Loading...
2020-02-25 Regular �Iw E IDIA�T CITY COUNCIL REGULAR IDAHO MEETINGAGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 6:00 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance X Liz Strader X Joe Borton X Brad Hoaglun X Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault Luke Cavener X Mayor Robert E. Simison 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Adoption of Agenda - Adopted 4. Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum) Signing up prior to the start of the meeting is required. This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials regarding matters of general interest or concern of public matters and is not specific to an active land use/development application. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented under this public comment section, other than the City Council may request that the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for a more detailed discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to further assist you in resolving the matter following the meeting. 5. Community Items/Presentations A. Transportation Commission Annual Report 6. Action Items Public Hearings for Land Use Applications follow this process: Once the Public Hearing is opened, City staff will present their report. Following the report, the applicant is allowed up to 15 minutes to present their application. Members of the public are allowed up to 3 minutes each to address council regarding the application. If a person is representing a large group such as a Homeowner's Association, indicated by a show of hands, they may be allowed up to 10 minutes. Following all public testimony, the applicant is then allowed 10 additional minutes to respond to comments. Once the public hearing is closed, no additional testimony will be received. The City Council may move to continue the item for additional information or vote to approve or deny the item with or without changes as presented. The Mayor is not a member of the City Council and pursuant to Idaho Code does not vote on public hearing items, unless to break a tie vote. A. Public Hearing Continued from February 4, 2020 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.- Continued to March 10, 2020 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. B. Public Hearing for Edington Commons (H-2019-0109) by G20, LLC, Located at 3610 N. Linder Rd. - Approved 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 14.56 acres of land with R-15 zoning; and 2. Request:A Preliminary Plat consisting of 92 building lots, 10 common lots and 4 other lots for common driveways on 13.49 acres of land in an R-15 zoning district. 7. Ordinances [Action Item] A. Ordinance No. 20-1873: An Ordinance (H-2019-0097 Percy Subdivision) For Rezone Of A Portion Of Government Lot 2 Of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; Establishing And Determining The Land Use Zoning Classification Of 30.02 Acres Of Land From R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) Zoning District To R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District In The Meridian City Code; Providing That Copies Of This Ordinance Shall Be Filed With The Ada County Assessor, The Ada County Recorder,And The Idaho State Tax Commission,As Required By Law; And Providing For A Summary Of The Ordinance; And Providing For A Waiver Of The Reading Rules; And Providing An Effective Date - Approved 8. Future Meeting Topics Meeting Adjourned at 7:57 pm Meridian City Council February 25, 2020. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 25, 2020, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Treg Bernt, Jessica Perreault, Brad Hoaglun and Liz Strader. Members Absent: Luke Cavener. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Sony Allen, Kyle Radek, Jeff Brown, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault Luke Cavener _X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: The meeting will come to order. For the record is Tuesday, February 25th, 2020. 6:00 p.m. We will begin this meeting with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Simison: Item 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Adoption of Agenda Simison: Item No. 3 is adoption of the agenda. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: You don't want me to pray? Simison: If you would like to you are more than welcome to. Bernt: I move that we -- we have a little change on 6-A, the applicant has requested to continue to March 10th. I guess we will approach that when we get to that section of the agenda. With that I move that we adopt the agenda as changed. Hoaglun: Second. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 2 of 40 Simison: As published. Bernt: As published. Hoaglun: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 4: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum ( Up to 30 Minutes Maximum) Simison: Item 4, future meeting topics, public forum. Anyone signed up? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody has signed up. Item 5: Community Items/Presentations A. Transportation Commission Annual Report Simison: Okay. Then we will move on to Item 5-A. Community items. The Transportation Commission annual report. It will be presented by Mr. Ballard. And if you could state your name and address for the record, please. Ballard: Thank you, Mayor Simison. Mrs. Strader. Mr. Borton. Mr. Bernt. Mr. Hoaglun. Mrs. Perreault. Perreault. Excuse me. Perreault. And Mayor Simison. Good evening. My name is David Ballard. I reside at 2482 East Springwood Drive in Meridian. Currently I am the chair of the Transportation Commission. I have served for six years and I would like to acknowledge the privilege and the opportunity that I have been given to serve on the commission. I believe it is a wonderful opportunity to participate in a limited fashion in the role with the City Council and the government, as well as in the community at large. I would also like to acknowledge the other members on the commission. David McKenny. Stephen Lewis. Tracy Hopkins. Ryan Hall. Ryan Lancaster. Joseph Leckie and Tom LeClaire and I do that-- present company excluded -- because I believe these individuals bring a passion for transportation issues in Meridian. We have some very robust discussions in the commission and I think we do at least bring some resolutions to be considered by City Council. I would also like to acknowledge the deep technical experience that the other members have. There is a -- there is a traffic management construction individual. Two transportation engineers. Two attorneys. A banker. And last, but not least, is our youth member. Besides the technical experience, they bring a lot of practical experience to the commission. Now, in looking at the commission, it's called a Transportation Commission, but we are not limited to cars. We take up issues with bikes, scooters, pedestrians, which leads to pathway, sidewalks. Also transit. And last, but not least, rail. But the focus is moving people and freight. Key -- key phrase I Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 3 of 40 believe is moving people, just not about cars. About getting to point A to point B and looking at some resolutions. Now, overarching I believe is safety and the considerations in our conversations and also the aspect of community and good neighbors. So, for instance, we looked at an issue of an HOA -- HOA issue. They were looking at should we adopt or can we adopt a 20 mile an hour speed limit, as opposed to a 25 mile an hour speed limit. That was one issue. Another issue that comes up is people -- and I get it -- taking their children to meet the school bus, but, unfortunately, they crowd the road. Maybe park where there should not be parking and impinge traffic. But in discussing those issues we take into account can we offer a resolution to make that a safer practice. What can we do? And along those lines with sidewalks, Commissioner Lancaster volunteered to form a subcommittee to step back and if there is a particular issue to -- I don't want to say take it offline. It still is open. But the HOA that came in that had a discussion about parking and the school bus and pedestrians, they were able to take that conversation in the subcommittee and come up with a path forward. Another resolution. Now, sometimes it seems that we deal with unintended consequences. A lot of planning has gone into locating schools, building sidewalks, roads, pathways, what have you, but over time as a project matures, the subdivision matures, traffic exceeds expectations. One in particular -- and this happens more often than not. I think people chose -- choose the path of least resistance, so they avoid going into the parking lot. They avoid parking on school grounds and crowd into neighborhoods. Unintended consequences. And along those issues, when I say unintended consequences, the commission has asked -- and we started a dialogue with the Mayor this afternoon. The commission is asking to put more issues on our plate. More thought for consideration. And, again, we do that in the sense of our practical experience, our technical expertise, and if we are the Transportation Commission we are asking to have more transportation issues come before us. One that is in a very large -- or, excuse me, way out in the stratosphere -- is there an opportunity to review any plans. Again, I will use by way of example -- we have two traffic engineers. Pretty smart guys. And I use that as an example, because in our conversations in the commission will usually see something or something comes out that gives another idea, something to consider, or maybe what I call a path forward to resolving and so we have asked -- and this next Monday in the commission we will take up that conversation generally about what that may look for and we will have to visit with Mr. Nary about the legal ramifications and in some process can we be another voice. Now, I'm not asking to make a decision, because we are an advisory committee or a commission, but I'm asking if we can bring another set of eyes to a situation and maybe offer what I consider some deep transportation experience -- and I will exclude myself. So, from the Council's perspective we are asking what can we do to better help you in reaching decisions. Can we bring more information. Now, it's also kind of fun -- only a lawyer uses sometimes describing what he does or she does as kind of fun. But taking this work somewhat serious, but the commission also gives us an opportunity to build relationships. For instance, there are members of the police force that come in, ACHD, ITD, the school district, transit-- I'm talking about COMPASS and VRT and, then, Mr. Cavener on the City Council, but also gives us an opportunity to build relationships with other participants in the community, so as have been want to do over the last several years -- and I have done the presentation -- I haven't read from the official report. I'm bringing what I call a little color commentary. It was suggested that I use a new schtick this year, so I worked on Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 4 of 40 that. But in all seriousness what I -- what we are asking is can we take on a larger role and I, for one, have said I'm not here to make a decision, I'm here to make a recommendation if we can and so we just asked for that opportunity to expand our role and serve you and as I acknowledged to the Mayor earlier today, I serve at his pleasure and I serve at the Council's pleasure. So, I understand my place in life. In closing, I would say it's been a -- it's been a great opportunity. It's been a learning experience. And it's -- it's fun to see the process when people bring ideas forward and watch an idea form and be able to success -- suggest a resolution and it is a forum, it is an opportunity for the public to come in and hear something and maybe offer a suggestion and find a resolution. If you have any questions I would be happy to try and answer. Simison: Thank you, David. And before we see if there is any questions from Council, just I don't want David to sell himself short in terms of his expertise. I think that he's put more time personally into transportation in Meridian between the city and the chamber and other areas. So, don't sell yourself short either. Ballard: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Are there any questions at this point in time? Or comments? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Thank you, David, for your presentation this evening. As a city we do have some commissions -- specifically the Planning and Zoning Commission that has, you know, quasi-judicial decision making responsibilities. Are you asking that you have the same type of decision making within your commission? Ballard: Not at this point, but if that is the desire of the Council within the legal parameters -- part of the discussion, Mr. Bernt, a couple of sessions ago -- I may have been a little too strong -- but one of the commissioners says we ought to be able to make decisions and I go no. As an administrative agency that's not -- that's not our call. That's -- we haven't been given that power. At this point we are an advisory commission. But if the role is expanded and can work out within those limitations and without delay in the process. I mean too many cooks spoil the soup. Bernt: Right. I get that. Ballard: But in some fashion if we have an opportunity --that's what I am focused --when I talked about unintended consequences -- if I can say this diplomatically -- I think something gets missed -- and is not intentionally, but in the planning stage something gets missed and after the fact that -- that problem comes to light. So, I'm saying if there is another set of eyes, I'm relying upon some experience -- and I'm pointing to that side of the dais where the traffic engineers sit, they will see some issue and the youth commissioner sits over here and I can recall at one instance when the youth Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 5 of 40 commissioner raised his hand and said here is the problem that didn't get solved. So, long answer to your question, if there is an expanded role, we would be happy to look at that and discuss if that is something that fits within the government and not asking to delay the process and insert somebody else, put another nose under the tent, if I can use that expression. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you very much. I'm curious if you think that the other folks on the Transportation Commission would be interested in reviewing -- kind of what you're getting at is reviewing development applications for potential issues and perhaps, you know, advising planning staff if you see an issue with something ahead of time, if you all would have the capacity to do that. And, then, I would also be curious -- I was sitting in on one meeting where we were talking about this thorny issue around Hillsdale Elementary School and the safe crossing to school there. You know, do you think if you had some kind of limited authority that there are certain small projects, like safe crossings and so forth, that the Transportation Commission would be interested in tackling? I guess define, if you can, some ideas about what an expanded role would look like. I would be interested to hear that, please. Ballard: Well, you have asked two questions there. The first one is do you think I -- do I think the other commissioners would take on -- let's say more responsibility, more work, and I can speak for one other member that was in the meeting with the Mayor, so he said yes. I think generally from our conversations over the last year or two in the commission is they are saying give us something more to work with. I think what comes with it, Mrs. Strader, is that if you are asking for more work, there is more responsibility and, yes, it's going to take more time. So, I think the general answer is yes. And from that comment I'm going to lead the discussion this coming Monday and talk about that. The second one that you mentioned is reviewing plans, again, within the limitations of -- of legal considerations. You know, at what stage do we look at it. There is some issues of -- again, if it's an advisory capacity you would be very early on in the process. One of the issues to talk about is we meet once a month, if we are going into look at plans or proposals it may necessitate twice a month meeting. So, again, that -- those are considerations. But your points are well taken and I think I will have to tell the commissioners we asked for another bite at the apple or a bigger bite at the apple and here is what we are willing -- or here is what they are willing to give us or maybe consider. You know, watch what you pray for, because you might get it. But, no, that expanded role would take on those considerations and in a heart to heart conversation with the other commissioners, if we are asking to do that, I think you have to understand that, yes, there would be more work, more responsibility. Strader: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up. Simison: Council woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 6 of 40 Strader: Some of the things I really struggle with -- we get into these meetings about specific applications, I struggle with, you know, our parking requirements, sometimes people need something different from a street perspective on the width and there are a lot of these little issues that keep -- seem to be continuously coming up and I do wonder if -- speaking only for myself, obviously, but if that is something you guys would be interested in weighing in on. It would probably be a lot of work, but, you know, providing input the way that other agencies do or even providing input when you see a problem -- maybe not necessarily in everything. But if you see an issue I would be interested to get that feedback, because I feel like we have subject matter experts that certainly are well versed in traffic, we have traffic engineers, I would like to get that -- that feedback from people if they see a fatal flaw with something or they think something's not making sense, I think it's better to know before you approve something versus trying to clean it up afterward. Ballard: And I think an overarching comment to that -- or response to that -- we are not asking to take over someone else's responsibility or to second guess -- I mean use P&Z but way of example, they review the plans. We are not asking you to replace their consideration, their processes, we are just asking to bring another set of eyes in. We are not trying to overrule. So -- and I appreciate the question. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, David, yeah, it's not often we get someone who wants to come up and say we want longer meetings, so I'm -- you know. But I was looking at the Transportation Commission's explanation of what they are about and, you know, going through and reading from -- from the document: This commission is a forum for transportation planning and project development that advocates for and promotes the advancement of a safe, efficient and multi-modal transportation network relating to roads, transit corridors, bike lanes, sidewalks, pathways and lighting and, then, it gets into the makeup and all that stuff. Ballard: Right. Hoaglun: That looks to me to be fairly broad. Ballard: Yes. Hoaglun: Everything -- all things transportation related that you guys can get into. So, I guess what you are asking for is an expanded role, but working with other commissions, with Planning and Zoning, with the Planning Department, I -- what -- with that fairly broad mandate, how -- how do you see that being structured? What are the ways that you would see that working? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 7 of 40 Ballard: We talked about that, again, at the 30,000 foot level this afternoon and I think that may be on the early -- or, excuse me, on the front end of any proposal to look at those plans or would we, then, be making a comment to staff. Would we later be making the recommendation to City Council? So, I don't know within the legal ramifications or the parameters of where we would fit into that process, if that's on the early end. Your question about visiting with other commissions, again, without stepping on toes or trying to overreach, it would -- it would compliment saying from this perspective and bringing our expertise, you may want to look at it -- if I can use by way of example in the last commission meeting there was a proposal to narrow down the traffic lanes to ten feet -- ten foot travel lanes. Got to be careful, so I don't step on toes. One of the engineer says, well, you are going to accomplish the same with an 11 foot travel way and you can redesign the width of the bike lane and so that -- that has advocacy on both -- both ends there. But that was -- that was something else brought to the process to say there is another way to design it and accomplish what you want, both a bike line -- bike lane, pedestrian sidewalk, and a travel lane for traffic. So, it would be another comment to be considered. Now, that agency -- or that division -- I'm not sure exactly where that would go. We do not have a city traffic engineer, but some of that overarching information to talk with those agencies or those divisions and say here -- here is something else you might consider. