Exhibit Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 42 of 124 Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 43 of 124 Page 8 B. Landscape Plan (date: 8/9/2019) C. Building Elevations Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 44 of 124 Page 9 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 Daycare Facilities, including but not limited to the following: a. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot (6') non- scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. b. Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. c. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk. e. On-site vehicle pick up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick-up of clients. 2. The maximum number of allowable clients at the facility at one time shall be limited to twelve (12). 3. The daycare/pre-school shall not operate beyond the hours of 6:00 am to 11:00 pm as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-9A.5, unless otherwise modified through approval of a conditional use permit. 4. The applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. B. Central District Health Department (CDHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=179734 C. Ada County Highway District (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=179950 D. Department of Environmental Quality http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180072/Page1.aspx E. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180058/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 45 of 124 Page 10 The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the R-8 zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds the proposed group daycare will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that it will provide a much needed service for area residents within walking distance of homes within the neighborhood. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the operation of the proposed daycare/pre-school should be compatible with the residential uses in the neighborhood and the existing and intended character of the neighborhood and not adversely affect such. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed daycare/pre-school complies with the condition of approval in Section VII as required, the Commission finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Because the site is within the City’s Area of City Impact boundary and has been annexed into the City and these services are already being provided to the existing home, the Commission finds the public facilities mentioned will be provided to the proposed use as well. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Commission finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Although traffic may increase slightly in this area due to the proposed use and clients dropping off and picking up children, the Commission finds it should not be detrimental to the general welfare. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features in this area; however, finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 46 of 124 C IDIAN*,----- �W,FZ,�J PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 3 C Item Title: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Off the Field (H-2019- 0112) By Off the Field, LLC. Located at 2204 E. Lanark Street Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 3.C. Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - F indings of F act, C onclusions of L aw for Off the F ield (H-2019-0112) by Off the F ield, L L C , L ocated at 2204 E . L anark S t. AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate F indings Findings/Orders 12/23/2019 E xhibit A E xhibit 12/23/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 47 of 124 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0112 Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for an Indoor Recreation Facility on 2 Acres of Land in the I-L Zoning District, Located at 2204 E. Lanark St., by Taylor Bateman, Off the Field, LLC. Case No(s). H-2019-0112 For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: December 17, 2019 (Findings on January 2, 2020) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the “Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,” codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision, which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 48 of 124 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0112 Page 2 upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission’s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant’s request for conditional use permit is hereby approval in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two (2) Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.1. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two (2) year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) two (2) year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of December 17, 2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 49 of 124 By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 2nd day of January, 2020. COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER RYAN FITZGERALD, VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED-&)— COMMISSIONER OTED COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER REID OLSEN VOTED By yan Fi e airman Q Attes . I c O LV o By dr e Weatherly, Deputy Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Develop`-mTM'Services divisions of the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: l Dated: ' ' ' 9LDQC) City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0112 Page 3 EXHIBIT A Page 1 HEARING DATE: 12/19/2019 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0112 Off the Field LOCATION: 2204 E. Lanark St. (R5302770031) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an indoor recreation facility on 2 acres of land in the I-L zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 2 Future Land Use Designation Industrial Existing Land Use(s) Indoor entertainment/recreation facility (proposed use is already operating without CUP approval) Proposed Land Use(s) Indoor entertainment/recreation facility Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 6/19/19; one (1) attendee History (previous approvals) 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) One (1) access via E. Lanark St., an industrial collector STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 51 of 124 Page 2 C. Project Area Maps III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Taylor Bateman, Off the Field, LLC – 2204 E. Lanark St., Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Hollyvale Rental Holdings – 2320 Potosi St., Ste. 130, Las Vegas, NV 89146 Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 52 of 124 Page 3 C. Representative: Andrew Davis, BRS Architects – 1010 S. Allante Pl., Ste. 100, Boise, ID 83709 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published 11/29/2019 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 11/26/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 12/9/2019 Nextdoor posting 11/26/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) General Industrial – The purpose of the General Industrial designation is to allow a range of industrial uses to support industrial and commercial activities and to develop areas with sufficient urban services. Light industrial uses may include warehouse, storage units, light manufacturing, and incidental retail and office uses. Heavy industrial uses may include processing, manufacturing, warehouses, storage units, and industrial support activities. In all cases, landscaping, and adequate access should be provided. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): “Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping.” (2.01.03B) There is existing street buffer and parking lot landscaping on this site. “Locate industrial and commercial uses where adequate water supply and water pressure are available for fire protection.” (3.04.02A) There is adequate water supply and pressure available to this property for fire protection. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing 11,268 square foot structure and site improvements on the subject property that were constructed in 2013 (CZC-13-036; DES-13-036, Performance Systems, Inc.). D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is an athletic performance company that specializes in strength conditioning for professional, collegiate and high school athletes and is classified as in indoor recreation facility in UDC Table 11-2C-2. From information provided by the Applicant, the hours of operation will be based on appointment, which could be 6:00 am to 7:30 pm; during the summer, closing time will be 4:00 pm. There are between 1 and 20 clients per session depending on the season. The number of clients per day varies on the season but can be anywhere from 30 to 60 throughout the day. They have 3 full time and 1 part-time employee. Although the proposed use is not industrial in nature, nor is it consistent with the purpose of the Industrial FLUM designation, the UDC does allow for such uses in the I-L district with a CUP. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 53 of 124 Page 4 Note: There is an open code enforcement case on this Applicant for operating this business illegally (i.e. without an approved CUP). In order to be in compliance, the Applicant must obtain approval of the subject CUP and obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Department for the proposed use. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2: Arts, Entertainment or Recreation Facility, as follows: A. General Standards: 1. All outdoor recreation areas and structures that are not fully enclosed shall maintain a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any abutting residential districts. The playing areas of golf courses, including golf tees, fairways, and greens, are an exception to this standard. Not Applicable 2. No outdoor event or activity center shall be located within fifty feet (50') of any property line and shall operate only between the hours of six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. Not Applicable 3. Accessory uses including, but not limited to, retail, equipment rental, restaurant and drinking establishments, may be allowed if designed to serve patrons of the use only. 4. Outdoor speaker systems shall comply with section 11-3A-13, "Outdoor Speaker Systems", of this title. Not Applicable B. Additional Standards for Swimming Pools: Any outdoor swimming pool shall be completely enclosed within a six foot (6') non-scalable fence that meets the requirements of the building code in accord with title 10, chapter 1, of this code. Not Applicable C. Additional Standards for Outdoor Stage or Musical Venue: Any use with a capacity of one hundred (100) seats or more or within one thousand feet (1,000') of a residence or a residential district shall be subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Not Applicable F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Not Applicable G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Once (1) access is proposed via E. Lanark Street, an industrial collector street. H. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking exists on the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B.2. In Industrial districts, the requirement is one (1) space for every 2,000 square feet of gross floor area. Based on the square footage of the structure (i.e. 11,268), a minimum of 6 spaces are required. Seventeen (17) off-street parking spaces exist on the site to serve the proposed use; there are additional spaces for overflow parking along the east side of the building. I. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are required by the UDC (11-3A-17) along all public streets; detached sidewalks are required along collector streets. There are no sidewalks along either side of E. Lanark St. in this location. Sidewalks were not constructed with this development in 1977 when the subdivision (i.e. Locust Grove Industrial Park) was developed; and not required to be installed in 2013 when this site was developed. With a conditional use application, the decision making body may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with the UDC that require the provision of on-site or off-site public facilities or services and/or more restrictive standards than those generally required in the UDC. If the Commission is of the opinion a sidewalk is necessary for public safety in this location, a condition Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 54 of 124 Page 5 requiring such should be included in Section VIII of this report. Note: Due to the type of use proposed on this site and the school (Meridian Academy High School) at the east end of Lanark Street it makes some sense to require a sidewalk; however, unless sidewalks are required on adjacent properties in the future, the sidewalk would not be continuous. J. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): There are no parkways. K. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): There is existing street buffer and parking lot landscaping on this site that was constructed in 2013 that appears to comply with current UDC standards. Because no development, additions to the existing building or site modifications are proposed, no new landscaping is required. L. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Gruber Lateral runs along the northern boundary of this site. M. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): No changes are proposed to the existing fencing. N. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): City water and sewer service is provided to this site. O. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): A photo of the existing structure is included in Section VII.C; no changes are proposed to the structure. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on December 17, 2019. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: Taylor Bateman, Applicant e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. Discussion on neighboring uses and whether or not to require a sidewalk to be constructed along Lanark St. 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. The Commission added a condition for a sidewalk to be constructed along the frontage of the property along E. Lanark St. in the future if a sidewalk is constructed on the abutting property to the east or west (either one) in the future (see Section VIII.A.3). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 55 of 124 Page 6 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan & Floor Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 56 of 124 Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 57 of 124 Page 8 B. Landscape Plan (date: 10/31/2013) Previously approved with CZC-13-036 C. Photo of Existing Building/Site Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 58 of 124 Page 9 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2 Arts, Entertainment or Recreation Facility, Indoors and Outdoors. 2. The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Department within 30 days of approval of the conditional use permit for the subject use. 3. A sidewalk shall be constructed on the frontage of the property along E. Lanark St. in the future if a sidewalk is constructed on the abutting property to the east or west (either one) in the future. B. Ada County Highway District (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=179758 C. Department of Environmental Quality http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=180073 IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meets all the dimensional and development regulations of the I-L zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds the proposed use is harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan (see Section V for more information). 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the operation of the proposed indoor recreation facility should be compatible with other uses in the vicinity and the intended character of the area and not adversely affect such. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed use complies with the condition of approval in Section VII as required, the Commission finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Because the site is within the City’s Area of City Impact boundary and has been annexed into the City and these services are already being provided to the existing building, the Commission finds the proposed use will be served adequately by these services continuing to be provided. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 59 of 124 Page 10 The Commission finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons or property or affect the general welfare by any of the means listed as the proposed use is actually less intense than many uses located in this area. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance in this area; however, finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 60 of 124 E IDIAN*,------ (IZ PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Planning and Zoning Public Hearing Outline and Presentations Meeting Notes: Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 2, 2020 Changes to Agenda: None Item #4A: Sky Mesa Highlands (H-2019-0123) Application(s): ➢ Annexation & Zoning ➢ Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 30.6 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at the NWC of S. Eagle Rd. & E. Lake Hazel Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: West: SFR, zoned R-4 North: SFR (in development process), zoned R-8 & RUT in Ada County East: Eagle Rd. & SFR, zoned R-4 & R-15 South: Rural residential, zoned RUT in Ada County History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: LDR (3 or fewer units/acre) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests annexation of 31.96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district for the development of 74 new SFR detached homes at a gross density of 2.45 units/acre consistent with the LDR FLUM designation. There is an existing home and accessory structures on this site; the home is proposed to remain on a lot in the proposed subdivision. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots & 2 other lots on 30.6 acres of land; originally, the plat was planned to develop in one phase but is now proposed to develop in 2 phases. The average lot size in the development is 11,000 s.f. with a minimum lot size of 8,000 s.f. Access is proposed via the extension of stub streets to the north in Sky Mesa Subdivision via E. Taconic Dr.; emergency acces s only is proposed via Eagle Rd. The existing home is seeking a waiver to UDC 11-3A-3A.3 from City Council for their access driveway via Eagle Rd. to remain until such time as the property redevelops; at such time, access would be taken internally from within the subdivision and the access would be closed. Detached sidewalks are proposed along all internal streets and along Eagle & Lake Hazel Rds.; Staff recommends the sidewalk is extended across the frontage of the lot adjacent to Eagle Rd. where the existing home is proposed to remain. A 25’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along Eagle & Lake Hazel Rds.; Staff recommends the buffer is extended across the frontage of the lot adjacent to Eagle Rd. in a common lot where the existing home is proposed to remain, except for the area where the driveway is located if Council approves a waiver for it to remain. A minimum of 10% qualified open space & 1 site amenity is required to be provided within this development. A total of 6.55 acres (or 21%) of qualified open space consisting of ½ the street buffer along Eagle & Lake Hazel Rds., 8’ wide pathways along intern al streets & common areas over 50’ x 100’ in area are proposed in excess of UDC standards. A large part of the common area includes two areas with significant slopes that are proposed to be landscaped in accord with UDC standards to count toward the qualified open space standards. A 675’ long pedestrian pathway is depicted on the landscape plan through the common area on Lot 14, Block 3; because it does not connect to an existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle route outside the development as designated on the Pathways Master Plan, it does not count as a “qualified” site amenity – therefore, the Applicant now proposes to not provide a pathway in this area. Because no other qualified site amenities are proposed and because removal of the pathway will essential make the common area unusable, Staff is not in favor of removal of the pathway. This development is proposed to be included in the Sky Mesa HOA and will be granted access to all amenities in that development consisting of (2) swimming pools and clubhouses, sports fields (i.e. ball field, basketball court), walking paths, playground structure and a swing set. The distance to these amenities range from 950-2,400 feet away from the northwest corner of this development. Because this will essentially be another phase of Sky Mesa and amenities were provided above the minimum standards for that development, Staff is amenable to the Applicant’s request. The Grimmett Lateral runs along the west & north boundaries of the site within a 30’ wide irrigation easement that is proposed to remain open on the west side and be piped on the north side; along the west boundary, this easement lies approximately 17 feet off the property line resulting in a 47’+/- encroachment/building setback for affected lots. Fencing is proposed along the east side of the easement line within building lots resulting in a very large area that will be unusable for homeowner’s of these lots that they will have to pay taxes on, although it may provide an amenity of sorts with wildlife. Note: When East Ridge Estates Subdivision was approved on the adjacent property to the west in 2017, Council approved a waiver for the easement to be located within adjacent building lots which resulted in a 45-foot wide building setback for adjacent building lots. The UDC (11-3A-6E) requires irrigation easements wider than 10 feet to be included in a common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless modified by City Council at a public hearing; the Applicant requests approval of a waiver to this requirement to allow the easement to be located within adjacent building lots. If Council does not approve the waiver, the easement should be placed in common lots. The UDC (11-3A-6B) requires all laterals to be piped unless used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1; the Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to leave the Grimmett Lateral open. Council may grant a waiver if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. If Council does not approve the requested waiver, the lateral should be piped. Conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate the architecture and building materials for single and 2 -story structures proposed within the development that include a mix of materials and colors with stone veneer wainscot. Because all of the proposed units are detached, they are not subject to design review. Written Testimony: • Rick Thurber (property owner that abuts the SWC of the proposed development) – Requests the proposed irrigation system which will replace the current one, has at least 60 psi to operate his sprinkler system, instead of the 52 psi proposed; and requests homes constructed on lots directly north of his property be restricted to a single-story in height so as not to obstruct his views and similarly trees that are planted be of a variety that won’t grow tall to obstruct his views. • Todd Tucker, Applicant (response to staff report) Staff Recommendation: Approval with a DA per 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- 2019-0123, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 2, 2020, 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- 0123, as presented during the hearing on January 2, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0123 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4B: Hensley Station (H-2019-0120) Application(s): ➢ Annexation & Zoning ➢ Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 6 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 462 N. Black Cat Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Railroad tracks & SFR rural, zoned R1 & RUT South & East: COMPASS Charter School, zoned M-E West: Black Cat Rd., and agricultural land, zoned RUT History: NA Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MHDR (8-15 units/acre) Summary of Request: Annexation of 7.17 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district for the development of 65 residential units at a gross density of 10.83 units/acre consistent with the MHDR FLUM designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 65 building lots & 6 common lots on 6 acres of land for the development of single-family attached and townhome dwellings. The plat is proposed to develop in 1 or 2 phases, the Applicant is unsure at this time. Access is proposed via W. Aviator St., a collector street, along the southern boundary of the site; an emergency only access is proposed via Black Cat Rd., an arterial street. Private streets are proposed for internal access. Off-street parking is proposed in accord with UDC standards; an additional 10 spaces are proposed for guest parking along the south end of the mew. A 25’ wide landscaped street buffer is required along Black Cat & a 20’ wide buffer is required along Aviator as proposed. The Director approved a request for alternative compliance to allow the street buffer along Aviator Street to be located in adjacent building lots rather than in a common lot as typically required, which will allow the townhomes to be placed closer to the street to enhance the streetscape consistent with new urbanism design and the design standards in the TMISAP. A minimum of 10% qualified open space & 1 site amenity is required to be provided with development. A total of 0.71 of an acre (or 12%) is proposed consisting of half the street buffer along Black Cat, the 35’ wide common mew and the common area at the NEC of the site. Amenities are proposed to consist of a fire pit with 2 benches and a 15’ x 15’ shade structure with picnic tables. A variety of structure configurations are proposed consisting of (3) single-family attached structures (2 units in each structure for a total of 6 units); (9) 4-plex structures in two different configurations (Type 1 – rear-loaded facing a mew, consisting of 8 units; and Type 2 – front-loaded facing the street, consisting of 28 units); (1) rear-loaded 5-plex structure containing 5 units; and (3) rear-loaded 6-plex structures containing a total of 18 units (see site plan and building elevations in Sections VII.E and F respectively). Build ing materials consist of a variety of horizontal and vertical siding and stucco with stone veneer accents; color schemes are the same on each of the buildings throughout. All structures (i.e. single-family attached and townhome dwellings) proposed in this development are subject to the design elements in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual, which include a requirement for porches to be provided for each unit facing W. Aviator St. Porches should be a dominant element along at least 30% of the front façade of the buildings – revisions to the elevations should be made to comply. Building materials, particularly at the street level facing Aviator St. should be high quality, such as terra cotta, natural stone, clay-fired units, or other approved masonry materials for architectural details or accents – the strongest use of such should be reserved for street level windows and entries. Written Testimony: Kent Brown, Applicant’s Representative (in agreement w/staff report) Staff Recommendation: Approval w/a DA per 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- 2019-0120, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 2, 2020, 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- 0120, as presented during the hearing on January 2, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0120 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 Emergency Access Zoning Map Future Land Use Map Aerial Map C IDIAN*,----- �IwlIZ PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 20, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 A Item Title: Public Hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands (H-2019-0123) By HHS Construction, LLC. Located at the NW Corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. 1 Request: Annexation of 31.96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district. 2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots and 2 other lots on 30.6 acres of land in the proposed R-4 zoning district. Meeting Notes: c� I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.A . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for S ky M esa Highlands (H-2019-0123) by HHS Construction, L L C , L ocated at the NW cor ner of S . Eagle Rd. and E. L ake Hazel Rd. C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taff Report 12/30/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 61 of 124 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools file:///H|/City%20Council%20To%20Move/PZ%20-%20Public%20Testimony%20Sign%20in%201-2%20Sky%20Mesa%20Highlands.htm[1/3/2020 8:44:45 AM] Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 1/2/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-A Project Name: Sky Mesa Highlands AZ, PP Project No.: H-2019-0123 Active: Signature Name Address HOA Name HOA Represent For Neutral Against I Wish To Testify Sign In Date/Time Sherrie Ewing 2934 E Lake Hazel Diamond ridge X 1/2/2020 5:49:03 PM Todd Tucker 729 s bridgeway place eagle id 83616 X 1/2/2020 5:50:04 PM Patricia Pitzer 2703 E Wainwright Dr X 1/2/2020 6:01:14 PM © 2020 - City of Meridian, Idaho Council Sign In Forms Tools Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission January 2, 2020 SKY MESA HIGHLANDS –ANNEXATION & REZONE –PRELIMINARY PLAT CITY OF MERIDIAN –PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION –JANUARY 2, 2020 Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Development Overview •Annexation & Rezone •R-4 Zoning Requested •Preliminary Plat •75 Residential Lots •13 Common Lots •Average Lot Size = 11,000 Square Feet •Approximately 6.5 Acres of Qualified Open Space Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Preliminary Plat 75 RESIDENTIAL LOTS 13 COMMON LOTS 30.6 ACRES TOTAL SIZE +6.5 ACRES (21%)OF OPEN SPACE 11,000 SQ. FT. AVG. LOT SIZE Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Sample Architecture Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Preliminary Plat Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Amenities Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Concerns Existing Access to Eagle Road Pedestrian Pathway Phasing Plan Grimmett Lateral Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Access to Eagle Road Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Pedestrian Pathway Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phasing Plan Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Grimmett Lateral Sky Mesa Highlands ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Summary Conditions of Approval Modifications A.2.a & A.3.a –The existing driveway access via S. Eagle Road on Lot 29, Block 1 shall be allowed to remain in its current configuration until such time as this lot is redeveloped. At that time the access to S. Eagle Road shall be removed and access to the redeveloped lot or lots shall be provided from within the existing subdivision. A.8 –Delete (Pipe Grimmett Lateral) A.2.e –Delete (Common Lot for Micro-Path) A.3.d –Delete (Common Lot for Micro-Path) A.3.f –Delete (Pathway Landscaping) A.3.h –Delete (Pathway Connection to Street) Page 1 HEARING DATE: 1/2/2020 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Sky Mesa Highlands H-2019-0123 LOCATION: Northwest corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd., in the SE ¼ of Section 32, T.3N., R.1E. (Parcel #R1835500100 & #S1132449300) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 31.96 acres of land with an R-4 zoning district; and preliminary plat consisting of 75 building lots, 11 common lots and 2 other lots on 30.6 acres of land in the proposed R-4 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 30.6 Future Land Use Designation LDR (Low Density Residential) (3 or fewer units/acre) Existing Land Use(s) Rural residential/agricultural with one (1) home Proposed Land Use(s) SFR (single-family residential) Lots (# and type; bldg./common) 75 building; 11 common; 2 other (common driveways) Phasing Plan (# of phases) None (1 phase) Number of Residential Units (type of units) 75 (SFR detached) Density (gross & net) 2.45 gross; 3.96 net Open Space (acres, total [%]/buffer/qualified) 6.55 acres; 21% (consisting of half the street buffer along Eagle Rd., arterial street; internal parkways; and open space areas over 50’ x 100’ in area) Amenities 11% additional qualified open space (of at least 20,000 s.f. in area) above the minimum required; Applicant also proposes to provide access to the amenities in Sky Mesa to the north through HOA CC&R’s STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 62 of 124 Page 2 Description Details Page ysical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The topography of the site slopes up toward E. La ke Hazel Rd. toward the south and west boundaries; there are steep slopes within the common areas on Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1 Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 10/7/19; 1 attendee History (previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District Staff report (yes/no) Not yet Requires ACHD Commission Action (yes/no) No Access (Arterial/Collectors/State Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Access from the north via the extension of S. Cubola Way and S. Pioneer Trail Way in Sky Mesa Commons Sub. Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access Connection to two (2) future stub streets to the north is proposed; no stub streets exist to this site from the west; no stub streets are proposed to the south for topography reasons Existing Road Network None Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers None Proposed Road Improvements S. Eagle Rd. between Amity & Lake Hazel Rds. is planned to be widened to 5 lanes with curb, gutter & sidewalk and a Level 3 bike facility; and the intersection at Lake Hazel/Eagle Rds. is planned to be widened to 4/5 lanes on Eagle and 3/5 lanes on Lake Hazel & signalized in 2023 per The Five Year Work Plan Fire Service Distance to Fire Station 2.6 miles (Fire Station #4) Fire Response Time 6:00 minutes (under ideal conditions) Resource Reliability 78% (does not meet targeted goal of 80% or greater) Risk Identification 2 (current resources would not be adequate to supply service) Accessibility Meets all required access, road widths and turnarounds Special/resource needs None (will not require an aerial device) Water Supply 1,000 gallons/minute for one hour Other Resources Police Service No comments submitted West Ada School District No comments submitted Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services 0-feet Sewer Shed North Black Cat Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s 75 WRRF Declining Balance 13.82 Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns • Slope needs to be 5% or less Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 63 of 124 Page 3 Description Details Page • Common Driveway at east end of line C needs an additional manhole to ensure sewer tie-in is not less than 90 degrees. Water Distance to Water Services 0-feet Pressure Zone 4 Estimated Project Water ERU’s 75 Water Quality Concerns None Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns 1. Waterlines size not shown. Modeled as 8" throughout project. 2. As currently designed, the water main in the northwest corner will not extend/connect to the northern development. As such, this design does not meet fire flow requirements and the water main must have a second connection to meet minimum fire flows. 3. As currently designed, the static pressure for the southern portion of the development does not meet the requirement of 55 psi. A portion of the property needs to be located in Zone 5 in order to achieve the required pressure. Applicant to coordinate with Engineering to ensure proper pressure and to make sure reconfiguration does not cause dead-end lines. 4. No mainlines in common driveways. Water service lines only. 5. Hydrant needed at the east end of E. Brace Street. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 64 of 124 Page 4 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Todd Tucker, HHS Construction, LLC – 729 S. Bridgeway Place, Eagle, ID 83616 B. Owner: Donald Cantrell – PO Box 5099, Boise, ID 83705 C. Representative: Scott Wonders, J-U-B Engineers, 250 S. Beechwood Ave., Boise, ID 83709 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published 12/13/2019 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 12/10/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 12/17/2019 Nextdoor posting 12/10/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Low Density Residential (LDR): The purpose of this designation is to allow for the development of single-family homes on large lots where urban services are provided. Uses may include single- family homes at gross densities of 3 dwelling units or less per acre. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 65 of 124 Page 5 B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): “Provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi-family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development.” (3.07.03B) The proposed single-family detached homes will contribute to the diversity in housing types in the City. Staff is unaware if the proposed units will be owner occupied or rental units. “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) The proposed development is approximately 2.5 miles away from employment areas along Overland Rd. to the north; the project is not in close proximity to shopping centers. “Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A) Qualified open space is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. As proposed, the proposed qualified open space exceeds the minimum standards. “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F) Urban services can be provided and this development is contiguous to the City. “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D); Access is proposed via the extension of internal local streets from Sky Mesa Subdivision from the north; no access is proposed via Eagle Rd., the arterial street. “Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B) There are no pedestrian connections proposed from the adjacent developments to the north and west to this property; a couple of pedestrian connections are proposed to the properties to the south across Lot 10, Block 1. The proposed land use (i.e. single-family residential) and density (i.e. 2.45 units per acre gross) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant should comply with UDC standards related to the provisions in the Comprehensive Plan as noted in Section VIII of the staff report. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is one (1) existing home and three (3) accessory structures on this site that are proposed to remain on Lot 29, Block 1; this property is included in the boundary of the annexation and subdivision because it cannot be verified as an original parcel of record. No changes are proposed to this property; access is proposed to remain the same (via S. Eagle Rd.). The configuration of the lot should be designed so that all structures comply with the minimum dimensional standards/setbacks listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district. D. Proposed Use Analysis: Single-family residential detached homes are proposed within this development and are allowed as a principal permitted use in the R-4 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The proposed lots average in size at 11,000 square feet with a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet (s.f.); the majority of lots are 65 feet wide consistent with lots located in other phases of Sky Mesa development to the north. The plat is not proposed to be phased. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): Not Applicable Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 66 of 124 Page 6 F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Development is required to comply with the dimensional standards for the R-4 district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5. G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is proposed via internal local streets (S. Cubola Way and S. Pioneer Trail Way) extended from the north from Sky Mesa Subdivision; no access is proposed via S. Eagle Rd. except for the existing home proposed to remain on Lot 29, Block 1 which is proposing to retain their access until such time as the property redevelops – at that time, access will be taken internally from within the subdivision. The western access from the north (S. Pioneer Trail Way) was not previously planned on the approved preliminary plat for Sky Mesa; the Applicant has submitted a concept plan showing how access will be provided from the north, which should be vetted through ACHD (see Section VII.B). The UDC (11-3A-3A.3) requires all subdivisions to provide local street access to any use that currently takes direct access from an arterial street such as S. Eagle Rd.; therefore, Staff recommends the existing driveway access via S. Eagle Rd. on Lot 29, Block 1 is removed and access is provided internally in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.3, unless otherwise waived by City Council. An access easement is depicted on the plat over Lot 30, Block 1, a common lot, for future access to this lot upon redevelopment. The development to the west did not provide a stub street to this property; no stub streets are proposed to the south because of the steep slopes in that area. Two (2) common driveways are proposed on Lots 8 and 16, Block 1; common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. H. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required for single-family detached dwellings as set forth in UDC Table 11- 3C-6. Guest parking can be accommodated on both sides of local streets. I. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): There are no multi-use pathways required on this site per the Pathways Master Plan. However, there are 675+/- linear feet of pathways proposed as amenities in the common areas on Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1. J. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalk are required to be provided with development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is proposed along S. Eagle Rd. and a 7-foot wide detached sidewalk is proposed along E. Lake Hazel Rd. Detached sidewalks are proposed along internal local streets. The sidewalk is not proposed to extend across Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain; Staff recommends the sidewalk is extended across the frontage of this lot with development as required by UDC 11-3A-17 for safe pedestrian access along Eagle Rd. K. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are proposed along all internal local streets with landscaping per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. L. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Landscaping is required to be provided with development as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-5 and 11-3B and 11-3G-3E. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 67 of 124 Page 7 A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. per UDC Table 11-2A-5, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The street buffer should be extended along the frontage of Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain in a common lot as required by UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. If the unimproved street right of way is ten feet (10') or greater from the edge of pavement to edge of sidewalk or property line, the developer shall maintain a ten foot (10') compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative ground cover as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.5a. Landscaping is required along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-12C; a minimum of 1 tree is required per 100 linear feet of pathway – the landscape plan should be revised accordingly to include landscaping along the pathways in Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1. The Landscape Requirements table should also include calculations for the linear feet of pathways proposed and the number of trees required and proposed. Landscaping is required within all common areas per the standards in UDC 11-3G-3E (i.e. one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet and lawn, either seed or sod); the landscape plan should be revised accordingly to include landscaping in Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1 in accord with this requirement; calculations should also be included in the Landscape Requirements table demonstrating compliance. M. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided for this development per UDC 11-3G-3A. A qualified open space exhibit is included in Section VII.D that depicts a total of 6.55 acres (or 21%) of qualified open space consisting of half the street buffer along Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd., 8’ wide parkways along internal local streets and common areas over 50’ x 100’ in area in excess of UDC standards. A large part of the common area includes two areas with significant slopes that are proposed to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.2. N. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of one (1) site amenity is required to be provided for this development per UDC 11- 3G-3A.2 that meets the standards set forth in UDC 11-3G-3C. Approximately 675 linear feet of pedestrian pathways are proposed; however, they do not count as a “qualified” amenity because they do not connect to an existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle route outside the development as designated on the Pathways Master Plan per UDC 11- 3G-3C.3. This development is proposed to be included in the Sky Mesa Homeowner’s Association and will be granted access to all amenities in that development consisting of (2) swimming pools and clubhouses, sports fields (i.e. ball field, basketball court), walking paths, playground structure and a swing set. The distance to these amenities range from 950-2,400 feet away from the northwest corner of this development (see exhibit in Section VII.D). Because this will essentially be another phase of Sky Mesa and amenities were provided above the minimum standards for that development, Staff is amenable to the Applicant’s request. O. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Grimmett Lateral runs along the west and north boundaries of the site within a 30-foot wide irrigation easement that is proposed to remain open on the west side and be piped on the north side; along the west boundary, this easement lies approximately 17 feet off the property line resulting in a 47’+/- encroachment/building setback for affected lots. Fencing Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 68 of 124 Page 8 is proposed along the east side of the easement line within building lots resulting in a very large area that will be unusable for homeowner’s of these lots that they will have to pay taxes on, although it may provide an amenity of sorts with wildlife. Note: When East Ridge Estates Subdivision was approved on the adjacent property to the west in 2017, Council approved a waiver for the easement to be located within adjacent building lots which resulted in a 45-foot wide building setback for adjacent building lots. The UDC (11-3A-6E) requires irrigation easements wider than 10 feet to be included in a common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless modified by City Council at a public hearing; the Applicant requests approval of a waiver to this requirement to allow the easement to be located within adjacent building lots. If Council does not approve the waiver, the easement should be placed in common lots. The UDC (11-3A-6B) requires all laterals to be piped unless used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1; the Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to leave the Grimmett Lateral open. Council may grant a waiver if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. If Council does not approve the requested waiver, the lateral should be piped. P. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): Fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C and 11-3A-7. Fencing is depicted on the landscape plan as follows: 6’ open vision black tube steel is proposed along the canal easement at the west and north boundaries; a 6’ tall closed vision vinyl fence is proposed at the back edge of the street buffer along S. Eagle Rd. and along the rear and sides of building lots abutting common areas along local streets; a 4’ tall open vision black tube steel fence is proposed adjacent to other internal common areas. Q. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed via existing 8-inch water and sewer mains in Sky Mesa Commons subdivision at the north boundary of this site. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Pressure irrigation will be provided by the Boise Project Board of Control via the existing Sky Mesa pressure irrigation system. The existing home is required to hook up to City water and sewer services at the developers expense within 60 calendar days of such services becoming available in accord with MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. At such time, the septic tank should be abandoned and the well solely used for irrigation purposes. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. R. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18) An adequate storm drainage system is required to be provided in this development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances; design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. Storm drainage is proposed to be mitigated by detention/retention ponds and/or underground seepage bed disposal in accord with ACHD design criteria. A master grading and drainage plan is required to be submitted with the final plat application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 69 of 124 Page 9 S. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate the architecture and building materials for single and 2-story structures proposed within the development that include a mix of materials and colors with stone veneer wainscot (see Section VII.F). Because all of the proposed units are detached, they are not subject to design review. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed AZ and PP applications with the requirement of a Development Agreement per the comments and conditions in Section VIII and the Findings in Section IX. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 70 of 124 Page 10 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation & Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 71 of 124 Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 72 of 124 Page 12 B. Preliminary Plat (date: 10/22/2019) & Conceptual Plans Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 73 of 124 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 74 of 124 Page 14 Revised concept plat for adjacent property to the north (Sky Mesa) showing access to the subject property Conceptual redevelopment plan for Lot 29, Block 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 75 of 124 Page 15 C. Landscape Plan (date: 10/22/2019) & Site Amenities in Sky Mesa Subdivision Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 76 of 124 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 77 of 124 Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 78 of 124 Page 18 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit (Revised) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 79 of 124 Page 19 E. Conceptual Building Elevations VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan, future redevelopment plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. The existing home proposed to remain on Lot 29, Block 1 shall hook up to City water and sewer services at the developers expense within 60 calendar days of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 80 of 124 Page 20 such services becoming available in accord with MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. At such time, the septic tank shall be abandoned and the well solely used for irrigation purposes. c. The CC&R’s for Sky Mesa Subdivision shall allow for this development to use their common area and site amenities; a revised copy of the recorded CC&R’s demonstrating compliance with this provision shall be submitted with the final plat application. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated 10/22/2019, shall be revised prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Remove the existing driveway access via S. Eagle Rd. on Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.3, unless otherwise waived by City Council. If access via Eagle Rd. isn’t approved, access should be provided via a common driveway as depicted on the conceptual redevelopment plan in Section VII.B. b. Extend the detached sidewalk along S. Eagle Rd. across Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. c. Extend the minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along S. Eagle Rd. across the frontage of Lot 29, Block 1 in a common lot as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-5 and 11-3B-7C.2a. d. Lot 29, Block 1 is required to have street frontage on a public street (30’ flag or 60’) or on a common driveway, which doesn’t require frontage per UDC 11-2A-3B and Table 11-2A-5. e. Include a minimum 15-foot wide common lot for a micro-path and landscaping at the end of the S. Burgo Pl. cul-de-sac connecting to Lot 14, Block 3. f. The existing home and accessory structures proposed to remain on Lot 29, Block 1 shall comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5 for the R- 4 zoning district; make any revisions to the lot configuration necessary for compliance. g. The irrigation easements depicted along the west and north property boundaries shall be included in common lots outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise modified by City Council per UDC 11-3A-6E. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated 10/22/2019, shall be revised prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Remove the existing driveway access via S. Eagle Rd. on Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.3, unless otherwise waived by City Council. a. Extend the detached sidewalk along S. Eagle Rd. across Lot 29, Block 1 where the existing home is to remain in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. b. Extend the minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along S. Eagle Rd. across the frontage of Lot 29, Block 1 in accord with UDC Table 11-2A-5 in a common lot; depict landscaping within the buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C. c. Include the width of the street buffer proposed along S. Eagle Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. in the Landscape Requirements table (minimum 25-feet wide). Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 81 of 124 Page 21 d. Include a minimum 15-foot wide common lot with a minimum 5-foot wide micro-path and landscaping on either side per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C at the end of the S. Burgo Pl. cul-de-sac connecting to Lot 14, Block 3. e. Correct “Block 1 Lot 50” in the Landscape Requirements table to read “Block 1 Lot 49”. f. Depict landscaping along the pathways in Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C; include calculations in the Landscape Requirements table for the linear feet of pathways proposed and the number of trees required and proposed that demonstrate compliance. g. Depict landscaping within the common areas on Lot 14, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 1 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.2 (i.e. one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet and lawn, either seed or sod); also include calculations demonstrating compliance in the Landscape Requirements table. h. If topography allows, extend the pathway on Lot 14, Block 3 out to the sidewalk along Pioneer Trail Way. i. The irrigation easements depicted along the west and north property boundaries shall be included in common lots outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise modified by City Council per UDC 11-3A-6E. j. If the unimproved street right of way is ten feet (10') or greater from the edge of pavement to edge of sidewalk or property line, a ten foot (10') compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority with the remainder landscaped with lawn or other vegetative ground cover shall be depicted as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.5a. 4. All common driveways shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 5. For lots accessed by common driveways, an exhibit shall be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D. Driveways for abutting properties that aren’t 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. 6. A perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveways on Lots 8 and 16, Block 1 shall 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 in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D.8. A copy of said easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 7. Provide address signage for homes accessed by the common driveways on Lots 8 and 16, Block 1 at the public street for emergency wayfinding purposes. 8. The Grimmett Lateral that lies along the west and north boundaries of the site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B unless otherwise waived by City Council. The Applicant requests a waiver to this requirement to allow the lateral along the west boundary of the site to remain open; the lateral on the north side of the site is proposed to be piped. Council may grant a waiver if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. 9. A master grading and drainage plan is required to be submitted with the final plat application. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 82 of 124 Page 22 B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1. Waterlines sizes are not shown. Conceptually modeled as 8" throughout project. 1.2. As currently designed, the water main in the northwest corner will not extend/connect to the northern development. As such, this design does not meet fire flow requirements and the water main must have a second connection to meet minimum fire flows. 1.3. As the water system is currently designed, the static pressure for the southern portion of the development does not meet the requirement of 55 psi. A portion of the property needs to be located in Zone 5 in order to achieve the required pressure. Applicant to coordinate with Engineering to ensure proper pressure and to make sure reconfiguration does not cause dead-end lines. 1.4. No water mainlines in common driveways. Water service lines only. 1.5. Fire Hydrant needed at the east end of E. Brace Street. 1.6 Sanitary sewer slope needs to be 5% or less. 1.7 The common driveway at east end of sanitary sewer mainline C needs an additional manhole to ensure sewer tie-in is not less than 90 degrees. 1.8 Due to the elevation differentials in this development, the applicant shall be required to submit an engineered master grading and drainage plan for approval by the Community Development Department prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. This plan shall establish, at a minimum; the finish floor elevation for each building lot, the finish grade elevations of the rear lot corners, the drainage patterns away from each building pad, the drainage patterns of the overall blocks, and any special swales or subsurface drainage features necessary to control and maintain storm water drainage. Applicant's engineer shall consult the 2012 International Residential Code when establishing the finish floor elevations and drainage patterns away from the building pads. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 83 of 124 Page 23 Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be 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. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 84 of 124 Page 24 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=179906 D. POLICE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/181049/Page1.aspx E. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/browse.aspx F. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180514/Page1.aspx G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180404/Page1.aspx Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 85 of 124 Page 25 H. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180617/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or 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 Applicant is proposing to annex and develop the subject property with 75 single- family residential units in the R-4 zoning district at a gross density of 2.45 units/acre consistent with the LDR FLUM designation. (See section V above for more information.) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute toward the range of housing opportunities available within the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed low density residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential development. 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 City services are available to be provided to this development. The School District has not submitted comments on this application. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the Applicant complies with the conditions in Section VIII. 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; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) Staff finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section VIII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 86 of 124 Page 26 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Staff finds the proposed plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City’s CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8- 30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 87 of 124 CID.IAN*,---- �W,IZ,�J PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 B Item Title: Public Hearing for Hensley Station (H-2019-0120) By Northern Land Development, LLC. Located at 462 N. Black Cat Rd. 1. Request: An Annexation of 7.17 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district 2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 65 building lots and 6 common lots on 6 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Meeting Notes: I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 4.B . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: 0 Title of I tem - Public Hearing for Hensley Station (H-2019-0120) by Northern L and D evelopment, L L C, L ocated at 462 N. B lack C at Rd. C lic k Here for Applic ation Materials C lic k Here to S ign Up to Tes tify at Hearing AT TAC HM E NT S: Description Type Upload D ate S taff Report S taff Report 12/23/2019 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 88 of 124 City of Meridian - Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools file:///H|/City%20Council%20To%20Move/PZ%20-%20Public%20Testimony%20Sign%20in%201-2%20Hensley%20Station.htm[1/3/2020 8:45:15 AM] Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 1/2/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-B Project Name: Hensley Station AZ, PP, PS Project No.: H-2019-0120 Active: Signature Name Address HOA Name HOA Represent For Neutral Against I Wish To Testify Sign In Date/Time David Petersen 4096 W. Gillette Dr. X 1/2/2020 7:20:10 PM © 2020 - City of Meridian, Idaho Council Sign In Forms Tools Page 1 HEARING DATE: January 2, 2020 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0120 Hensley Station – ALT, AZ, PP, PS LOCATION: 462 N. Black Cat Rd., in the SW ¼ of Section 10, T.3N., R.1W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 7.17 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district and Preliminary Plat consisting of 65 building lots and 6 common lots on 6 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 6 acres Future Land Use Designation MHDR (medium high density residential) in Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) Existing Land Use(s) Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family attached dwellings; and townhome dwellings Lots (# and type; bldg./common) 65 building lots; 6 common lots Phasing Plan (# of phases) 1 or 2 phases (as shown on the plat in Section VII.B) Number of Residential Units (type of units) 6 attached units & 59 townhome units Density (gross & net) 10.83 gross; 14.47 net Open Space (acres, total [%]/buffer/qualified) 0.71 of an acre (or 12%) Amenities Fire pit with 2 benches Physical Features (waterways, hazards, flood plain, hillside) The Purdam Gulch Drain crosses the northeast corner of this site Neighborhood meeting date; # of attendees: 9/18/19; 5 attendees History (previous approvals) None STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 89 of 124 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) Private street access proposed via Aviator St., a collector street; emergency access only via N. Black Cat Rd., a minor arterial street (100’+/- south of the north property line) (the existing access via Black Cat is required to be closed) Traffic Level of Service Better than “E” (acceptable level of service for a 2-lane minor arterial is “E”) Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access No stub streets or cross-access easement are proposed Existing Road Network Black Cat Rd. is currently improved with 2-travel lanes, approximately 25’ of pavement and no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting the site. Aviator St. was constructed as ½ of a 3-lane collector 46’ street section with 23’ of pavement plus 12 additional feet of pavement totaling 35’ with vertical curb, gutter & a 7’ wide attached sidewalk on the south side of the roadway with a 3’ gravel shoulder and borrow ditch on the north side of the roadway. As it continues east & transitions to a 2-lane roadway, it’s constructed as ½ of a 36’ collector roadway with 18’ of pavement plus 12’ additional pavement totaling 30’ with vertical curb, gutter and 7’ attached sidewalk on the south side of the roadway with a 3’ gravel shoulder and borrow ditch on the north side. Existing Arterial Sidewalks / Buffers Proposed Road Improvements Black Cat Rd. is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Franklin Rd. to Cherry Ln. and the Black Cat/Cherry intersection to be widened to 5-lanes on the north leg, 6- lanes on the south leg, 4-lanes on the west leg and 5-lanes on east leg and signalized between 2021-2025 Fire Service Distance to Fire Station 2.3 miles (Fire Station #2) Fire Response Time 4:00 minutes (under ideal conditions) Resource Reliability 81% (meets targeted goal of 80% or greater) Risk Identification 2 (current resources would be adequate to supply service) Accessibility Meets requirements Special/resource needs None Water Supply 1,500 gallons/minute for 2 hours (may be less if buildings are fully sprinklered) Police Service No comments submitted Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services 0 feet Sewer Shed South Black Cat trunkshed Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 90 of 124 Page 3 Description Details Page Estimated Project Sewer ERU’s See application WRRF Declining Balance 13.8 Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Yes Water Distance to Water Services 0 feet Pressure Zone 1 Estimated Project Water ERU’s See application Water Quality None Project Consistent with Water Master Plan Yes Impacts/Concerns The dead end water main in W. Freestyle Ln. should end with a fire hydrant, not a blow-off C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Zoning Map Planned Development Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 91 of 124 Page 4 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Northern Land Development, LLC – 2150 N. Canter Pl., Eagle, ID 83616 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Kent Brown, Kent Brown Planning – 3161 E. Springwood Dr., Meridian, ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning Posting Date City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published 12/13/2019 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 12/10/2019 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 12/21/2019 Nextdoor posting 12/10/2019 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Medium High-Density Residential (MHDR): The purpose of the MHDR designation is to allow for the development of a mix of relatively dense residential housing types including townhouses, condominiums and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from 8 to 15 units per acre. These are relatively compact areas within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 92 of 124 Page 5 convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and individual project identity. The proposed development consisting of a mix of attached dwellings and different types of townhouse dwellings at a gross density of 10.83 units/acre is consistent with the uses and density desired in the MHDR designation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use and development of this property (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) The proposed mix of attached and townhome dwellings will contribute to the diversity in housing types in the western portion of the City. Staff is unaware if the proposed units will be owner occupied or rental units. “Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers.” (3.07.02D) The proposed development will provide housing options in close proximity to the existing and future employment and shopping centers along the Ten Mile corridor. “Require open space areas within all development.” (6.01.01A) A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. As proposed, the development exceeds the minimum standards at 12%. “Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City.” (3.01.01F) Urban services can be provided and this development is contiguous to the City. “Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets.” (3.06.02D); One private street access is proposed for the development via the collector street along the southern boundary of the site; access is not available via a local street. “Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together t o promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.” (3.03.03B) There are no pedestrian connections proposed to adjacent properties other than sidewalk proposed along the collector street at the southern boundary of the site. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and accessory structures on this site that will be removed with development. Removal of these structures should take place prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. D. Proposed Use & Site Design Analysis: Single-family attached and townhome dwellings are listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as principal permitted uses in the R-15 zoning district. The preliminary plat is proposed to develop in one or two phases as shown on the preliminary plat in Section VII.B; the Applicant is unsure at this time if it will be phased. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 93 of 124 Page 6 The site design is subject to the design elements in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). In accord with the Plan, structures are proposed to be built near the edge of the street buffer and front on Aviator St., the primary street, with parking at the rear of the structures and pedestrian walkways from each unit to the perimeter sidewalk with trees and landscaping in the front yards; structures are proposed to be 2-stories in height. E. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): None F. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): All development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R- 15 district. The minimum lot size in the R-15 district is 2,000 square feet (s.f.); there are 14 lots that are below the minimum lot size – revisions should be made to the plat to comply. G. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): One access is proposed via W. Aviator St., a collector street along the southern boundary of the site; an emergency only access is proposed 100’+/- feet south of the north property line via Black Cat Rd., an arterial street. Private streets are proposed for internal access within the site. Private streets are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. All drive aisles are required to be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed; if curbs exist next to the drive aisle(s), they shall be painted red. H. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided for the proposed single-family attached and townhouse units as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. All of the units are proposed to have 3 bedrooms. Therefore, 4 spaces are required per dwelling unit with at least 2 of those in an enclosed garage, the other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10’ x 20’ parking pad. All of the units have a 2-car garage and a parking pad for 2 cars that complies with these standards. Additionally, a total of 10 guest parking spaces are proposed along the south end of the mew. I. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): A pedestrian pathway is proposed through the central mew within this development; landscaping is required adjacent to the pathway as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C as proposed. J. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalk are required adjacent to all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17; detached sidewalks are required along arterial and collector streets. A detached sidewalk is proposed along N. Black Cat Rd., an arterial street, and an attached sidewalk is proposed along W. Aviator St., a collector street. The sidewalk along Aviator St. should be detached as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-17C at least 6-feet from the back-of-curb as required by ACHD with landscaping consisting of grass or vegetative groundcover (no trees) in the parkway area. K. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are not proposed within this development. L. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along N. Black Cat Rd., an arterial street, and a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along W. Aviator St., a collector street, as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C as proposed. A 2-3’ tall berm is proposed within the buffer along Black Cat per the detail on Sheet L1.2 of the landscape plan. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 94 of 124 Page 7 The UDC (11-3B-7C.2a) requires all residential subdivision street buffers to be on a common lot maintained by a homeowner’s association. The Applicant requests approval of Alternative Compliance to this standard to allow the street buffer along Aviator St. to be placed in an easement on building lots (Lots 2-12, Block 1) rather than a common lot. This will allow the townhomes to be placed closer to W. Aviator St. to enhance the streetscape consistent with new urbanism design and the design standards in the TMISAP; these units will be accessed from the rear with the front doors facing Aviator St. All of the common area open space in the subdivision will be maintained by the Homeowner’s Association for consistent maintenance and appearance. Staff is supportive of the request for Alternative Compliance based on the Findings in Section IX.D. Landscaping is required along the pathway in the mew in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C as proposed. Landscaping is required within common areas per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E as proposed. Mitigation is required for all existing 4” caliper or greater trees that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site; mitigation trees are in addition to all other landscaping required as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10C.5. The landscape plan (Sheet L1.2) states 223 total caliper inches are required for mitigation; the plan also states existing trees to be saved on site will count toward mitigation – however, existing trees do not count toward mitigation. Therefore, additional trees (223 caliper inches) should be depicted on a revised landscape plan that comply with the minimum mitigation standards, or alternative compliance may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. M. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided within the development that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. Based on 6 acres of land, a minimum of 0.60 of an acre/26,136 square feet is required. A total of 0.83 of an acre/36,285 square feet (or 14%) qualified open space is proposed as shown on the exhibit in Section VII.D consisting of half the street buffer along Black Cat Rd., an arterial street; all of the street buffer along W. Aviator St., a collector street; the 35’ wide common mew; and the open space at the northeast corner of the development. Because the street buffer along Aviator St. is proposed to be on an easement on privately owned lots rather than in a common lot owned by the HOA, the buffer (5,348 square feet/0.12 of an acre) does not count toward the minimum open space standards; however, the project still complies with the minimum standards without this area at 30,937 square feet/0.71 of an acre (or 12%). N. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of one (1) site amenity is required based on the area of the site that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The Applicant proposes an open grassy area exceeding 50’ x 100’ in area; 2 benches near a 15’ x 15’ gathering area with a fire pit; and a pedestrian pathway through the central mew as site amenities. In order for the open grassy area to qualify as a site amenity, it would need to be at least 20,000 square feet over the minimum amount of qualified open space required; it’s under that amount at 10,019 square feet. In order for the pedestrian pathway to qualify as a site amenity it would need to connect to an existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle route outside the development as designated in the Pathways Master Plan; it does not. The fire pit with 2 benches in itself doesn’t qualify as a site amenity; after discussions with the Applicant, a 15’ x 15’ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 95 of 124 Page 8 shade structure with picnic tables will also be provided in accord with UDC standards (see detail of shade structure in Section VII.D). O. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Purdam Gulch Drain and associated easement crosses the northeast corner of this site as depicted on the site plan and plat. The UDC (11-3A-6B.3) requires the waterway to be piped if it’s not improved as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-A-1. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this provision as allowed by UDC 11- 3A-6B.3a, to allow the short segment of waterway crossing this site to remain open and not be piped consistent with that upstream and downstream. The UDC allows Council to waive this requirement if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. Staff recommends a fence is installed along the easement of the drain to ensure public safety constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C.3. P. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as follows: 6’ tall solid vinyl fencing is proposed along the back edge of the street buffer along Black Cat Rd.; and a 4’ solid vinyl fence with 2’ lattice is proposed along the north and east boundaries of the site. Fencing should be depicted as such on the landscape plan. Q. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities are required to be installed at or below grade in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Adequate fire protection is required in accord with the appropriate fire district standards. R. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15) An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be constructed and service provided to each lot in the proposed subdivision. S. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18) An adequate storm drainage system is required to be provided in this development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances; design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. T. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual): A variety of structure configurations are proposed consisting of (3) single-family attached structures (2 units in each structure for a total of 6 units); (9) 4-plex structures in two different configurations (Type 1 – rear-loaded facing a mew, consisting of 8 units; and Type 2 – front- loaded facing the street, consisting of 28 units); (1) rear-loaded 5-plex structure containing 5 units; and (3) rear-loaded 6-plex structures containing a total of 18 units (see site plan and building elevations in Sections VII.E and F respectively). Building materials consist of a variety of horizontal and vertical siding and stucco with stone veneer accents; color schemes are the same on each of the buildings throughout. All structures (i.e. single-family attached and townhome dwellings) proposed in this development are subject to the design elements in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 96 of 124 Page 9 Design review approval of the proposed structures should be obtained prior to submittal of building permit applications. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance is not required. The building design is subject to the design elements in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). In accord with the Plan, porches should be provided for each unit facing W. Aviator St. and should be a dominant element along at least 30% of the front façade of the buildings – revisions to the elevations should be made to comply. Building materials, particularly at the street level facing Aviator St. should be high quality, such as terra cotta, natural stone, clay-fired units, or other approved masonry materials for architectural details or accents – the strongest use of such should be reserved for street level windows and entries. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement and the preliminary plat with the conditions included in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. The Director approved the requests for private streets and alternative compliance per the Findings in Section IX. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 97 of 124 Page 10 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 98 of 124 Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 99 of 124 Page 12 B. Preliminary Plat (date: 10/07/2019) & Phasing Plan Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 100 of 124 Page 13 C. Landscape Plan (date: 10/07/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 101 of 124 Page 14 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 102 of 124 Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 103 of 124 Page 16 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit (date: 10/07/2019) & Site Amenities Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 104 of 124 Page 17 E. Site Plan (date: 10/01/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 105 of 124 Page 18 F. Building Elevations (date: 10/04/2019) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 106 of 124 Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 107 of 124 Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 108 of 124 Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 109 of 124 Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 110 of 124 Page 23 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 111 of 124 Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 112 of 124 Page 25 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 113 of 124 Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 114 of 124 Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 115 of 124 Page 28 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 116 of 124 Page 29 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of $303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the site plan, preliminary plat, phasing plan, landscape plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. The existing structures on the site shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. c. All structures (i.e. single-family attached and townhome dwellings) proposed in this development are subject to the design elements contained in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Design review approval of the proposed structures shall be obtained prior to submittal of building permit applications. A Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 117 of 124 Page 30 Certificate of Zoning Compliance is not required. Porches are required for the units that front on W. Aviator St. and should be a dominant element located along at least 30% of the front façade of buildings. Building materials, particularly at the street level facing Aviator St. should be high quality, such as terra cotta, natural stone, clay-fired units, or other approved masonry materials for architectural details or accents – the strongest use of such should be reserved for street level windows and entries. 2. The preliminary plat, dated: 10/7/2019, shall be revised as follows: a. The sidewalk along W. Aviator St., a collector street, is required to be detached from the curb at least 6 feet, measured from back of curb, in accord with UDC 11-3A-17C and ACHD standards. b. All building lots shall be a minimum of 2,000 square feet in accord with UDC Table 11- 2A-7. c. Depict zero lot lines on the plat where buildings will span the lot line(s). 3. The landscape plan, dated: 10/7/2019, shall be revised as follows: a. Depict a fence along the Purdam Gulch Drain easement to preserve public safety in accord with UDC 11-3A-6B.3a per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C.3 if Council approves a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6B.3 allowing the drain to remain open. b. Depict a total of 223 additional caliper inches of trees on the site as mitigation for the same amount of caliper inches being removed from the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5; or alternative compliance may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. Existing trees proposed to be retained on the site do not count toward this requirement. c. The sidewalk along W. Aviator St. is required to be detached from the curb at least 6 feet, measured from back of curb; landscaping consisting of grass or vegetative groundcover per the standards in UDC 11-3B-5N (no trees per ACHD) shall be installed within the parkway between the back of curb and sidewalk along W. Aviator St. d. Depict fencing as follows: 6’ tall solid vinyl fencing along the back edge of the street buffer along Black Cat Rd.; and 4’ solid vinyl fence with 2’ lattice along the north and east boundaries of the site. 4. The Purdam Gulch Drain shall be piped where it crosses this site in accord with UDC 11-3A- 6B.3, unless otherwise waived by City Council. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this provision as allowed in UDC 11-3A-6B.3a. 5. A picnic area with tables and a 15’ x 15’ shade structure shall be provided as amenities in addition to the proposed fire pit and two benches, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. 6. Private streets are required to comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. All drive aisles shall be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed; if curbs exist next to the drive aisle(s), they shall be painted red. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 The dead-end water main in W Freestyle Ln should end with a fire hydrant, not a blow off. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 118 of 124 Page 31 1.2 Each lot/unit shall be required to have independent water and sewer services. 1.3 Revise the landscape plan for Lot 24 to remove the trees within the 20-foot wide sanitary sewer easement. The plan shall also need to show a minimum of a 14-foot wide compacted grave access road over the sewer mainline per Meridian Public Works Standards. The drainage basin design may also need to be modified to not encroach within the area needed for the sewer mainline. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian’s standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2” x 11” map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be 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. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 119 of 124 Page 32 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 120 of 124 Page 33 surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=180596 D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT (CDHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=180513 E. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180729/Page1.aspx F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/180782/Page1.aspx G. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) http://weblink.meridiancity.org/weblink8/0/doc/181137/Page1.aspx IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or 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 development and map amendment to R-15 is consistent with the land uses and density anticipated in MHDR designated areas such as this and is generally consistent with the provisions in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the regulations of the R-15 district and allows for a variety of residential land use types (i.e. single-family attached and townhomes). 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment shouldn’t be materially detrimental to the public. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 121 of 124 Page 34 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 the proposed map amendment shouldn’t adversely impact the delivery of services in the City. 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat (UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) Staff finds the proposed plat is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with the Unified Development Code if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval listed in Section VIII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds public services are available and will be extended with development to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Staff finds the proposed plat is in conformance with the scheduled public improvements in the CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development although the Developer will be funding the improvements necessary for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the proposed development should not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features on this site that need to be preserved. C. Private Street (UDC 11-3F-5): 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; Staff finds the proposed design of the private streets meets the standards listed in UDC 11- 3F-4. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 122 of 124 Page 35 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 finds granting approval of the proposed private streets will not be detrimental to any persons or property in the general vicinity. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. Staff finds the proposed use and location of the private streets shall not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or regional transportation plan for this area. 4. The proposed residential development (if applicable) is a mew or gated development. Staff finds a portion of the proposed residential development is a mew development. D. Alternative Compliance (UDC 11-5B-5E): Required Findings: In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application, the Director shall determine the following: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or Staff finds strict adherence to the requirements are feasible but would affect the design of the project. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Staff finds the proposed alternative compliance provides an equal means for the meeting the requirement in UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. and will provide a streetscape consistent with new urbanism design as desired in UDC 11-5B-5B.2e and the design standards in the TMISAP. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. Staff finds the alternative means of compliance with UDC 11-3B-7C.2a will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or harm the intended uses and character of the surrounding area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 123 of 124 EIDIAN?- DAJ PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA January 2, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 5 A Item Title: Election of Commission Officers Meeting Notes: PROJECT ENGINEERDEVELOPER PLANNER/CONTACT EXISTING ZONE: RUT PROPOSED ZONE: R15 PARCEL: S1210325900 ADDRESS: 462 N Black Cat Rd. MERIDIAN, ID 83642 SITE:262,717 SF 6.03 ACRES AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE: 2,263 SF TOTAL LOTS:71 COMMON/OPEN SPACE LOTS:5 OVERALL GROSS DENSITY: 10.77 PROPOSED OVERALL COMMON SPACE: 45,423 S.F OR 1.04AC QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS: 10% REQUIRED 32,488 S.F PROVIDED = 12.37% MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT - 40'-0" BUILDING LOT SETBACKS (REQ'D) FRONT - 20 REAR - 12 INTERIOR - 3 SITE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS (REQ'D) FRONT - 25 (ARTERIAL) SIDE - 20 (COLLECTOR) INTERIOR - 3 REAR - 12 (ABUTS RUT) I TEM SHEET C ouncil Agenda I tem - 5.A . Presenter: Estimated Time f or P resentation: Title of I tem - Election of Commission O fficers [Action Item] Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda January 2, 2020 – Page 124 of 124