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, just to follow up. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Another comment. I'm never opposed to having more eyes look at things and weigh in, especially people who are in that field of reviewing what they are assigned for and it's just a matter of how -- how -- what that looks like, how it works and if that's -- if it's feasible in not slowing up a process, but keeping things flowing, but providing information. Ballard: Well -- and, Mr. Hoaglun, that is -- so, my task was to come and ask if we could start that dialogue and so I think, if I may, we have started that dialogue. I'm not sure how it looks, where it goes, where we fit into it, but we appreciate the opportunity and look forward to the next conversation. So, the wheels are turning a bit and somebody will say, well, I think you could fit here or fit here and we will work that out. Hoaglun: Thank you. Simison: And if I could just add from our conversation a little bit. We do have a new planner focusing on transportation and education. I think with that new position, when it comes online, it will provide some additional insight and time to be dedicated towards the transportation component, but some of this will involve, you know, where we have even left it from our conversation today is we are doing status quo and moving forward in terms of how the agendas are set. Caleb is responsible for those elements, but as we start bringing on these resources what does that look like, but a good example was a conversation that we just had earlier during the workshop about Locust Grove. Having them more involved in the phasing processes with ACHD as a commission, you know, I Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 8 of 40 don't know if the commission comes and presents to the transportation commission when they are doing road section improvements in Meridian. I don't think that's been something that's traditionally been on the -- as part of the conversation, but maybe that's one element. So, really, there is two sides of the equation here. If there is something that you can think of that would be beneficial to you as a decision maker from them, from what you have heard in your two months or two years or more, what would that be and let's see if that makes sense and they, too, will be looking at what makes sense from their standpoint. Maybe when we bring somebody on -- so, maybe by summertime we can have a more in-depth conversation about what that might look like. Ballard: Mayor, thank you. And I will work on getting your name right. Excuse me. Thank you for the opportunity. Item 6: Action Items A. Public Hearing Continued from February 4, 2020 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. Simison: Thank you, David. Appreciate it. Okay. Item 6-A is a public hearing continued from February 4th, 2020, for -- for Sky Mesa Highlands by HHS Construction that the applicant is requesting continuance. So, this has already been opened in the previously -- need to open it again. Okay. So, with that I will open this public hearing. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. We are on 6-A; correct? Simison: Correct. Allen: The applicant did request continuance to March 10th in order to continue working with ACHD on development requirements. Simison: Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Not seeing them, was there anybody from the public who is here to testify on this item today? Okay. With that, Council, do have any motion? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 9 of 40 Hoaglun: I would move that we continue the public hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands, H- 2019-0123 to March 10th, 2020. Borton: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to continue the application to March 10th, 2020. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not all those in favor signify by saying aye. Oppose nay. The ayes have it. The case is continued. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Public Hearing for Edington Commons ( H-2019- 0109) by G20, LLC, Located at 3610 N. Linder Rd. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 14.56 acres of land with R-15 zoning; and 2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 92 building lots, 10 common lots and 4 other lots for common driveways on 13.49 acres of land in an R-15 zoning district. Simison: Item 6-B is the public hearing for Edington Commons, H-2019-0109. I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the next application is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 13.49 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 3610 North Linder Road, just north of West Ustick Road on the east side of North Linder Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 14.56 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district for the development of 92 single family residential attached and detached units at a gross density of 6.83 units per acre, which is consistent with the medium density residential future land use map designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 92 building lots, 11 common lots, and four other lots on 13.49 acres of land in the R-15 district. The plat is proposed to develop in two phases and the phasing line is shown here in the darker dashed line here. Access is proposed via North Linder Road, an arterial street, with stub streets proposed to the east and south for future extension. Public streets are proposed for internal access, some with 27 foot wide street sections, which are reduced, which only accommodate parking on one side of the street, four common driveways are proposed for access to homes off the public streets. To address staff's concerns pertaining the amount of on-street parking available within the development, with the narrow lots and reduced street sections, a parking exhibit was submitted as shown depicting a total of 15 parking spaces for use by residents and guests, which should be adequate for the proposed development. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space and one site amenity is required to be provided for the development. The open space exhibit shown includes a couple of small areas that do not Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 10 of 40 qualify. However, the other areas shown comply with the minimum UDC standards. The Coleman Lateral, which runs along the northern boundary of the site, is proposed to be piped. Site amenities are proposed in excess of the minimum standards as follows: A children's play structure, swing set, seating benches, climbing rock, climbing dome and pathways. The multi-use pathway proposed along the northern boundary of the site adjacent to the Coleman Lateral complies with the pathways master plan and will eventually extend to the east when the property redevelops to the existing pathway in Woodburn West, providing a connection to the on-street pathway along Linder Road for safe pedestrian access to the middle school to the north. The western portion of the pathway is proposed to extend to the north across the adjacent Sawtooth Middle School property and that is shown on this exhibit right here. This is the little segment that will be on the school district property. Photos of that attached and detached homes posed to be constructed in this development were submitted as shown on the right. All homes along the west perimeter boundary of the development adjacent to Linder Road and others as depicted in red are proposed to be a single story in height. Building materials consist of a mix of siding, horizontal and vertical lap siding, and board and batten with stone veneer accents. The attached structures are required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. For aesthetic reasons and to ensure consistency with the concept elevations originally submitted with this application shown on the left, staff recommended a development agreement provision requiring all homes be constructed with minimum one foot wide fire rated eaves on all four sides consistent with previous Commission and Council direction on this matter. Although the Commission preferred the appearance of eaves on homes, because they are not required by the UDC or building code, they were hesitant to require such and removed staff's recommended condition requiring such. They requested City Council address whether or not there should be a policy or code amendment requiring such on all homes in the city or if it should just be a development agreement provision when and if determined appropriate. If Council determines that eaves should be required, development agreement provision A-1-D in Section 8 should be reinstated. Summary of the Commission public hearing. The Commission did recommend approval to Council. The following folks testified in favor. Hethe Clark from Clark Wardle, the applicant's representative. Julie Ann Domingo. Serena Ormsby Alvarez. Stave Yapyap. Peng Cheng. Laren Bailey. Justin Cranney from Hawley Troxell representing the Lester and Betty Vogel Trust. Dennis Green and Tina Folden. No one testified in opposition of this application and Steven Lloyd commented. Written testimony was received from Whitney Montgomery, Kelly Woodhouse, Michelle Anderson and Cheryl Garpetti, all homeowners in existing subdivisions by this developer. They are all in support. Letter from Laren Bailey, the applicant, to Steve and Andrea Lloyd, the property owners to the east, agreeing to limit the height of homes to a single story adjacent to their property on Lots 20 and 23 through 26, Block 1. Jake Centers, Blackrock Homes, Justin Cranney, Hawley Troxell, representing Lester and Betty Vogle Trust and Hethe Clark, the applicant's representative, stating that he is in agreement with the Commission's recommendation. Key issues of discussion by the Commission are as follows: The possibility of floating the mixed use designation on the property to the south -- to the southern portion of this property and adding a commercial or a multi-family component to enlarge the mixed use area and provide a transition and integration of uses from the residential to the future commercial Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 11 of 40 uses to the south. Staff recommendation for four-sided eaves and a cohesive color scheme to be provided for the overall development, featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color and an accent color, or unique material and garage doors coinciding with this scheme or other accents. The provision of an emergency access to the site that meets Fire Department requirements. The location of the micro path along the east side of the site providing a connection between the multi-use pathway and the common driveway and it not being visible from the public street, creating police surveillance concerns and I will just stop and back up here and show you that real quick. It's the little pathway right here. There is a condition in the staff report that requires that that pathway be relocated in this vicinity right here. The available -- availability of on-street parking for guests and whether or not reduced resections should be allowed and their impact on on- street parking. The provision and alignment of a ten foot wide multi-use pathway and qualified open space along the northern boundary of the side and location of the existing easements and, finally, the impact of the development on area school enrollment, which is currently over capacity and the school district's request for no homes in this development to be occupied until 2021 , which Pleasant View will be open and the cap on Hunter Elementary will be lifted. The Commission made a couple changes to the staff recommendation. They struck condition A-1-C, which requires a cohesive color scheme to be used for the overall development, featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color and an accent color, or unique material with garage door colors coinciding with this scheme or other accents. Design reviews should not be required for single family detached homes and strike condition A-1-D, which requires a minimum one foot wide fire rated eaves to be constructed on all four sides of homes within the development. There are a couple outstanding issues for Council tonight. The Commission would like direction from the Council as to whether or not there should be a policy requiring four sided eaves to be constructed on homes within the city. The Commission generally preferred the appearance of eaves on homes, but because they aren't required by building code or city code, they were hesitant to require them through the development agreement. If Council determines eaves should be required, DA provision A-1-13 in Section 8 should be reinstated. And, finally, the Commission recommended for Council to consider if the development as proposed provides an adequate transition to the mixed use designated parcel to the south approved to develop with commercial uses and what could be done about making sure that commercial piece doesn't get blocked in and I will just flip to that map real quick to show you what's been conceptually approved on that property to the south. It looks like there is a gas station, fuel Island, retail commercial space and a bank. A stub street is proposed to the south and the back of homes face that property currently. There is no mix or integration of uses proposed. It was something that the Commission spent a lot of time discussing when the Alpina Townhomes came in previously on this property with the integration with the property to the north. The Commission recommendation, again, was approval with the requirement of a development agreement for the amended provisions in the staff report. There has been no written testimony since the Commission hearing, except for the applicant's response that he is in agreement with the Commission recommendation. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Do we have any questions for Sonya at this time? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 12 of 40 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Sonya, what year was that conceptual plan approved for the Sugarland property? The development agreement on the -- Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I do not remember offhand. I think that was dated from '13. The applicant actually -- the applicant's representative Laren Bailey actually worked on that project. He can probably tell you. Perreault: Thank you. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Sonya, can you, please, explain to me what the concern is with the commercial property to the south and how it might be possibly blocked in? Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bernt, Councilmen, I can't explain to you exactly what they meant by that. That was the Commission's words, not mine. But I think it was more there being a public street access to this site and the backs of homes facing the future commercial development. Just not a lot of, you know, integration of uses. Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: After reading the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, I know that there was issues with transition, but I'm trying to figure out how -- what the concern is with it being blocked in. Allen: Like I said, it's their words, not mine. I'm not sure what they are --what they meant by that. Bernt: Okay. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. I apologize. I'm trying to get one in. What is the percentage of qualified and minimum open space? I read in the staff report that it is not adequate. What is the exact percentage, please? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 13 of 40 Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman, it -- it is adequate. It does meet our minimum standards. The original analysis did not and they have made their recommended changes to the plans that staff asked for, so now they do comply with that. The qualified open space exhibit shows that it is 13.47 acres, roughly 15 percent -- excuse me. Not 13. That's the area of the site. 2.02 acres, 15 percent of the site. Like I said, there are a couple areas that the applicant has shown on their plan that -- like these entry strips here that do not count towards a qualified open space, but the area that does count -- does meet and exceed the UDC standards. Strader: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm trying to figure out from the -- what -- what we count as qualified open space or usable open space what the percentage is. So, would that approximate 15 percent include these small areas you are indicating here, that, in your opinion, don't meet the definition? And take a couple of minutes if you need to to calculate it. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, I don't know what that area is. I did ask the applicant to remove that from their exhibit, but they did not. So, they may know better than I do an approximate percentage without those areas. Strader: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Perreault, I just looked up the Sugarman development agreement was 2014. Perreault: I was wondering if -- with the Mayor's permission I might speak to the count -- the Commission's concerns, having chaired the Commission at the time that -- that these hearings were happening, if that's okay. We had heard that Alpina Townhomes application three different times. They came back with different versions of design for that four acres -- roughly four acres that sits to the south and the concern was that that four acres is too small to develop into the use that is intended on the Comprehensive Plan. That applicant -- they were looking to do townhomes. Of course there is a variety of different things that could be -- could be put in there, but the main issue that -- that we were coming across was being able to get access from -- to arterial roads in an appropriate location when access from arterial roads was really limited. So, because it's just such a small piece of property it was very hard for -- it is not going to matter what you put on there, it's going to be very hard to access, because of the shape and the size and so every time that the applicant came to us on that -- on that Sugarman property when the applications were presented we encouraged them to go to the neighbors to the north, which is our applicant this evening, and the neighbors to the east to talk with them about Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 14 of 40 developing that entire corner in a uniform way and really encouraged them to do a mixed use and so in all three of those hearings that we had on the Planning and Zoning Commission all of the representatives from the -- the -- from the listing agents to the owners of all of those properties were present at at least one of those hearings and were aware that that was what the Commission was recommending to -- was recommending to all the property owners of those three parcels. So, the concern really lay in accessibility of that -- that four acre piece. We didn't have conversation, of course, at that time with transitioning from this four acre piece to the 13 acre piece we are hearing this evening, because we didn't have an application for the 13 acre piece yet. But there -- there was some conversation about what that would look like and so I don't know what has transpired from that point in time. The -- the owner of the 13 acre piece to the north was -- was still marketing that property and I assume has since sold. So, what's happened since then -- what I can say is that the Commission -- that's what they are trying to communicate. They are still concerned about the size of that four acre piece, the 13 acre piece to the north and being able to integrate that whole corner. It also creates challenges for the eight acre piece to the east, but if that applicant hasn't presented any comment on this application -- or if that owner hasn't presented any -- any issue, then, that's -- that was their choice to do so. So, I hope that helps. Simison: Thank you. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, a question for staff. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Sonya, do you happen to know what the distance is from Linder Road to the entrance for the Sugarman property and it looks like that road is straight that goes through the commercial and, then, to the residential. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, I'm sorry, I do not. To the northern boundary -- or to the access on Linder? Right here? Is that what you're asking? Hoaglun: What I'm asking, Mr. Mayor and Sonya, is the distance from Linder Road going back east to the entrance to the commercial property. Allen: Oh. Right here? Hoaglun: Yes. Allen: I'm sorry. I do not know and I can't scale this right here, so -- Hoaglun: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, it's just -- it's hard to tell. Allen: And the applicant's representative may be able to tell you that. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 15 of 40 Hoaglun: Yeah. I just want to make certain that if you are heading east and you want to turn into the commercial subdivision or into the residential park, are you in the turn lane trying to turn -- left turn lane that's going east or are you -- how far are you beyond that. On this scale it shows the turn lane turning right is just after that. The closer that these entrances are to intersections, we all know the busier it gets and the more complicated it is and -- and things like that. So, I'm -- I'm just concerned about that. I do have a question for -- for staff. Another question, Sonya. And that is in this it talks about the Coleman Lateral is proposed to be piped, but they are going to put in a pathway on the northern boundary of that. So, there will be access to it, but it is piped. I just want to make sure that I read that correctly. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, Council, the applicant did confirm to me that it will be -- both sections of it will be piped. There is a short segment right here and, then, there was also kind of a separated segment right here and he confirmed that they would both be piped. Hoaglun: Thank you. Simison: Do I have any other questions for staff at this time? Okay. Then I will ask the applicant to please come forward. State your name and address for the record, please. Clark: Members of the Council, excuse me, Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise, with a law firm of Clark Wardle, representing the applicant. And, Sonya, could you bring up that PowerPoint. Got it. Okay. So, we are here before you tonight with a medium density development that's near major traffic corridors. It's intended, like other projects that this builder does, for high quality, low maintenance product, often for empty nesters and small families. I want to emphasize a couple of things about it. The R-15 zoning that's been proposed complies with the medium density Comprehensive Plan designation and the design of the project fully complies with R-15 in turn. So, in other words, we are in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan designation. We have requested no variances from the zoning that has been identified. A couple of items I would also point out. As Sonya mentioned, we have self imposed a few things, including the pink lots are limited to single story. We have done a large half acre park. We have gone well over on the required amenities providing five, where only one is required. We have provided what in our view is 15 percent open space, but Council Member Strader, even if you take out that area that you have identified, which is give or take maybe seven or eight thousand square feet, we are still well above the -- the minimums and I think importantly to date -- and I don't want to -- I don't know who is here tonight, but to date we have had very little to no opposition. This has been a fairly straightforward progress -- process that just required some -- some conversations with P&Z to get over a couple of items. So, as -- as Sonya mentioned, our parking -- and I do want to clarify this. Our parking does exceed code. We have four parking spots for residents and 50 on-street parking spaces and we had a meeting with Deputy Chief Bongiorno, we have -- and it's been approved by Fire. There, as I understand it, is no issue on the -- the staff level with regard to the adequacy of the parking plan. Also wanted to follow up on the regional pathway. This -- you can see with the red arrow points to the regional pathway. That location has been approved Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 16 of 40 by planning staff and by parks. We are in agreement with the condition language that's been proposed by staff. I did want to just clarify one item just in case there was a question in anyone's mind. I think Sonya mentioned that this does go on to the Sawtooth Middle School property. We have discussed that with West Ada School District. Their staff is on board with that. In order to finalize that we have to go in front of their trustees, but we can't go in front of their trustees until we have an approval at Meridian. So, it's a little bit of a chicken in the egg element, but we will be coordinating that process, if we are fortunate enough to get an approval, and we, obviously, would coordinate and install the improvements on -- on that site. I also wanted to talk about schools. Of course, you know, this has been a topic that's come up quite a bit lately. Before I talk about that, think it's important to keep in mind how long it takes to get these projects done. So, obviously, right now we are at the preliminary plat stage. After we have finished this preliminary plat we still have to come back and get a final plat approved. Once -- that's going to take several months. Once we do the -- in order to record the final plat we have to install street improvements, do all that sort of thing. So, the timing of this is such that we won't have residents until 2021 and very few at that. You know, we will still be at the beginning of the sale of this project and so given that, you know, we have discussed with West Ada what their timing is. At that point Owyhee High School will be online, as you -- you guys are all very well aware. Also the Pleasant View Elementary will also be online. That -- what that means is that the planning that the school district has done to match your city's comprehensive planning is working, that, you know, these schools will be coming online as the -- as the residents will be arriving. You know, one other issue that I would point out there, too, and I think it's kind of important to keep in mind is that this is a different type of product than you might typically see in a -- in a Meridian subdivision. This is dense product. These are smallish homes that they are intended for empty nesters. They are intended for, you know, starter homes. You are not talking about homes that are typically going to have the -- the five, six children in them and, in fact, when we have done surveys of our other projects we have found that the number of students is, give or take, approximately half of what's generally developed -- or generally generated in these types of subdivisions and many of those students come from within the district already. So, we think that there is a good plan here and that school is -- is very much adequately addressed. So, as I mentioned -- or as Sonya mentioned, we are in agreement with the Planning and Zoning recommendation, which it would be awesome if I could just drop the mic right now and turn around and walk away and tell you that's great, but there are these other points of conversation and I guess it was just too good to be true. So, I want to go over these two items that Sonya discussed with you. So, the first one is this -- the transition to the property on the south and with regard to that I do want to make a couple of quick points. That site does have an approved plan. The development agreement for that Sugarman commercial subdivision was signed in 2016. So, it's recent. It has a commercial entitlement. That commercial entitlement includes accesses onto Linder Road and Ustick. We think there will probably be a stub that's required to the east when the east property develops. So, in terms of blocking it in, we just don't see that as happening, to answer your -- your question, Council Member Bernt. With regard to the question of -- of transition, which I think is the second point that was raised, we have provided, as you can see here where I'm pointing, a wall of dense homes and we think that density is the best way to transition between these two products or projects. If you Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 17 of 40 run a density calculation for this area that I'm kind of circling here, you're looking at about 11 -- or, excuse me, about nine units per acre. So, from our east boundary over to Linder. If you were to replace that with say four-plexes you would only actually end up with about six and a half units per acre, because you would have to put in internal parking and you would have to put in sidewalks. So, in fact, you -- you end up with more open area between the two projects if you were to do four-plexes than you would with -- with what we have proposed. You also have the -- you know, the comp plan designation for this area is medium density, which means your-- you can go three to eight units per acre. So, you would be working against that cap as well. And, then, the final -- the final point I would make with regard to that is the Comprehensive Plan. We have been hearing for the last couple years -- you know, I got a couple familiar faces and, then, we have got some new faces, but we have been hearing for the last couple years that, you know, hey, the comp plan designation -- we need to respect it, you know, let's -- let's stick with it. We just went through a comp plan process just a few months ago. This property stayed the same during that process. No, there was not a change to either our property or the property to the south, which we don't control. So, you know, from our perspective, you know, given what we can control, we think that we have -- we have done a good job of trying to transition to that property. The next point I would make is that we have been in discussions with the neighbors to the south and they approved the connection point to our property. You know, they have not indicated any objection to what we are trying to do here. So, you know, while we appreciate the concerns for sure and we want to make sure that -- that the planning that the city does can play out, we think that we have done what -- what should be expected of us here given the -- the comprehensive planning and the -- and the zoning ordinances that were in effect at the time of our application. Then the last thing -- and I will just -- I'm just calling this the uncodified design standard question -- is a reminder -- and I think we are just talking about eaves, but as a reminder there is -- there is no design review for single family detached buildings or residences in -- in Meridian. You know, staff has pointed out that additional standards can be imposed using a development agreement, but they still need to have some sort of a nexus to the property, they still can't be arbitrary. So, staff's talked about having a, quote, policy for four sided eaves and as a preliminary matter I do want to say that this builder, which is Blackrock Homes, does install eaves on the front and the back of the homes. The eaves on the front wrap around about four feet. So, we are not talking about the fronts or the back. They do use eaves on the sides where it faces streets. Really what we are talking about is in those kind of tight areas between -- between buildings whether they should be required to include eaves in those locations. The justification that we have heard is for aesthetic, as well as drainage reasons, and that's from the -- from the staff report. But to be clear from a drainage perspective there is not a drainage problem without eaves. Oops. Let me go back. The International Building Code does not require eaves. That's because drainage is addressed by fine -- fine grading at the base of the building. You know, water doesn't fall straight down. A one foot eave isn't going to keep water off the walls and this is totally tongue in cheek, but I included a picture here of that Geico house with the snow globe on it. That's about what you would need to keep the water off the sides of the building. You know, a one foot isn't going to address that. So, if it's not for drainage, it's got to be for aesthetics, and aesthetics are, obviously, in the eye of the beholder. The UDC doesn't have a standard that requires eaves and there are many Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 18 of 40 common architectural styles that don't include eaves. So, you know, Cape Cod and southwestern adobe. I have included pictures here. They don't have eaves. And so what we are asking for is for the Council ultimately not to micromanage the process. We have these pictures that I have shown on here, you know, this is what the product looks like. We can't build it fast enough to keep up with the demand and each of these homes are one hundred percent within code and they include eaves on the front, back, and otherwise where appropriate and I --we are asking you to leave it at that, rather than asking to make subjective design decisions. So, with that I will wrap up. Again you have a project before you with 92 residential lots and we are in agreement with all the conditions of approval that P&Z has recommended. The biggest question tonight should be does this meet code and if it does it should be approved without imposing new uncodified design requirements and this is the point -- you know, Council Member Bernt, Council Member Borton, have seen me do this a number of times. I usually put up a slide now that says here are the changes that we want to the condition -- conditions of approval and this is the point where I get to go none. So, that's time. No, it wasn't time. With that, Members of Council, I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you very much for all -- all of the individuals here that -- that represent the applicant and we really appreciate the -- the pathway that you are going to -- that you are going to put in and at this staff's request that's -- that's fantastic. We are trying to get that pathway connected across the city as fast as we can and -- and every participant that helps us with that we really appreciate. So, I want to say that first. Secondly, in the -- in the application there was a statement by the applicant that said that they are asking for an R-15 zone due to dimensions versus density and so I wanted you to elaborate on that a little bit for us. Does that mean that setbacks are more narrow? Obviously, it sounds like your density is somewhere around -- just under seven units an acre. So, could you elaborate on that for me. Clark: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, the answer is yes. I think you have nailed it. The -- the density falls within either an R-8 or an R-15, but we went with the R-15 to allow for the -- the smaller setbacks. It's still within the -- the limits of the medium density designation. Perreault: Is that three foot on either side of the property line -- interior setbacks? Clark: Yes. Council Member Perreault, that's correct. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 19 of 40 Strader: Can you give us a feel for the price point these homes serve -- or even just like a discount to the market average if you believe that this meets somewhat a definition of having more affordable housing stock. Clark: Council Member Strader-- so, Council Member Strader-- and my clients will -- will yell at me if I misunderstood the hand signals, but this is a 300,000 and lower price point, which is something that is just desperately needed in -- in Meridian and they are the number one builder within that price point. Strader: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Could you get a little more granular on the timeline of when each phase of your project will be delivered and why you feel this will not necessitate a timing restriction in terms of, you know, you have heard loud and clear we have a ton of concerns about school overcrowding. Clark: Uh-huh. Strader: Could you just may be address that a little more from a timeline perspective. Clark: Yeah. Council Member Strader, so the -- we are currently at the preliminary plat phase. We -- oh. Council Member Strader, I just got a little more detail for that. So, we are still at the preliminary plat phase. We still have to get ourfinal plat. We don't anticipate that we would be able to pave this before the snow flies in '20. It's anticipated it would be July of 2021 . So, that -- that's when we would be looking at -- at folks being able to -- you know, being well under construction and having homes for sale after that point. So, just to clarify that, so I think what I said was -- was compressing the timeline for actually building the homes. So, it's July of 2021 for paving and, then, we are under construction for the homes. So, several months after that. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: So, to clarify, what you are saying is -- is that you are going to start construction of these homes after July of 2021 . Clark: Council Member Bernt, that's correct. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 20 of 40 Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Clark, if we could go back to the slide I think -- well, they say a picture is worth a thousand words. That helps me where you had both the commercial and the residential showing. There we go. Because I think that answered my concern, because when looking at the residential portion and seeing that street come and, then, seeing the commercial separately and thinking they were lined up, I was having concerns, because I thought there is no way where that Northwest 15th compared to Linder Road would allow adequate ingress and egress coming -- if you are headed east. But I see it is offset and it's moved down. So, that takes care of my concern there. I did have a question regarding that space that you showed the bank and, then, to the north, there is parking and, then, an open space. Is that just open space? Green space? There is not going to be a structure there that we know of? Clark: Council Member Hoaglun, the -- the answer to that question is that it's -- it's not property that we control and so I don't know the -- whether there would be -- you know, exactly what would be used on that. But I think the -- the larger point that we were trying to make is just these -- our neighbors do have an approved project with an active development agreement on it. Hoaglun: Okay. Good. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Clark, and -- and just a little bit further--and I know you don't control that aspect, that could be --that becomes an egress to development that occurs to the east. It does -- having a family situation where a property backs up to a commercial and -- and restaurants have gone in and trucks park and it's -- it harms the values of some of these homes when you -- when -- when you do that, when you don't have a buffer. I mean it's -- just so you go into this with your eyes wide open, I -- I don't doubt that, but -- but that -- that does have issues. As to the eaves, for me you have got the eaves in the front, you have got the wraparound and -- and to me it seems like when you have those narrower setbacks -- I mean it allows -- and I don't know if the Fire Department wants to weigh in, but I would assume that would help for -- if you have got to go up a ladder and -- between houses you have got more room to do that without eaves, so -- if you need to access a window or something. But that's not my area of expertise. But I don't have an issue with the eaves. The wraparound -- when you drive by you don't really notice the eaves on the side. So, that's -- that's not an issue for me, so -- Simison: Thank you. Anyone else have any questions for the applicant at this time? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Hethe, I only have a couple of questions and I thought this is a good example, this project, of some things we are trying to do with open space with its proximity to a -- to the school and the school site and the ability to -- it's not a city park, I understand, but is available open space, which is somewhat unique and a benefit for these -- for these residents. I don't know if I'm capturing what's intended with -- is that the emergency access in the southwest corner to Linder Road? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 21 of 40 Clark: You are talking about this, Councilman Borton? Borton: Yeah. Clark: Yes. Yes. This is -- so, that is the -- the -- one of the -- the conversations that we have had below was we are not going to be able to get above -- and I don't remember the number of lots -- without having our secondary access and so that lot would -- is it that one, Laren, that you -- that -- that lot would be an interim emergency access until this property to the south develops. Borton: Got you. Clark: And we are conditioned accordingly. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Then to follow that through, what happens to that emergency access? Does it get removed, greened up, and become open space? Clark: Yeah. Council Member Borton, that can be -- it would become a home again at that point. Borton: Okay. It would be or will be? Is that -- is that decided yet? Clark: It -- it would be. Once we have the secondary access resolved then -- then we intend to develop that as a home. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: At first blush that strikes me as a little odd to have perhaps a single family home, you know, adjacent to what will be probably cars queued up, turning right and left, in and out of a gas station, as opposed to being perhaps some buffer with some landscaping. know it's a lot, but I had assumed it might have been greened up. The other question, if I could, is the comments on the eaves -- and that -- I think eaves apply and should apply everywhere and -- with some exception, but -- but I really subscribe to their value, one, two or three feet, and better than nothing in throwing water away and -- and I have just seen -- and you probably have in other circumstances as homeowners who deal with some of the weather and water rot that can happen. So, I think eaves do certainly serve a purpose, which I thought you would -- to challenge you about it, I thought you would -- would argue that eaves do have a great value, but in some circumstances -- and an R-15 is a great example where you have got reduced setbacks, dimensional standards sort of negate the value and utility of them and it's the R-15 which makes the side eaves not Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 22 of 40 warranted, as opposed to eaves don't serve a valuable purpose to the home itself. I think they do in the R-4 and R-8. I would love to see us develop, for everyone's benefit, an actual standard to confirm they should be anywhere they can truly function, but I do -- and I assume that might be where you were going, it's R-15 and these unique setbacks create the unique circumstance which warrants excluding them here, so -- Clark: Council Member Borton, I -- I like the nuanced lawyer argument, you know, and -- and I appreciate the point that you are making. I think the larger point is that we, as a city, and we as the development community coming in before you with applications, should know what we are up against and we shouldn't be coming up with -- with new design requirements that aren't -- don't have a basis in the code. The point I would take issue with in terms of -- of your argument there is that the International Building Code doesn't require eaves for a reason and it's because they really don't serve that function. You know, they really are more aesthetic than anything. We don't have eaves on commercial buildings. We don't have eaves on Cape Cods. You know, there is a lot of instances when they are --when they are not required and I think it would be a little heavy handed and I -- and I think overengineering the process to say that they just need to be there all the time. But your point on the R-15 is well taken, that -- and I think we are saying largely the same thing there, is that where Blackrock tends not to use these is in the narrow areas between the homes where you can't see them anyway. So, it's just wasted expense, so -- Borton: Okay. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I don't know if this is a question for the applicant for staff, but it's my understanding that this property to the south, that's just the conceptual design that's approved with the development agreement. That isn't an actual plan that's in -- in construction or in development at this time. So, since we don't know when that's going to come about, I agree with Council -- Councilman Borton's concern about what happens with that lot, because if they don't develop that for several years is the builder going to come back and finish that one property out? Do you have any thoughts on that? Clark: Council Member Perreault, if-- if I understand the point you are making, as we are looking at that, you know, we don't control the property to the south. All we can do is look at it and say, hey, there is -- there is a plan that's been approved and this is the site plan that was approved and is attached to that development agreement. So, they are -- they are allowed to go forward with these uses and so I -- you know, whether they would want to modify the site plan, we would all be speculating, but all we know is based on what's there that they can move forward with that. And Laren just reminded me that this is an approved final plat down there, so there is not an expiration on it. So, it wouldn't time out either, so -- Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 23 of 40 Perreault: Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I guess maybe I didn't ask my question as clearly. Is the applicant planning on -- let's say they -- that they don't actually -- since there is no expiration, which understand it's part of the DA, if nothing happens there for -- for quite a few years, is the applicant planning on coming back later and -- and putting a residence there or is that going to be left as open space and Councilman Borton already asked that question and I -- I'm asking for really first a safety reason, in addition to -- I'm not as concerned about the aesthetics, but I agree that -- that I have a safety concern about whether that's used for pedestrian use or whether -- whether it's going to be right next to a commercial in and out. Clark: Council Member Perreault, the -- the applicant has agreed to a condition of approval that says that we have to use that as a secondary access until such time -- Perreault: Okay. Clark: -- is that we have another secondary, which would come through our neighbors to the south. So, it will be a temporary access until somebody comes along and does something down there. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just to pile on a little bit more in an open discussion so you will have an opportunity to respond. I tend to agree very strongly with the point raised by my fellow Council members that having a home -- I think it's Lot 22 sort of just facing this commercial development, not ideal and can create a safety concern. Certainly creates an aesthetic concern. I'm imagining the odd chance that there is a kid living in that house, there is no buffer, they are right next to a future road. I'm struggling a little bit with that one. commend the pathway. I commended the -- meeting the open space requirement, that you guys did that. This is one of my probably remaining concerns. Clark: Council Member Strader, I appreciate -- I don't -- I don't know if there was a question there, but I -- the points that I would make would just be that we are in excess of the open space requirements and we are comfortable that that would be a marketable lot with appropriate fencing, you know, in the event that it -- that there is a secondary access and that's allowed to be redeveloped for a home. Strader: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 24 of 40 Strader: If this was -- if this ended up being a condition of approval, I mean are you open to that change? Because -- and you won't have an opportunity, once we close our discussion, to talk about how important it is to the rest of the Council, but I would like to understand the applicant's position on that. Clark: Council Member Strader, you're asking if we would agree to a condition of approval that that would be permanently open space? I think the -- the answer is that I -- I would be happy to talk about it with my -- with my client. I have a hard time seeing the -- the code basis to take away the lot when we are already in excess of the open space requirements and so -- sorry? Strader: Mr. Mayor, follow up. I -- you know, the UDC and code are very important and I understand that that's the letter of the law, but our Comprehensive Plan speaks very specifically to the importance of transition and so I would just caution you that I tend to take a wider view of our role in terms of what considerations we have holistically, not just the letter of -- of the UDC or meeting a specific requirement, but integrating your project into the community really well. So, if you are doing that great on one part of your property with a pathway, I have some concerns about this particular lot here having a home right there -- not even the back of a home. Anyway, that's -- that's my two cents. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Is this -- is this subdivision going to be similar to that of Verado I'm assuming? Clark: Council Member Bernt, yes. Bernt: All right. So, that's what I thought. So, if I'm not mistaken, I believe that when -- when we spoke about Verado last year, that we -- I believe that it was presented that originally that the homes wouldn't have eaves and we switched it to eaves because of the same arguments that we were talking about tonight. So, with that said, knowing that that precedent was set in that subdivision, this subdivision is similar, why -- why no eaves, knowing that we had requested eaves on a similar subdivision in the past. Clark: Council Member Bernt, so I wasn't at that hearing, but I know that that is -- that is correct, that that was requested by the city. In this case, you know, I think it's fair to bring it up again and ask the question whether it makes sense and in this case we still believe it doesn't and that, you know, in the time since then it's not become a code requirement. It's not a design requirement. There is no design review for single family detached homes. So, I -- you know, that is the -- it's -- the most I would say to that is that, you know, it -- I don't think it made sense then, it doesn't make sense now. Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 25 of 40 Bernt: I -- I like this -- this model. I like -- you know, it -- the City of Meridian -- I believe that we need this type of diversity of housing. I think that there are folks that -- that need this price point, especially -- we all know where the market is and where it's going. You know, homes are expensive. They are getting to be more expensive and so see this price point in this diversity of housing I think makes a lot of sense. I have seen homes where there is no eaves on the side. I just -- I just don't like it. I really don't. I just don't like the look of it. I know Blackrock does, you know, and I'm not picking on anyone, Jake. I'm not picking on anyone. But I feel like, you know, I know Blackrock does some construction down in Boise in Harris Ranch and all of those homes that are similar to this have eaves. So, I'm -- I'm wondering why Meridian we don't get -- I mean -- and I don't -- this is not a sword to die on, I'm just -- I'm trying to like figure it out, like I just want to know. Clark: Uh-huh. Council Member Bernt, I think when you said I just don't like it, that kind of hit the rub of it, that, you know, this is -- you know, what we are talking about is product that looks good, that sells very well. With the product that we are talking about at Harris Ranch is probably twice -- twice as expensive as this. But, you know, in -- and in this case, you know, we -- we make decisions to try to make sure that we are hitting a price point for folks and, you know, the -- being able to -- to do some extra up front, rather than having to spend it on eaves on the sides that nobody's ever going to see and doesn't really serve a function, that makes a heck of a lot of sense -- Bernt: Right. Clark: -- to a lot of our homebuyers. Bernt: Follow up, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: So, basically, this is the numbers and cents really. Not necessarily aesthetics or not necessarily -- not necessitating eaves because of water or such, this is merely -- this is saving us money on this house, so that we can put that -- those -- those -- those funds toward a different part of the house. Is that what your argument is? Clark: Council Member Bernt, it's all the above, you know, the -- that does allow us to do some extra things for homebuyers, but really, you know, the reason we are, you know, having this conversation with you in this forum is -- is -- sorry? Bernt: Excuse me. I don't mean to interrupt. Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I don't mean to -- I don't mean to make light, but I feel like this somewhat -- it's a little bit silly. You know, we are talking about eaves, you know, to a certain degree, but I -- I like how it looks, you know. I'm not a homebuilder like Blackrock or I don't have the Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 26 of 40 expertise like other developers, like Mr. Conger does, so I'm -- by no means am I a material expert on this matter, but I -- I have drove past -- Clark: Okay. Bernt: We can agree to disagree. Clark: I -- and maybe that's what has to happen, but the -- the point that I would make -- and -- and you mentioned, hey, you know, these guys have great expertise in building these homes. They do. Bernt: Right. Clark: And the city should allow them to exercise that expertise, rather than dictating some of these items. Bernt: Okay. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Since I'm with -- I don't think it's the role of City Council to get too into details on the aesthetic aspects of the project personally. You know, you should select the paint colors you think that will sell and that -- that's your decision and I hope you have figured out whether eaves will work or not for people. I do think when we do our district areas that is the appropriate time where we can bring in the architectural standards that are appropriate for each area. Like that to me is the time that would make a lot of sense to look at holistically what are the standards, right, as opposed to kind of like picking on -- you know, there is one particular application in front of us and kind of getting too worked up about it, I -- I would rather focus on the high level issues personally of just, you know, we have got massive school overcrowding, we have an applicant that has met the open space requirement and I -- you know, that's just my two cents. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I do want to talk briefly -- I noticed one of the key decisions is the micro path on the side. If we can jump back to one of the -- the maps that had that. It was in the back. Because I think the Police Department had a comment on that. Being that it was -- was it hidden -- in fact, Lieutenant Brown, if you wouldn't mind commenting on -- on that. Was that because it was just a -- it was hard to view to -- to -- to be open? This is -- would be in the top left quarter beyond -- yeah. Right there. That was the concern that the Police Department had. Do you recall? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 27 of 40 Brown: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, I'm not -- not exactly sure what -- when that discussion point was brought up. Clark: Council Member Hoaglun, I could jump in. So, the -- this was a matter of discussion and sometimes the way the staff report is drafted and updated makes this a little confusing. So, this was discussed below. We had placed that there in -- in part because our neighbor had asked us to put it there, so they could have a little bit more separation. We, at the last hearing, discussed this and we have agreed to the condition of approval that says that it would be relocated. So, that will happen in connection with our -- with our final plat. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Clark. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I wanted to thank Mr. Centers for his drone photos for the -- regarding the parking in the current Verado development and I'm curious how, as a community, that is generally handled. We are constantly having discussions about parking concerns citywide. Our code enforcement is always sharing those concerns with us. So, just out of-- out of curiosity, how -- tell us how you guys have done a great job with keeping those roads clear and, you know, just --just curious about that. It's not a technicality. It's not a comment on the application. I'm just wondering what methods you guys have used. Clark: Council Member Perreault, I -- I put up a couple of the photos that Mr. Centers had provided. There is not really any behavioral control going on here. It's not a CC&R issue. Really what it comes down to is that the -- the project has provided for four on-site spaces and this is the same type of a design. Plus, you know, the on-street, but, you know, what we find is that these are, you know, the -- you know, the starter home, the empty nester types, you know, you are not hosting the Super Bowl party at these houses and, you know, you don't have a ton of -- you are not going to have 50 people showing up for your -- for your Super Bowl party in one of these houses. They are small houses. So, you are not going to have the -- the type of activity that you might see in a lot of other places. We have -- you know, the -- we took these photos over the course of -- I think it was over a week. We tried to take them at times when folks would be home and we were finding that there was very little issues with -- with on-street parking, you know, based on the design of the project. I -- you know, I would also point out, you know, ACHD and all the cities have worked together to come up with this reduced street section, the 27 foot street section with parking on one side. It's -- you know, it's an important thing at ACHD to try to reduce these maintenance costs and it is functioning and you can see in our projects it's been functioning well. Simison: Are there any further questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Clark: Thank you. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 28 of 40 Simison: Thank you very much. So, this is a public hearing. Is anyone signed up to testify on this application? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there were four sign-ins. Only one indicated they wished to testify and it's Tina Folden. Simison: If you would come forward and, please, state your name and address for the record, please. And you have three minutes. Folden: My name is Tina Folden. I live at 2241 East Kamay Drive in Verado Sub in Meridian. First off of my notes, I didn't even know I -- if I had eaves on my house or not. I had to ask, because I was looking at it and I don't know, I guess that -- to me it didn't -- it doesn't make a difference. It didn't -- it didn't to me. Anyway, it's my understanding that Edington Commons will offer a similar housing style to Verado and that is something I support. I just past my one year anniversary and I love my home and love the Verado neighborhood. I chose Blackrock Homes and the Verado community because of the quality of the home and the location. I have heard a question about parking has come up and I want to share that I have not experienced any issues with parking. I knew the parking situation before I bought and actually appreciate that not a lot of extra cars can be parked by the streets. So, this was positive. Before I purchased my home I looked around at several other communities, but chose Verado because of the location and orderly uniform way in which the homes are designed. They are a bit close, but on the plus side it doesn't allow for the accumulation of additional junk and such that I saw in some of the other neighborhoods. CC&Rs are enforced and I believe this neighborhood concept works. The subdivision is clean and highly maintained. Thank you for your consideration in supporting these types of neighborhoods. Simison: Thank you. Any questions? Okay. Yes. Green: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. This is my first opportunity to take a chance to speak before you and I appreciate it. Simison: Please state your name and address for the record. Green: Pardon me? Simison: If you could state your name and address for the record. Green: Yeah. My name is Dennis Green. I live at 2185 East Sharptail Street in Meridian, a city in the United States and it's located between -- off of Ustick, just like this proposed development, between Eagle Road and Locust Grove. Okay. A couple things I wanted to talk to. I have lived there for two years. Affordability was one of my criteria when I was out looking for a home. Blackrock not only offered an affordable home, but the quality was incredible for the price point, as well as the size of the home. It's a couple thousand square feet and for a single -- I guess I'm now an empty nester -- it's quite adequate for me. In terms of parking, I have been there for two years. Never been an issue. I have Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 29 of 40 seen a couple Super Bowls, a couple Christmases, some other holidays. There is 28 houses on my street and we have comfortably, easily 30 to 40 parking spaces. Now, could elaborate and say, well, we could park in front of the driveway, so we could park in the driveway and if I go 40 yards down the street around the corner is probably an additional 48 other parking spaces. So, it's never ever been an issue and I don't see where it would be and I have learned tonight that I'm -- and I just want to let you know that it's not a concern and it does not distract from the quality or the beauty of that development. So, any questions I can answer for you? Simison: All right. Thank you very much. Green: Well, thank you for this opportunity. Simison: Is there anybody else that would like to testify at this time? Would the applicant like to come forward. Clark: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise. Sonya, could I have the -- the slideshow back. It's a tug of war. So, Council Member Strader, I just discussed your question with my clients and we came up with a possible solution that I think might address yours and Council Member Borton's concern. You know, one option would be to relocate this pathway to the other side of the temporary access. I don't think we would have a block length issue, because I think it's 700 feet and we would have -- it would -- we are guessing it would be about 500 feet would be the end of the ultimate length. So, you know, my suggestion would be to direct us to work with staff on -- on looking at relocating that pedestrian -- pedestrian access to provide an additional buffer and, then, if we do run into a block length issue or any other complication in the code, then, we can -- we can sort that out with them. But, hopefully, that would address the concerns that have been expressed and happy to answer any other questions. Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: At first blush it looks like doing that to compress the lots to the north still would require it would be one lot less. Clark: Council Member Borton, it wouldn't mean any fewer lots, you would just take this pathway and relocate it down here and shift these up. But if the -- if the goal is to provide, you know, a landscaping type buffer from the residences, then, that would do it. Strader: Mr. Mayor, follow-up question. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 30 of 40 Strader: So, if the plan, then, needed to provide the temporary Fire access in the same location and, then, I guess you would have another -- I guess do we sacrifice the -- the Fire access I guess that would be my question by doing that. Clark: Council Member Strader, I'm not sure I understand. Strader: Mr. Mayor, just to follow up. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm just trying to -- clearly you could work with staff then, but I -- we would still require this -- I believe this additional access is necessary from a Fire access standpoint and so -- Clark: And, Council Member Strader, we are not talking about losing the --the emergency access. Strader: Right. Clark: We would still have to have an emergency access that satisfies emergency service standards. We would slide that up and, then, put the pathway on the other side of that, so that there is a permanent buffer, as -- as Council Member Borton put it, between the home and whatever ultimately develops to our south. Strader: And I would actually ask staff to comment, if they can, if they have any initial thoughts on that proposal. Certainly, then, looks like you kind of have an access issue from a pedestrian standpoint potentially. But, yeah, I think that might work. It seems like a potential solution at first blush, but I would ask Sonya or someone on staff to comment on whether they think that's a viable option. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, staff -- staff's really not a fan of designing projects in the -- in the public hearing forum. You know, there is just -- there is -- like the applicant brought up the block length, you know, it's just hard when you are sitting here to make sure you are thinking about all the things you need to think about. I'm not sure it would be an issue, to answer your question, assuming all the code requirements are met and the Fire Department access is provided. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor. Over on this side of the world. Simison: Yes. Bongiorno: Since we are talking about Fire Department access, I will go ahead and put my two cents in. So, with this particular project there are code requirements for the distance between those two that's half the diagonal of the property and so there is a distance requirement that they would still have to meet. So, it may not be exactly where Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 31 of 40 that is, but it would be -- it would have to be somewhere in there to make sure that they meet the fire code requirements. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just to make sure I understand the dialogue here. So, when this phase goes in that pathway that is shown now would not exist, but you would still have the emergency exit access until such time that the second entryway through the commercial property is allowed and, then, there is enough room, because you have slid everything down, that that emergency access goes away, that becomes a buildable lot, and that pathway, then, is the buffer between the commercial and that property that would then, be, built once the path -- the emergency access has gone away. It's just a matter of the timing of when that goes away and, then, putting the path in after the emergency access goes away; correct? Clark: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, no, we are not proposing to hold off on the path. The path would go in and -- and, then, it would just be adjacent to the temporary access and, then, once the temporary access is no longer needed, the pathway would still be there. Hoaglun: Okay. But Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah, it -- the timing on that -- you got access, it's a pathway already, and if you are going to construct a lot I thought you would just wait until that -- Clark: I see. Hoaglun: -- you build and, then, you can put the pathway in as long as -- we all know the pathway is going to be there at a future date, so the -- and I want to bring it up now, because we are talking about this, because when I was on Council before we dealt with the Walmart being put in on Overland and that's a major impact and you have houses back there and we worked like crazy -- and with the homeowners association and the type of wall and how high of wall and all the landscaping that goes into that to mitigate that type of thing and I think -- and this is a comment toward staff, we have got to get better about these smaller commercial projects that butt up to these residential areas, because the impacts are the same. You have trucks coming by, you have delivery trucks, you have people parking this way and that way. You have traffic and that's not on the residential folks here, I -- and I don't know if in the process when that comes forward with a plan if we can put in buffers there and make it on the commercial, because, you know, my other little pet peeve is residential pays 70 percent of the property taxes. So, I'm going to put it on the commercial to make that happen, not the residences. So, it's just one of those things. We have to really watch that, because it does impact those folks. Even though these are different, they are skinny lots, smaller backyards, they have to deal with Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 32 of 40 the noise and the lights and everything else, but we -- since it's not a big commercial project like a Walmart, I just think we have to, as a Council, pay closer attention to that as well. So, just my two cents. That's -- that's -- you are going to hear that from me for the next four years. Sorry. So -- and, Mr. Mayor, just to add, not against this project, it's just one of those things that we have to figure out how to make these buffer areas work for everybody. Simison: Council, is there any other questions at this point in time? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Just to piggyback on what Brad said, also in -- if this project is approved allowing, you know, future homeowners to know that there is going to be commercial on that corner. I mean I can't tell you how many different times we -- we have applications that come before us where there is a hard corner there is -- is pasture or it's weeds or whatever and homeowners are shocked out of their minds that commercial is going to be going in that corner and they are upset, because they weren't notified. And so the last thing I -- we want is to have your future homeowners to be upset that we are allowing access through this potential subdivision into commercial and how that may or may not affect traffic and all of the other concerns that homeowners have. Just something that we need to talk about as well. Clark: You know, Council Member Bernt -- and your -- your point is well taken. I mean whenever I hear that I -- I think about, you know, some days in Harris Ranch, you know, when someone asked us, you know, are those cows going to be there forever -- Bernt: Right. Clark: -- and, you know, no. You know, in this case, you know, the road will have the sign on it that says this road to be extended in the future, because it's going to be stubbed out, so that's going to help with that sort of thing and, then, in addition, you know, you hope that folks will do their due diligence and make sure they understand what's approved next to them. But I -- your point's very well taken. Bernt: We are going to hear it. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: This is way off the rails, but I appreciate the solution. I think it captures some compromise in trying to address that southern -- southwest corner parcel. I can't -- I can't think of anything that necessitates the pedestrian access at the kind of mid block. So, by moving it down it does provide some additional buffer, perhaps encourages pedestrians Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 33 of 40 to not walk in that entrance to the commercial section, but perhaps walk upon that, which is another collateral benefit. Someday maybe we can discuss adding on those -- this -- this road will be extended in the future and, then, placing a copy of the plat on -- literally on that sign. I mean I'm half joking, but I don't know why not. There is means to try and communicate here is what's approved here. It wouldn't cost anymore. More ways to communicate. So, I appreciate -- I think your crew has come up with a fair compromise to capture the concern on that southwest corner. Clark: Thank you for raising it. So, obviously, it's -- we took it as a good suggestion, so we will see what we can do to make that happen. Simison: Is there any other questions or comments for the applicant? I'm going to weigh in for just very quick on two minor points from my perspective. I agree with Council Woman Strader. Now is not the time to have a conversation about eaves. If there is something that we think is important or of value, let's do that in the right context as compared to one offs on this specific application. And, then, from my --just in case there is an act of God and things move forward much faster, I think that putting the time restriction on when the first permit could be pulled up of January 1 st, 2011, as an example -- or 2021. From that standpoint that would -- that should be well before and what we have heard the applicant would be their time frame before they would ever get to that point in time or some day within the -- you just don't want people moving in in March for some reason, by an act of God, before -- two months before the end of the school -- school season is up and trying to be put into the school. So, if the applicant would be open to a date certain, if the Council thinks that that's appropriate, then, what would that be. Clark: Mr. Mayor, I could respond to that. The -- any date that you select on that is going to be arbitrary. You know, January 1, March 1, May 1 -- you know, ultimately what this comes down to is -- is the time it takes to get this process through the city process. So, there is not -- you know, there is not going to be a -- well, there is not going to be an act of God unless everything changes here that would allow us to get going before the time frame when both schools are going to be online and, again, this is a -- a 92 lot development, you know, it's only going to be a handful of homes that will be online by the time you get to fall of 2021. So, I -- to me it's just unnecessary. You know, I'm -- I have been told that January 1 sounds great. Simison: And that's why Council even thinks it's relevant, but -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I think it's a fantastic suggestion. I appreciate that that sounds like extraordinary circumstances, but I think we are in extraordinary circumstances with our schools and, you know, that would give us a real safeguard around the issue. So, I appreciate you making that suggestion. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 34 of 40 Clark: Mr. Mayor, if I could just clarify. One of the reasons why my initial response was to push back on that was because I didn't know what type of permits you were talking about. You know, obviously, we are going to need grading permits before that happens. I'm -- I'm assuming that your -- your point is -- is residential building -- Simison: Residential building permits. Yes. Clark: Okay. Okay. With that clarification I -- I feel a lot better, so -- Simison: Okay. All right. Council, anything further or do I have any motion to close the public hearing or not. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 6-B. Borton: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 6-B. Any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Strader: Mr. Mayor, I will kick off some discussion. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Great. I appreciate the applicant trying to work with the neighbors, meeting our -- and exceeding our requirement for open space and making some adjustments to what they originally intended in order to work well and create a project that fits well within the city. I continue to have some concerns about our school overcrowding, but the small unit count and the timeline to deliver the product with the additional requirement of a date to pull the residential building permits makes me comfortable, so I would be supportive of approving the project if we make those requirements. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I had hoped -- even with the previous applications in this area that --that whole corner will be able to be developed as a whole. However, I realize that's probably not realistic at this point and so I think that that being said, that I think the applicant has done everything they possibly can to -- to appease what we have requested of them and to Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 35 of 40 comply with -- comply with code. I appreciate very much that they are in agreement with Commission's recommendations and definitely -- definitely a need in our city for this price point for sure and it's in our -- it's in our code that we as a -- as a Council and staff will promote a variety of housing types and options for residents. So, I appreciate that that is something that we are considering this evening and I think this location is a -- is a pretty good location for this. I don't know anything -- I can't think of anything in that area that causes me concern for this density in that location. I think it will be really interesting to see how that four acre property to the south, you know, eventually get -- eventually gets built out. However, if that -- if that owner-- if those owners in that surrounding area don't have objections to this and didn't come this evening to share their concerns, then, we don't -- we don't have any way to know that they have concerns, so -- Simison: Any further comments or would anyone like to take a stab at a motion? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I move that we approve Item 6-B, H-2019-0109, to include a DA that captures the conditions in the staff report and the remarks made by the applicant today, including Mayor's request to have the -- the no residential building permit issued prior to January 1 of 2021. Hoaglun: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor, I have a question. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: If legal needs to answer this, but do we need to require the applicant to provide a copy of their contract with the school district or with Sawtooth about that, just --just so that the district can't back out. Is that something -- I don't know how that works on our side. Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Perreault, I think there is a requirement in the DA that they have to provide an easement -- Perreault: Okay. Nary: -- to the other side for this -- their side of the property. It sounds like they have been in agreement with the district staff, so it is a trustee decision, but we wouldn't condition their development agreement on somebody else's agreement. Perreault: Okay. So -- so, if the trustees decide not to agree to that, what happens? Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 36 of 40 Nary: Then it wouldn't connect. Perreault: Okay. Allen: Mr. Mayor, excuse me, may I answer that? Simison: Yes, you may. Allen: Council Woman Perreault, Commissioner -- Councilman. There is a provision in the staff report in the existing development agreement that -- or in the proposed development agreement that they provide a pedestrian connection out to the sidewalk along Linder Road. It does not specify where. They are proposing it on the school district property, but if that falls through for some reason they are still required to provide it on their property. So, that is a requirement either way, whether or not the school district agrees to it or not on their property. Perreault: Thank you. That makes me more comfortable. Simison: Thank you. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: The motion does include the applicant's comments with regards to relocating the -- the pedestrian access to the west as well and that solution on that southwest lot. Simison: Agreed. I don't have a vote, but I agree. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, yes. If it's wanted to make that part of the motion, the second does agree with that. Simison: All right. If there is no further discussion on the motion, the clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 7: Ordinances [Action Item] A. Ordinance No. 20-1873: An Ordinance ( H-2019- 0097 Percy Subdivision) For Rezone Of A Portion Of Government Lot 2 Of Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 37 of 40 Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; Establishing And Determining The Land Use Zoning Classification Of 30.02 Acres Of Land From R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) Zoning District To R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District In The Meridian City Code; Providing That Copies Of This Ordinance Shall Be Filed With The Ada County Assessor, The Ada County Recorder, And The Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; And Providing For A Summary Of The Ordinance; And Providing For A Waiver Of The Reading Rules; And Providing An Effective Date Simison: We will now move on to Item 7-A. Ordinance. So, this will be Ordinance No. 20-1873 and ask the clerk to read it by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is Ordinance 20-1873, an ordinance related to Percy Subdivision, H-2019-0097, for rezone of a portion of Government Lot 2 of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 30.02 acres of land from R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) Zoning District to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a waiver of the reading rules; and providing an effective date. Simison: Would anyone like this ordinance read in its entirety? If not, do I have any motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I have been informed by my fellow Council members that this seat is the one required to make motions on these ordinances. However, I understand that there is a clause I'm supposed to use that allows us to shorten it and I can't remember off the top of my head what it is. So, I'm going to request -- oh. Okay. Got it. So, I move that we approve Ordinance No. 20-1873 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Second. Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second that we approve the ordinance with suspension of the rules. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not the clerk will call the roll. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 38 of 40 Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, absent; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: Future Meeting Topics Simison: Item No. 8, future meeting topics. Do we have anything that for a future meeting discussion? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: We may place for a ten minute workshop discussion, quick thumbs up, thumbs down, on getting into the weeds on eaves in R-4 and R-8 and perhaps that could be a March, April workshop. Do we want to open that door and discuss it. An item just for discussion. Simison: I will ask the Council President to put that on his list of things to evaluate for future consideration. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: How does this process work? Do we end up making a motion to --to contribute that time in the future or is this just things that were thrown out there? Okay. I would like to have some time to discuss the letters from the West Ada School District. In our last meeting with them they talked about what we would like to hear from them on each of these applications, whether what they are currently sending is sufficient for us and whether there is anything else we would like to hear or know on each of the applications. So, I realize that each Council may have had different preferences on that and it may have changed over time, but it sounded like the school -- school district -- district was asking us if we would do that in our hearing. Simison: Thank you. And I think what we talked about was waiting until we get the position on board. Perreault: Okay. Simison: Because they are doing it--they are actually going to be the ones that are going to be providing the information. So, we can say this is what we would like you to get, Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 39 of 40 along with the school district, so it is on the -- on the to do, just probably not for a couple months, until we get someone in that position. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Suggestions to throw out there, since we are having a little open discussion. I would be very interested to hear a short-- perhaps five minute update on city preparations in the very unlikely event of the coronavirus coming to town. I just think it's good risk management for us to anticipate problems ahead of time and have a plan in place, which I'm sure we do. One suggestion I have. The other suggestion -- I would be interested to explore with my fellow Council members if you want to talk a little bit more about the issues in the school district, how we want to coordinate with them and just have some general follow up and maybe key takeaways on that meeting that we had with West Ada. Even maybe a more holistic discussion than just the letters that we receive. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just nothing for a future topic, although it will be discussed. I will be attending the first official meeting of the Expo Idaho Advisory Committee tomorrow night. So, we will start hearing from Expo Idaho and their needs and we are going to be electing a chairman, vice-chairman and those types of things. So, if you have any thoughts, ideas, let me know and anybody in the public who can e-mail me if they have thoughts on that, but it's kicking off for real tomorrow night. Simison: Excellent. Well, maybe we will have a report from you on a future meeting topic if relevant. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I'm sure you will. Bongiorno: One more, Mr. Mayor, since we are throwing stuff around. Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I can get our EMS chief at -- whenever you guys would like to give you a full update on the coronavirus. He's -- he's well versed. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Speaking for myself, I would love to get that update. Thank you very much for offering it. Bongiorno: I will work to get it on the schedule then and I will have him come and present to you. Meridian City Council February 25,2020 Page 40 of 40 Simison: All right. Do I have any other motions that someone would like to make tonight? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I move that we adjourn the meeting. Hoaglun: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting. Any discussion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:57 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 3 / 10 / 20 MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 2/25/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/25/2020 Hearing Type: Public Forum Active: There are no signatures posted for this meeting type yet. Go Back To List Export To Excel ©2020 - City of Meridian, Idaho internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignlnFormDetails?id=425 1/1 C-/WE IDIAN-- ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item - 5.A. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 20 Title of Item -Transportation Commission Annual Report Council Notes: dam ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Annual Report Cover Merr. REVIEWERS: to Clerk. Johnson, Chris Approved 1/31/2020 - 10:34 AM Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 4 of 101 Date: December 2, 2019 To: Mayor and City Council From: Meridian Transportation Commission -David Ballard, Chair -David McKinney,Vice-Chair -Stephen Lewis -Tracy Hopkins -Ryan Hall -Ryan Lancaster -Michael Venard/Joseph Leckie -Patricia Matthews/Tom LeClaire -Brian Leisle RE: 2019 Annual Report The Meridian Transportation Commission (TC) was formed in February, 2013 with Ordinance No. 13-152. The Commission consists of nine appointed commissioners and meets on the first Monday of each month, except September, in the Council Chambers. Councilman Luke Cavener and representatives from ITD District 3, ACHD, COMPASS,Valley Regional Transit(VRT),and the West Ada School District serve as ex-officio members. Planning Division Manager Caleb Hood provides staff support, Sergeants Stacy Arnold and Brandon Frasier providesregular updates from the Police Department perspective,and Ted Baird, Deputy City Attorney, provides legal guidance. City Staff provides monthly updates to the Commission regarding the progress of projects that were in construction or were soon to be constructed.Additional City staff and additional staff from the ex-off icio agencies interact with the Commission from time-to-time as do members of the public. Commissioner David Ballard was once again elected Chair for 2019. David McKinney was elected Vice-Chair of the Commission for 2019. In 2019, the Commission welcomed Tom LeClaire and Michael Venard, while two other members,Tricia Matthews and Charlene Pederson, left the Commission. The Transportation Commission spent quite a bit of time in 2019 discussing both short and long term roadway project planning and prioritization, transit service planning, and the City's new Comprehensive Plan, to name a few.A more complete summary of business conducted by the Commission in 2019 is outlined below. In January, the Commission heard from Justin Lucas, ACHD Planning Supervisor on the Roadways to Bikeways Plan. The Commission also received an update on shared vehicles, including a draft Ordinance and elected officers for 2019. In February, the Commission began to discuss the prioritization of proposed roadway, intersection, and Community Program projects for consideration in ACHD's IFYWP. Some concerns were brought up surrounding traffic and parking concerns in Paramount Subdivision, south of Rocky Mountain High School. Some speed studies were also requested to ACHD on Amity and Locust Grove. In March, the TC welcomed a new Youth Commissioner, Michael Venard. The TC finalized their ACHD prioritization lists for the Mayor and Council to consider.The Commission also requested ACHD evaluate speeds on Wrightwood Drive,just off of Locust Grove Road. Stephen Hunt from VRT was present and discussed fixed- route transit planning. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 5 of 101 The Transportation Commission, during their April meeting, continued to plan for public transportation. During the May meeting,the TC heard from Sgt.Stacy Arnold about concerns at the Meridian/Ustick intersection and the speed limit on Locust Grove Road north of Ustick. Bill Parsons,the City's Planning Supervisor, presented to the Commission about sign codes.This was Tricia Matthews last meeting. During the June meeting, speeding concerns on Lost Rapids Drive were addressed. An update on the Harvest transit service was given. City Staff also presented on the Master Mobility Map and requested feedback on its functionality. Crosswalk compliance results were discussed in July. Sgt Arnold also noted that this was his last meeting as he would be going back to patrol; Sgt. Frasier would be the new Police liaison to the TC. Rachel Haukkala, a Planner with COMPASS, presented on high capacity transit alternatives, including options for using the rail corridor. Commissioner Lancaster, representing the TC School Zone Subcommittee, provided an update on their meeting the month prior where they discussed the school zone on Meridian Road downtown as well as at Rocky Mountain High School. In August, the Commission welcomed Tom LeClaire to the Commission. During the meeting, a draft Air Compression Brake Ordinance was reviewed. Mike Barton, the City's Parks Superintendent, discussed the Rail with Trail project and the overall City pathway network with the Commission. Toni Tisdale, COMPASS Senior Planner, presented on the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The Initial Draft of the ACHD 2020-2024 IFYWP was shared and discussed. For the September meeting,the Commission took a mobile bus tour with VRT Staff.The tour started at the Park & Ride lot on Ten Mile and went downtown Boise. In October, the Commission again discussed compression brakes.Alissa Taysom was introduced as the new Ex- Officio member from VRT to the TC. Sgt. Brandon Frasier was also welcomed and introduced to the TC. Sgt. Frasier introduced a proposed hands-free driving ordinance to the Commission. A Comprehensive Plan update was given by Caleb Hood. In November,the TC received an update about the new fixed route transit service. Randy Spiwak addressed the Commission, asking them to examine the default speed limit. Rachel Haukkala, COMPASS, updated the Commission on the recently completed Rails with Trails Study. Mark Wasdahl, ITD, presented on the SH-69 Traffic Study.This was Youth Commissioner Michael Venard's last meeting. December 2nd, was the last meeting of the Commission for 2019.The Commission welcomed Joseph Leckie as the new Youth Commissioner. The December agenda included a review of this report, the new fixed-route transit messaging plan, and a review of the role and bylaws of the Commission. The Commission is grateful for the opportunity to provide service to the citizens of Meridian and to actively shape the transportation systems of our City. The Commission has a lot of experience and technical expertise that can benefit the community even more. To that point, the Commission would like to take on more responsibility and a larger role when it comes to helping address all kinds of transportation related issues.The Commission plans to review their by-laws and Ordinances and may recommend changes to the Council in 2020. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 6 of 101 C� fER1D1ANTtt--- I DAHO Planning and Zoning Public Hearings Staff Outline and Presentation Meeting Notes: Changes to Agenda: • Item#6A: Sky Mesa Highlands—AZ, PP(H-2019-0123)—Applicant requests continuance to March 101h in order to continue working with ACHD on development requirements. Item#6B: Edington Commons(H-2019-0109) Application(s): ➢ Annexation &Zoning ➢ Preliminary Plat Size of property,existing zoning,and location: This site consists of 13.49 acres of land,zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 3610 N. Linder Rd,just north of W. Ustick Rd. on the east side of N. Linder Rd. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR(3-8 units/acre) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests annexation&zoning of 14.56 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district for the development of 92 SFR attached &detached units at a gross density of 6.83 units/acre consistent with the MDR FLUM designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 92 buildable lots, 11 common lots and 4 other lots on 13.49 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. The plat is proposed to develop in 2 phases. Access is proposed via N. Linder Rd., an arterial street,with stub streets proposed to the east&south for future extension. Public streets are proposed for internal access, some with 27'wide reduced street sections which only accommodate parking on one side of the street;4 common driveways are proposed for access to homes off the public streets. To address Staff concerns pertaining to the amount of on-street parking available within the development with the narrow lots& reduced street sections, a parking exhibit was submitted as shown depicting a total of 50 spaces for use by residents&guests,which should be adequate for the development. A minimum of 10%qualified open space and (1)site amenity is required to be provided for the development. The open space exhibit shown includes a couple of small areas that do not qualify; however,other areas shown comply with the minimum UDC standards.The Coleman Lateral,which runs along the northern boundary of the site is proposed to be piped. Site amenities are proposed in excess of the minimum required, as follows: a children's play structure, swing set, seating benches, climbing rocks, climbing dome, and pathways.The multi-use pathway proposed along the northern boundary adjacent to the Coleman Lateral complies with the PMP and will eventually extend to the east when the abutting property redevelops to the existing pathway in Woodburn West providing a connection to the on-street pathway along Linder Rd.for safe pedestrian access to the middle school to the north. The western portion of the pathway is proposed to extend to the north across the adjacent Sawtooth Middle School property. Photos of attached &detached homes proposed to be constructed in this development were submitted as shown on the right.All homes along the west perimeter boundary of the development adjacent to N. Linder Rd. &others as depicted in red are proposed to be a single-story in height. Building materials consist of a mix of siding (horizontal &vertical lap siding and board &batten)with stone veneer accents. The attached structures are required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. For aesthetic reasons&to ensure consistency with the concept elevations originally submitted with this application shown on the left, Staff recommended a DA provision requiring all homes be constructed with minimum 1-foot wide fire rated eaves on all four sides consistent with previous Commission/Council direction on this matter. Although the Commission preferred the appearance of eaves on homes, because they are not required by the UDC or Building Code they were hesitant to require such &removed Staffs recommended condition requiring such-they requested City Council address whether or not there should be a policy or a code amendment requiring such for all homes in the City or if it should just be a DA provision when/if determined appropriate. If Council determines eaves should be required, DA provision#A.1d in Section VIII should be re-instated. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Hethe Clark, Clark-Wardle,Applicant's Representative; Julie Ann Domingo; Serena Ormsby Alvarez; Stave Yapyap; Peng Cheng; Laren Bailey;Justin Cranney, Hawley Troxell, representing the Lester&Betty Vogel Trust; Dennis Green;Tina Folden ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Steven Lloyd iv. Written testimony: Whitney Montgomery, Kelly Woodhouse, Michele Anderson &Cheryl Garpetti; (all homeowner's in existing subdivisions by this developer-in support); letter from Laren Bailey, the Applicant, to Steven &Andrea Lloyd,the property owners to the east, agreeing to limit the height of homes to a single story adjacent to their property on Lots 20 and 23-26, Block 1; Jake Centers, Blackrock Homes;Justin Cranney, Hawley-Troxel representing Lester&Betty Vogel Trust&Hethe Clark, Applicant's Representative(in agreement w/Commission's recommendation). Key Issue(s)of Discussion by Commission: i. The possibility of"floating"the Mixed Use designation on the property to the south to the southern portion of this property and adding a commercial or multi-family component to enlarge the mixed use area and provide a transition and integration of uses from the residential to the future commercial uses to the south; ii. Staff recommendation for 4-sided eaves and a cohesive color scheme to be provided for the overall development featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color, and an accent color or unique material and garage doors coinciding with this scheme or other accents; iii. The provision of an emergency access to the site that meets Fire Dept. requirements; iv. The location of the micro-path along the east side of the site providing a connection between the multi-use pathway and the common driveway and it not being visible from the public street creating police surveillance concerns; v. The provision and alignment of a 10'wide multi-use pathway and qualified open space along the northern boundary of the site and location of existing easements; vi. The availability of on-street parking for guests and whether or not reduced street sections should be allowed and their impact on on-street parking; vii. Impact of the development on area school enrollment,which is currently over capacity, and the School District's request for no homes in this development to be occupied until 2021 which Pleasant View will be open and the cap on Hunter Elementary will be lifted. Commission Change(s)to Staff Recommendation: i. Strike condition#A.1c which requires a cohesive color scheme to be used for the overall development featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color,and an accent color or unique material with garage door colors coinciding with this scheme or other accents—design review should not be required for single-family detached homes; ii. Strike condition#A.1d which requires minimum 1-foot wide fire rated eaves to be constructed on all 4 sides of homes within the development. Outstanding Issue(s)for City Council: i. The Commission would like direction from City Council as to whether or not there should be a policy requiring 4-sided eaves to be constructed on homes within the City—the Commission generally preferred the appearance of eaves on homes but because they aren't required by Building Code or City Code they were hesitant to require them through the Development Agreement. If Council determines eaves should be required, DA provision#A.1 d in Section VIII should be re-instated. ii. The Commission requested the Council consider if the development as proposed provides an adequate transition to the mixed use designated parcel to the south approved to develop with commercial uses and what could be done about making sure the commercial piece doesn't get blocked in; only a stub street is proposed to the south and the back side of homes face that property—there is no mix or integration of uses proposed. Commission Recommendation: Approval with the requirement of a DA per the amended provisions in the staff report Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0109, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 25, 2020: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0109, as presented during the hearing on February 25, 2020,for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0109 to the hearing date of for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) h2 __ •. F �,�•• :,:`IS � •' r.� .vr.� • "�.c VW.� "� � ni , �w' 'f �.. �i:•�.r.- �:, -Mr - -7' _ +..t�f ~��,;�' _��=r_ -.5 r�dY6..s Yi h` cy •r. 1 ��n .k. l ��' 1 1 ■ 1 ■ 11 --- � Legend INN MEN 1■1 I •�■1■.■a■\■1■■lid � 1■■ ■YINN■■1 ,■1■■1■ � • - • • • l�//. 'r�l�■■I�111111■1■� ■■1 I e • - • • • _ _ 11 �11■11 INI■- 111`ir• pu■■1• ■■11 -- 111 :��- uu:� p■u a �._. 1!11 11 •ll���1:'�Ilu■�� :m u�'III I 1 = �!J - -7 Ilan2 NI I��1l1�1111::i`:�}��=1= =I== 1■ I :■,111 �; = - ■. u u=� !'1/1111 I��I����a��nu■::: =it a■II � 1■11 W �� -r+�iu II .. I. I,��r,I j�I����a u1u�r •. � � ` � a ■INI uuul ■ ICI♦ �ri111 nun\ w is nnuil 1 I 1 111 INI IN I III �I ►1 + � ♦} �i<l1.111 �IIIII 111 �- _ ��� NI•�■-III IIII i a D - o■ ':: NI _--itillltil- ; a•:'.D�C,, ISM ', � ,,..�.'. IN FF o rr * i �i ._ 111 .. N 11 1111� 111■ :..0 S-T.- -:A,; - {A7 CK I�I� ■ii:�� ■ ��.'�� 1511'' 1 AA ii f�\��11111■■�}I} �tea•.. � �.f' -i IIIIR ii ii i 11 z�i,�= mom 1■1 ■,.•,. ■ � �� �= IIIIIII I 151 • D ♦}t►Lt1 ��. �ct ul ■ ■■ ■ � � lultiuu uuuw 111 ■ •�.■ �� ._III. ��� . N■■ •1■■NI 1 _ 1=■■1■■1■■ 1 �■111 =2 111.,•■■■ ..•■�■1■■■■•■■■■■■ ��1■1■■I/w� �� i,. ■ u ulv■ ■■■. ■ uuuulm �- lu■�/■uuu uw�■uulnuu■d �■■n.■�� 1r�a i�uumno._. ;■■�11■ - um uu_:, �,V�+r l■on:�•uu.ugo- 1:..■■.■.�,.qi,,��I ■= II � ' ,.. �_ � ; ■■u- ■,■m 1 A ►��� •�1♦I�� \■ r to■ m uu11i •�.: ♦i ■_ C c e 5 11� 4 0■ : �� � 111��■� �f 1�•�•}I♦+i�■oFallen ■ }} �1 •�■■■1 If `a II M• ♦ v.. - I .,sra ���■ r•• �i i�•1•}}1/►•}��}f a■is a- -� ♦•1 •1•■�r�,,1■i■■■O■ �l r. �., �:ii ■■ i� i�iij1`�•}•�+•}�•�'1���f�=111�11 ♦1•�,,}♦��I.�■■11■i�a .,w� i •+ ,� �e � tr\ IN REVISED Preliminary Plat & Landscape Plan • >!_ II---- _ - _- - ' --- }..aomsK"-'— Ic' �• Y-al ' IF r4"�.. i i� I — s 4 44 �i r p a p On-Street Parking Exhibit p z ■ G7 n rn 0 z 1 f ' 1 r .r i LA C = CP - Staff Note: Because W. Woodpine St. (the middle east/west street) is only a 27 foot wide street section, parking is restricted to only one side E CA - of the street which reduces the parking count by 2; 3 additional spaces ; D ' can be accommodated along one side of W. Woodpine St. where it stubs ; Z at the east boundary adjacent to common area, resulting in an overall total of 50 on-street spaces. till, - ,Q ■ _ i I �I I: Qualified Open - Space Exhibit I I � I � - - - Site Amenities Proposed Amenities: o Large Half-Acre Park-The half-acre park will contain the following recreation facilities: 1 Play Structure Swing Set t Seating Benches Climbing Rocks r Climbing Dome Attractive Landscaping I I and Pedestrian is I I Pathways I I I I I I - � � I $�S = I c Multi-Use Pathway { 25 0 ,-1 � YJIE i•_ SAWTOOTH MIDDLE SCHOOL M II. I .—�d-�C��• B—� _ 3 EG C I` 1, 6 ��7rB�Tff `` a Lo- =— ------- a' 13 19 — 15 -LIB ` I------- ---- ` `^ 17 1J 'I �' •/ '� ... � 18 --- 19 20 I EDINGTON SUBDIVISION REGIONAL PATHWAY EXHtOrT wr ����•�.��'."i�I_���:t': •l•:� -�_.. ,fl�Gail,' •w Updated Photo Elevations 1• Original Conceptual Building Elevations R- w r f� �, �iJ� ���.._�._�■ r`i I i! I ,•al�'�'�f�f��li� lf �+ ^4 {�� •Ifl'���I� f �� ____ ■ 71. t l -� R yl T � � 1 +� 1{ li t cW �4 4L SFill �,�• f� SUGARMAN COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION 1 I MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO ENGINEERS SURVE'/ORS pIARNERS II` ....:i�i. .-j-,��'. GAS STA-ION Q r-y3, 3000 SF ® I J 0 JSF�l- us-nCK OLu O07 J V iFLIFL ISLANDFTIW !Z• a i O �L1 ROAD .O.,ati tirWcrd •�. +� �+ca/CONiaCT F�NEAAL NOTES LANDBOAPE PLAN � ltlO.O•R'-"MYir"EPa,we1F 11,9.l.e�,swID.„.s,NlBI.m NLL Ce-YELOP�faR�MFptYP710N- �cen�wmYMi r�r�woc Ewa mu�ra�i'acis rvwrrris�nae,raiM ta+�scaaE axw�cr rwEcwva nav u�rusw6� •Tw "�4'`O�mw'.�,��_�.�".'�`""""r.i.wai.�.:•..o�•o...� maemm.,.�,w�rQr�.Nmn..ww„rm•� n ^ I w+w�arSZ.-.,ZT`.. ..w�. .� .I ,rila " L1 �E IDIAN^ ITEM SHEET IDAHO Council Agenda Item - 6.A. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item - Public Hearing Continued from February 4, 2020 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. Click Here for Application Materials Council Notes: ATTACHMENTS: De Planning and Zoning Minutes Minutes 1/31/2020 REVIEWERS: Department Clerk. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 2/20/2020 - 3:34 PM Continued to March 10, 2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 7 of 101 �E IDIAN^ ITEM SHEET IDAHO Council Agenda Item - 6.13. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: Title of Item - Public Hearing for Edington Commons (H-2019-0109) by G20, LLC, Located at 3610 N. Linder Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at Hearing Council Notes: ATTACHMENTS: Planning and Zoning Recommendations and Staff Report Staff Report 2/20/2020 Applicant Response to Recommendations/Staff Report Cover Memo 2/25/2020 Planning and Zoning Minutes Minutes 2/20/2020 REVIEWERS: Department Clerk. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 2/20/2020 -2:05 PM Approved Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 34 of 101 2/25/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 2/25/2020 Hearing Type: Council Item Number: 6-B Project Name: Edington Commons Project No.: H-2019-0109 Active: Signature HOA HOA I WishSign In Address For Neutral Against To Name Name Represent Date/Time Testify Dennis 2/25/2020 2185 E. Sharptail St. Verado X Green 5:46:04 PM Tina 2241 E Kamay Dr. Verado X 2/25/2020 Folden Meridian 5:49:33 PM Will 2/25/2020 5854 N Rosepoint PI X Dilmore 6:01:43 PM Angie 5854 N Rosepoint PI., X 2/25/2020 Dilmore Boise, ID 83713 6:02:01 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel ©2020 - City of Meridian, Idaho internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignlnFormDetails?id=415 1/1 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING February 25,2020 �! DATE: Legend �1IProject Location TO: Mayor&City Council ® ® ffiff) FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton Development p Services Manager - , 208-887-2211 ® ,, SUBJECT: H-2019-0109 s'- Edington Commons �� a LOCATION: 3610 N. Linder Rd. r i I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation&zoning of 14.56 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; and Preliminary plat consisting of 92 building lots, 10 common lots and 4 other lots on 13.49 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 13.49 Future Land Use Designation MDR(3-8 units/acre) Existing Land Use Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-15 Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 92 building/10 common/4 other Phasing plan(#of phases) 2 phases Number of Residential Units(type Single-family attached and detached of units) Density(gross&net) 6.83 units/acre(gross)& 11.64 units/acre(net) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ See Analysis, Section V.3 buffer/qualified) Amenities Children's play structure,climbing dome, swings,climbing rocks&seating area Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 35 of 101 Physical Features(waterways, Coleman Lateral runs across the northern boundary of this site hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of July 9,2019;no attendees except Applicant attendees: History(previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report Yes (yes/no) • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Fire Service • Distance to Fire 2.4 miles from Fire Station 43 (can meet the response time requirements) Station • Fire Response 4 minutes(under ideal conditions) Time • Resource 82%from Fire Station#3—meets the target goal of 80%or greater Reliability • Risk 1 (residential)(current resources are adequate to supply service) Identification • Accessibility Does not meet all required access,road widths&turnarounds;development is limited to 30 building lots for both phases until a secondary access that meets IFC is built&approved by MFD.See additional comments in Section VIII C. • Special/resource Doesn't require an aerial device needs • Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 1 hour(may be less if building is fully sprinklered) • Other Resources NA Police Service • Distance to 4.5 miles Police Station • Police Response 4:01 minutes(priority 3) Time • Calls for Service See comments in Section VIILD • Accessibility See comments in Section VIILD • Specialty/resourc See comments in Section VIII.D e needs • Crimes See comments in Section VIILD • Crashes See comments in Section VIIID West Ada School District Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 36 of 101 • Distance(elem, Paramount Elementary— 1.2 miles(enrollment at Hunter Elementary is ms,hs) currently capped); Sawtooth Middle School—0.3 mile;Rocky Mountain High School— 1.4 miles • Capacity of Paramount Elementary 650; Sawtooth Middle School 1,000;Rocky Schools Mountain High School 1,800 • #of Students Paramount Elementary 701; Sawtooth Middle School 1,042; Rocky Enrolled Mountain High School 2,475 • Anticipated 74 schoolaged children generated by this development Wastewater • Distance to 0-feet _ Sewer Services • Sewer Shed White Drain Trunkshed • Estimated 92 Project Sewer ERU's • WRRF 13.78 MGD Declining Balance • Project Yes Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts& None Concerns Water • Distance to 0-feet Water Services • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated 92 Project Water ERU's • Water Quality None • Project Yes Consistent with Water Master Plan • Impacts& Provide water easement in shared drive(Block 1,Lot 21)for potential Concerns connection of parcel to the east.A second water connection for redundancy shall be required to the water main in Linder Road through the walking path between lots 13 & 14(Block 2). Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 37 of 101 1 1 I - • - • Ili •■off •�-=-T.���� Legend ME N.own ITS --"on Project Loc ON IN mossmilim IN ofion ■■u■s ��om �uu i i ~J + � I I R o ul■■- _ ■aI I ' I II I�+ ♦ Y•Ilm nugl m 1►�I I�II,♦ �LI■■11 ���+�111111 Ilglllll ' � W:�'a■■ C � .�� -�iYllllr 11 1 s r - �--ram � I�=�' iin 14• = pq : .�V IYii111 � ♦A■i: � +' *III==-- W� ■rn■ � � �� II7111 1 -.:7?I„ 1_'I - • - e ,1..■In■ / �i� i�■- -::` Iona ' ° -.......U,S;TICK 11�11 US- son Ilk. II-:: - ■ - s nun:.. ��I=��- r 1■aal■■a■■ I•i--■unnu■■r■■..umnun■ �� - pu►luun■■uar�:■■■uun■n■1 ��■nn:`������IW Illlle- p--v■n■■q■uuuugn+ 1:■nn■q■��I��� UND ..■ate+sA►i���i�■s►R■. ♦i� ♦�---■■ 4 i-- a , 1� f�- �=(IIIII ♦♦ ,M♦ ��■uu �\' ■ 1■ 11■1 11 ■ 1■ 11■1 11 -iii 1•i _ _ i�i: 1•i • 1■1 1■■ �Y■■•N■■1 unnu 1■1 1■■ �Y■■•••■■1 unnu 1■ Ypuw INf■■■- 1■ puw �'■INf■■■- IS E-1111 111 _ uw� pauu p ■ uu_ p•uu p ■ 1 1■11- W N .INI �IIIIIII ■ � 1 1■!. I N .INI �IIIIIII ■ ■-11: INII -iN I III it f=1■1 INII -iN I III illly. i¢-III IIII II I � i§- xl xl III IIII II ►n -- xl ---1511151� � � - xl ---1511151- 1110 * ■■■1■■■■ ■■■ Nn■■• N 1■ �1111� •■■■1■■■■ ■■■■1■N■■■�� 1J in- NO �1 :i i ■ �_=.- IIII': :i i 1■■■■ �� � IIII' = 1511 -i�'�= 1511 ■ -- 2 IIIIIII 1 151 Nor ' ■■■■N• ��'�= IIIIIII I 151111111 :■■■■1 1 ��: =F- 111151111 IIII IIIII :■■■■1 1 �� - ONF Z. 111151111 IIII IIIII 1` - w uu■u - : - 1■ - ■■■ !! uuw 11-- ---' 'ME -- ■• ■■■■N■ ■ - -- ■• ■■■■N■ ■ ■■■■■■■1■■■ �•----' -- - 1�■■■■■1■■■ - - 1■ � ■ 'P-1■1 �2 � ■ 'P-1■1 :�2 I 1 ■1 ■■N■ • ■ ■■1■■■■■■1■ 1■ IIIN IIII_- ■1 ■■N■ • ■ ■■1■■■■■■1■ 1■ - II�N.1"1-_- :i ■ uuw au. 1?i�:.. 1 :i ■ ■unnu Pv 1?i�:.. ^1 S, - r r��`•-� - I - IIIII : iii • • 11 i on �♦ i �• i • • • '•- •. -1 1 1 '.• • 1 C. Representative: Laren Bailey,Devco Development,LLC—4824 E. Fairview Ave.,Boise,ID 83706 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 11/15/2019 2/7/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 11/12/2019 2/4/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 11/22/2019 2/14/2020 on site Nextdoor posting 11/12/2019 2/4/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION&ZONING Comprehensive Plan(https:llwww.meridiancity.or /�pplan): This property is designated Medium Density Residential(MDR)on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The MDR designation allows smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The proposed single-family homes and gross density of 6.83 units per acre is consistent with the MDR FLUM designation. 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 detached units will contribute to the diversity in housing types in the northwest 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 Chinden Blvd. and Ten Mile corridors. • "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 development does not meet the minimum qualified open space requirement. • "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 adjacent arterial street; there are no stub streets to this property and access is not available via a local street. Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 39 of 101 • "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 to adjacent properties other than sidewalks along stub streets; Staff recommends a segment of the City's multi-use pathway is constructed along the northern boundary of this site adjacent to the Coleman Lateral in accord with the Pathways Master Plan as noted below. • "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) Other than sidewalks along public stub streets, no pedestrian connections are proposed to adjacent properties. Below staff recommends that the applicant construct a 10 foot multi-use pathway along the south side of the Coleman Lateral to promote neighborhood connectivity and safe pedestrian access to the school to the north. One of the many goals of the Comprehensive Plan is to proactively address conflicts between incompatible uses. This property currently abuts C-C zoned property on the south boundary. The applicant is providing a stub street for vehicular connectivity but the neighborhood as designed doesn't integrate with the mix of commercial uses currently approved for the commercial property(Sugarman).With a previous development application(Alpina Townhomes) on the subjeet Sugarman property,it was the desire of the Commission to have the two properties develop uniformly to ensure a true mix and integration of uses in this area. Staff recommends that the Commission determine if the proposed single family development provides an adequate transition to the mixed use designated property development to the south. Zoning: Based on the analysis above, Staff is of the opinion the requested annexation with the R- 15 zoning district and proposed development is generally consistent with the MDR FLUM designation and is appropriate for this site. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property to the north and south and across the street to the west; and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary(AOCI). A legal description for the annexation area is included in Section VII.A. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and several accessory structures on this site. These structures are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer for the phase in which they are located. Dimensional Standards (UDCL1-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. The proposed plat complies with these standards. Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 40 of 101 Subdivision Design&Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3): The proposed subdivision is required to be designed and improved per the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 which include but are not limited to streets,driveways,common driveways, easements,and block face. The proposed plan complies with these standards. Phasing Plan: The subdivision is proposed to develop in two(2)phases. The first phase will include 44 building lots. Access(UDC 11-3A-3,11-3H- /Streets: One(1)access is proposed via N. Linder Rd., an arterial street,at the northwest portion of the site;two (2) stub streets are proposed for future extension to the south and east. Development is limited to 30 building lots until such time as a secondary access that meets International Fire Code(IFC)is built and approved by the Fire Dept. Traffic: A Traffic Impact Study was not required by ACHD for the proposed development. Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3 : All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. Four (4)common driveways are proposed that comply with UDC standards. Common driveways should be a maximum of 150' in length or less,unless otherwise approved by the Fire Dept. An exhibit is required to be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks,fencing,building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures.Driveways for abutting properties that aren't taking access from the common driveway(s) should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line away from the common driveway. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum 5-foot wide landscaped buffer. A perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveway(s)is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment.A copy of the easement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat. Signage should be provided at the ends of the common driveways on Lots 6 and 22,Block 1; Lot 7,Block 2; and Lot 15,Block 5 for emergency wayfinding purposes as requested by the Fire Department. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Parking for single-family dwellings is required based on the number of bedrooms per unit.For 1- and 2-bedroom units,a minimum of 2 spaces are required with at least one of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad. For 3-and 4- bedroom units, a minimum of 4 spaces are required with at least 2 of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pads. For 5+bedroom units, a minimum of 6 spaces are required with at least 3 in an enclosed garage,other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad. Because of the proposed reduced 27-foot wide street sections (W.Windswept Dr. and W. Woodpine St.),parking is restricted to one side of the street only; and narrow building lots (i.e.32'+/-)with 20'wide driveways,the amount of available on-street parking is limited. This has historically created issues with not enough on-street parking available for guests and residents due to residents using their garages for storage rather than parking; and people parking on both sides of the street where parking is restricted to only one side blocking access for emergency vehicles. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 41 of 101 To address this issue,the Applicant has submitted a parking exhibit included in Section VII.F that depicts a total of 50 available on-street parking spaces. Staff is concerned this is sufficient; if the Commission and/or City Council does not feel it's sufficient,they should require the provision of wider street sections to accommodate parking on both sides of the streets,wider building lots,and/or additional parking spaces in common areas.Because more parking will be able to be provided on the south side of W. Windswept Dr. vs. the north side where building lots are proposed, Staff recommends parking is solely provided on the south side of the street and parking is prohibited on the north side as proposed. One side of the street where 27-foot wide street sections are proposed should be signed"No Parking". Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): Pathways are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 with landscaping on either side of the pathway(s)per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. The Pathways Master Plan depicts a segment of the City's multi-use pathway in the general area near the northern boundary of the site for pedestrian access from the development to the east(Woodburn West)to the on-street pathway along Linder Rd. and the school to the north. Therefore,the Park's Dept.recommends as a DA provision that a pathway is provided on the south side of the Coleman Lateral on this site.Inclusion of a pathway will also allow this area(i.e.Lot 1,Block 1)to count toward the qualified open space requirement which does not meet the minimum standards as proposed.This pathway would eventually extend to the east to the existing pathway in Woodburn West development when the abutting property to the east redevelops for interconnectivity and safe pedestrian access to the school to the north. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk was recently constructed with the road widening along Linder Rd., an arterial street; minimum 5-foot wide attached(or detached) sidewalks are required along internal local streets as proposed. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 17E, 11-3B-7C and 11-3G-3B.5. Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed along the entry street and within common area"end caps". Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Landscaping is required to be provided in accord with UDC standards as follows: • A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along N. Linder Rd., an arterial street,in a common lot(s)and landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; • Landscaping is required on either side of pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-12C; • Landscaping is required within parkways as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17E, 11-3B-7C and 11-3G-313.5; and, • Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E. Landscaping is proposed within the street buffer along Linder Rd. and within most common open space areas in excess of UDC standards. No trees are depicted along the micropath between Lots 13 and 14,Block 2; landscaping should be provided in accord with UDC standards(or Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 42 of 101 apply for alternative compliance if an easement exists). The total linear feet of parkways and required&provided number of trees should be included in the calculations table on Sheet L2 of the landscape plan in accord with the minimum standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3G): Based on the overall development area which consists of 13.49 acres of land, a minimum of 10% (1.35 acres)qualified open space is required to be provided within the development per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. An open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.D that depicts 2.02 acres (or 15%) of open space for the development consisting of a half-acre park exceeding 50' x 100', common areas with parkways along the entry street and parkways within"end cap"common areas adjacent to streets, a micro-path lot,half of the arterial street buffer along Linder Rd. and the common lot where the Coleman Lateral is located at the north boundary of the site. Some of the open space depicted on the exhibit does not count toward the"qualified"open space standards set forth in UDC 11-3G-3 as shown in the second exhibit in Section VII.D (see hatched areas),primarily consisting of the area along the north boundary where the Coleman Lateral is located.Without this area,the development does not meet the minimum standards. Therefore, Staff recommends a 20-foot wide common lot is added along the north side of the building lots in Block 1 adjacent to the lateral outside of the irrigation easement containing a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway with 5 feet of landscaping on either side of the pathway in order for this area to qualify and comply with the minimum open space standards.In order for open space to qualify toward the minimum requirements it must improve the livability of residential neighborhoods,protect natural amenities, be accessible by all residents of the development and be located in areas of high visibility to avoid hidden areas and corners, dark areas, unusable space and reduce the opportunity for crime as set forth in UDC I I- 3G-1, 11-3G-3 and 11-3G-3D. Qualified Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G): A minimum of one(1)qualified site amenity is required to be provided for this development based on the size of the development(i.e. 13.49 acres). The Applicant proposes the following amenities in excess of UDC standards: a children's play structure,a swing set, seating benches,climbing rocks, climbing dome and a micro-path(see Section VII.D). Existing Trees: There are several(i.e. 6+/-)existing trees on this site that are proposed to be removed with development. Mitigation information is included on the landscape plan; (151)2- inch caliper trees are proposed for mitigation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 10C.5. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The Coleman Lateral runs along the northern boundary of this site within a 40-foot wide easement and is proposed to be left open as linear open space. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 7. Fencing is proposed as follows: a 6-foot tall solid vinyl privacy fence is proposed along the west, south and east boundaries of the development; a 5-foot tall black wrought iron fence is proposed along the rear of building lots adjacent to the canal along the north boundary of the development; and a 4-foot tall black wrought iron fence is proposed around the common area where children's play equipment is proposed near the entry of the development in accord with UDC standards. Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 43 of 101 Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. See Section VIII-B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System(UDC 11-3A-IS): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for each lot within the development. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18 : An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single-family attached and detached units as shown in Section VII.E. Building materials consist of a mix of siding(horizontal and vertical lap siding and board&batten)with stone veneer accents; colors are very monochromatic. The single-family attached structures are required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual; single-family detached structures are exempt from this requirement. All SFR homes along the west perimeter boundary of the development adjacent to N. Linder Rd. are proposed to be a single-story in height. To ensure eaves are constructed on homes for aesthetic as well as drainage (i.e. keeping water away from the foundation) reasons, Staff recommends a DA provision requiring all homes within the development be constructed with minimum 1-foot wide fire rated eaves on all four sides.For variety in appearance of the structures, Staff recommends a cohesive color scheme is used for the overall development featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color, and an accent color or unique material. Garage door colors should coincide with this scheme or other accents. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation&Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications with the conditions included in Section V1II per the Findings in Section IX. Further, Staff recommends the plat,landscape plan and qualified open space exhibit is revised per the conditions in Section VIII prior to the Commission's recommendation to Council on this application. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on December 5,2019 and January 16, 2020.At the public hearing on January 16',the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Hethe Clark, Clark-Wardle,Applicant's Representative; Julie Ann Domingo; Serena Ormsby Alvarez; Stave YaRyap; Peng Cheng; Laren Bailey;Justin Cranny, Hawley Troxell,representing the Lester&Betty Vogel Trust; Dennis Green; Tina Folden Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 44 of 101 b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Steven Lloyd d. Written testimony: Whitney Montgome , (resin support); letter from Laren Bailey,the Applicant,to Steven&Andrea Lloyd,the property owners to the east, agreeing to limit the height of homes to a single story adjacent to their property on Lots 20 and 23-26, Block 1; e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. Support of proposed development from homeowner's in other subdivisions by the same developer; 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The possibility of"floating"the Mixed Use designation on the property to the south to the southern portion of this property and adding a commercial component to enlarge the mixed use area and provide a transiton and integration of uses from the residential to the future commercial uses to the south; b. Staff recommendation for 4-sided eaves and a cohesive color scheme to be provided for the overall development featuring a minimum of two field colors, a trim color, and an accent color or unique material and garage doors coinciding with this scheme or other accents; c. The provision of an emergency access to the site that meets Fire Dept. reugirements; d. The location of the micro-path along the east side of the site providing a connection between the multi-use pathway and the common driveway and it not being visible from the public street creating police surveillance concerns; e. The provision and alignment of a 10' wide multi-use pathway and qualified open space along the northern boundary of the site and location of existing easements; f. The availability of on-street parking for guests and whether or not reduced street sections should be allowed and their impact on on-street parking; g. Impact of the development on area school enrollment,which is currently over capacity, and the School District's request for no homes in this development to be occupied until 2021 which Pleasant View will be open and the cap on Hunter Elementary will be lifted. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. Strike condition#A.1 c which requires a cohesive color scheme to be used for the overall development featuring a minimum of two field colors,a trim color,and an accent color or unique material with garage door colors coinciding with this scheme or other accents —design review should not be required for single-family detached homes; b. Strike condition#A.1d which requires minimum 1-foot wide fire rated eaves to be constructed on all 4 sides of homes within the development. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. The Commission would like direction from City Council as to whether or not there should be a policy requiring 4-sided eaves to be constructed on homes within the Cit,Y the Commission generally preferred the appearance of eaves on homes but because they aren't required by Building Code or City Code they were hesitant to require them through the Development Agreement. If Council determines eaves should be required, condition#A.1 d should be re-instated. b. The Commission requested the Council consider if the proposed development in itself provides an adequate transition to the mixed use designated the south and what could be done about making sure the commercial piece doesn't get blocked in. Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 45 of 101 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map 5awtooth Land Surveying, LL.0 -A&, 2030 5.'Nashington Ave. 1044 Northwest Blvd.,Ste.G 4 4 1 1'Avenue cast f Emmett, 10$36 J 7 Coeur dl'Alcne, ID 113814 Jerome,IV 63338 P: (208)398-8I 04 P!(208)714-41544 P:{209}329-5303 F:(208)398.8105 F.(208)292-4453 F-(208)324-5521 Annexation Legal Description (,._r, ) A parcel of land being a portion of the W1/2 SWI/4 SWi/4 of Section 36,Township 4 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as Follows: BEGINNING at the S1/16 corner common to Sections 35 and 36,from which the southwest corner of said Section 36,bears South 00°14'51"West, 1318.78 feet distant,- Thence South 88056'15"East,coincident with the north line of the SW1/4 SW1/4 of said Section 36, a distance of 272.69 feet; Thence South 71002'05"East, 415.82 feet to the east line of the W1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 of said Section 36; Thence South 00°17'40"West,coincident with said east line, 863.19 feet to the southeast corner of the N1/2 SW1/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 of said Section 36; Thence North 88046'08"West,coincident with the south line of said N1f 2 SWI/4 SW1/4 SW1/4 of Section 36, a distance of 655.89 feet to the west line of said SW1/4 SWIj4 of said Section 15; Thence North 001114"51"East, coincident with said west line, 989.08 feet to the Point of BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 14.564 acres, more or less. BASIS OF REARING for this description is South 001114'51"West, between the 51/16 corner common to Sections 35 and 36 and the southwest corner of Section 36,Township 4 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian. �t.1AAi n 1 Q v Ift P:12019119161-EOINGTON PLACE ALTA-CMG1SurveylDrawingslDescriptions119161-Annexation Leila 1.dacx.docx. Page i1 Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 46 of 101 AIVNEXAMN LEGAL EXHIBIT POINT OF BEGIi@7NNG 5lj3fi CIORMFR SEL naw 35&36 1 1 I � 1 �I 1 •�a *14.564 ACRES ai M $I I �n I 1 I I � I M.LA 5F=Pi CORNER 0 ' It11S5CAP d� O1�Z+14 p 35 39 6 5 S OF 2 I W.flSTICfCRD. 1"-200` PROJECT., ONNERI &OPER: 2030 S. WASHINGTON AVE. bwc �rrvt;T�ry PLACE GG EMMEM 10 83617 19161-EX 4624 W FAIRVIEWAVE. P: 201 398-8I04 PROACV& SUSDrV ION BOISE,+083roc • F. �200 398-8105 19161 swim swim or SECTION 36 (20)336-5355 T.4 Ikl,,R. ? W..6.M. sN�r PATE: 812212019 t I , ry: LLG WWW cSAWT-00THLS.CCM I OF 1 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 47 of 101 B. Preliminary Plat(date: 12,13,12019 1/8/2020)&Phasing Plan REVISED r r �Z a-��a •-s�, g�•s I I I y k y r � 11L �n K a C RoiI I I i c !s i. . . 0 1 "1 EOINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION 3616 N.CINDER ROAD,MERIDIAN,I❑ : �yonolo 3- PRELIMINARY PLAT �^'� -wm.w....a�.. Page 14 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 48 of 101 �y SeeXi5�9]..pp � 6 6 I q G--�cyy yy 4& d -�� I k P�--_----------- ' F"Jik C s u IL 1 I itr � S.w 5 2t a 8u 1 • , - � p m •,u' I py1 • v a i - .,v �gv JA l }hY WCOCNF[f Sr � H Cw s+ ��� 9 .1 1 8 < 9 Iy{ I■{ a 'y a w a 8 g I eu glrt n• � R qv $ I �f yy I $ �C 3 I 4 x •me' xer aat u vv' xm ^I a ���•: I aaw @ ooe.x d' LN ;IK 1 1 I ¢� a[e wm' xm •�✓ m 4•b I II P� R" .. I I II I sm .ua • 4>tl " $ is n 81 aa I $ y ■ p� � N yI 17 , ,� 1 yy_ Y x• 1 �1 I 61 CG el III 9" I l y i r uoe v Yes':6'oe' Q IYIL EDINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION C—CW 31TE IV- pw � � WORKS 3616 N.UNDER ROAD,MERIDIAN,I❑ ° e .gym eowuo 'R z g 2 LOT DIM ENS ION S^ mnax-si. Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 49 of 101 C. Landscape Plan(date: 11,118,12019 January�U5 2020) REVISED 3 m O 4 � a�e - 1 r M1�NI I do II a � _ o Page 16 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 50 of 101 3 m G 2 I I w4Nwosxaroerh- Asa n 19 19 r2 t z :...: + ---- -- -- - m I ra�c i i Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 51 of 101 F11 n n x = - s vi - r�1 t _ wwwlsrFTmive - - k 13 ^�^� Y. - w wbooaesT ST - t, I 4F a EDINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION - i 3810 N.UNDER ROAD. MERIDIAN. ID - ',1 - i n f PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 52 of 101 M__ 77 Y P i f _ Ol mots", z - -- - - - - uti - - ----- ---- --- - --- - - - -__ ^F_ _ = EDINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION - _� 3610 N.CINDER ROAD, MERIDIAN, ID n k = PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN rsIla Page 19 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 53 of 101 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit & Site Amenities lu I I 4 f T - + _ I F 1 I I 1 If I I 4 � a I M �6 ra iJ_ 6 Y its .i $ r Pao eo R y A 3 Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 54 of 101 Proposed Amenities: a Large Half-Acre Park-The half-acre park will contain the following recreation facilities: - Play Structure - Swing Set r - Seating Benches - Climbing Rocks - Climbing dome Attractive Landscaping and Pedestrian Pathways L t- . -- . - Nib- Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 55 of 101 E. Conceptual Building Elevations(Single-Family Attached/Detached)—REVISED �' - .�� •}r - _ ter^• - f•�..r.. NITS IL .l r - _ 1 Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 56 of 101 F. On-Street Parking Exhibit s rn O i CD z a -p CD o ) C] x N 0A rn V a m - � � X 7 p f 1 a C w •. a " z v � d n - ro A - z z i '•• •. 0 3 ; W � Staff Note: Because W. Woodpine St. (the middle east/west street)is only a 27-foot wide street section, parking is restricted to only one side of the street which reduces the parking count by 2; 3 additional spaces can be accomodated along one side of W. Woodpine St.where it stubs at the east boundary adjacent to common area,resulting in an overall total of 50 on-street spaces. Page 23 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 57 of 101 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 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,phasing plan, landscape plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. All single-family attached structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.An application for Design Review shall be submitted and approved for all attached dwellings prior to submittal of building permit applications. used erall development eat g a of two f4eld eeler-s, a tr-im eeler, and an aceent eeler-or-unique material. Gar-age door-eeler-s shall eeineide with this seheme or-other-aeeents. El. All hemes within the development shall be eenstf+ieted with miaim-um 4 fe8t wide fire r-a4ed eaves on all f,,,-sides e. All homes along the west perimeter boundary of the development adjacent to N. Linder Rd. and on Lots 20 and 23-26,Block 1 shall be restricted to a single- story in height as proposed by the Developer. d. A minimum 10%(1.35 acres)qualified open space shall be provided with development of this site as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3 in accord with the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat. e. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within a 14-foot wide public use easement^*d 20 feet wide een*ne lot with a minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip on each side of the pathway, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-12C shall be provided along the sew north side of the Coleman Lateral outside of the Irrigation District's easement. Five foot wide!andseape stfips shall be provided on eitheF side of the patl+way4het The pathway shall extend from the east boundary of the site to the sidewalk along N. Linder Rd. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated 12/3/19, shall be revised as follows: a. Depiet a miaimi±m 20 feet wide eemmen lot M the r-ear-of building lots in Bleek 1 adjaeepA to the Coleman Later-a!for-a multi tise pathway a-ad asseei4ed landseaping. b. Relocate Lot 21,Block 1 to between Lots 17 and 18 or Lots 18 and 19,Block 1 in order to provide an access near the east end of the linear open space to the north as required by UDC 11-3G-3B.le; the common lot shall be a minimum of 15-feet wide. Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 58 of 101 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated 11/18/19, shall be revised as follows: a. Depict trees and landscaping along the micropath between Lots 13 and 14,Block 2 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. b. Include the linear feet of parkways and required&provided trees in the calculations table on Sheet L2 of the landscape plan in accord with the minimum UDC standards. e.Depic ^ 20 foot wide eo moron lot at the 'cur-of building in Block 1 south of the Coleman Later-a!eentaining a 10 feat wide multi tise pathway a-ad 5 A'A"id-e landseape strips on either-side of the pathway!a-ndseaped per-the standards in UPC; 11 3B 12E d. Relocate the common lot(Lot 21, Block 1)with pathway and landscaping to between Lots 17 and 18 or Lots 18 and 19,Block 1 so that the multi-use pathway required to the north along the waterway is accessible at each end as required by UDC 11-3G-3B.le; landscaping is required along either side of the pathway as set forth in UDC 11-313-12C. e. Depict a 6-foot tall wrought iron fence between the multi-use pathway and the adjacent waterway for public safety. 4. 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. 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. 5. Provide address signage for homes accessed by the common driveways on Lots 6 and 22, Block 1; Lot 7, Block 2; and Lot 15,Block 5 for emergency wayfinding purposes. 6. A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be filed with the Ada County Recorder for all common driveways,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A copy of the recorded easement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 7. Development shall be limited to 30 building lots until such time as a secondary access that meets International Fire Code(IFC) is built and approved by the Fire Dept. 8. All existing structures on the site shall be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat phase in which they are located. 9. Parking is restricted to only the south side of the 27-foot wide street section(i.e. W. Windswept Dr.); signage shall be installed prohibiting parking on the north side of the street to ensure emergency access can be provided. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272 1.2 Provide water easement in shared drive(Block 1,Lot 2-2 21)for potential connection of parcel to the east. A second water connection for redundancy shall be required to the Page 25 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 59 of 101 water-main in Linder-Read dffeugh the walking path bePveen lots 13 & 14 (Bleek 2) with the development of the second phase of the subdivision. 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. 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. Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 60 of 101 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 surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 61 of 101 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.meridianciN.orglWebLink8lDocView.aspx?id=178616&dbid=0 D. POLICE DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/179502/Pa el�.aspx E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) hyp://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178893/Pa eg l.aspx F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT http://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178820/Pagel.aspx G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES http://weblink.meridianciiy.org/WebLink8/Doc View.aspx?id=178813&dbid=0 H. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT h yp://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178990/Pagel.aspx I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) hyp://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/178990/Pa eg 1.aspx J. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) hyp://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink8/0/doc/179106/Pa eg l.aspx K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) http://Weblink.meridianciLy.org/WebLink8/0/doc/179666IPa eg l.aspx L. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=182053&dbid=0&repo=Meridian C Lty 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. hi order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: Page 28 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 62 of 101 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the Applicant is proposing to annex and develop the subject property with 92 single-family residential units in the R-15 zoning consistent with the MDR 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; The Commission 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; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed medium density residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential. The Commission recommends the Council determine if the proposed use and design of the development is compatible with the adjacent future commercial uses abutting the south boundary. 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 The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. The School District has submitted comments, included in Section VIII.J that currently show student enrollment is above capacity for the elementary, middle and high school—the School District is of the opinion it would be best to delay the approval of this development until they are within a year of opening Owyhee High School. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. The Commission 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 11-613-6) 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) The Commission 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; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. Page 29 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 63 of 101 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission 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; The Commission 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 The Commission 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) The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Page 30 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 64 of 101 DEVELOPMENT REAL PROPERTY ZONING CLARK WARDLE T. Hethe Clark (208)388-3327 hclark@clarkwardle.com Via electronic mail February 24, 2020 Meridian City Council c/o Sonya Allen,Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Division 33 E. Broadway Ave., Suite 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Edington Subdivision—H-2019-0109 Comments in Preparation for 2-25-20 Hearing CW File No. 23785.1 Dear Sonya: We have had an opportunity to review the Staff Report in this matter and look forward to tomorrow night's hearing. We are in agreement with the conditions of approval contained in the Staff Report and we appreciate the work that went into them by Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. As we reviewed the Staff Report,there were a few items that may have appeared confusing. In order to streamline tomorrow night's hearing,we are providing the below comments and clarifications: • Parking Plan: Pages 7 and 8 of the Staff Report provide comments regarding the parking plan and include a suggestion that there should be more parking. The project exceeds current code requirements. Prior to the meeting with the Commission, we met with Chief Bongiorno to confirm the Fire Department's sign-off on the parking plan. The parking plan has been approved. It is our understanding that there is no remaining controversy on this matter. • Regional Pathway: Page 8 of the Staff Report appears to suggest that there is a remaining question regarding the proposed regional pathway and the calculation of open space in the project. After multiple discussions with Staff, Settlers Irrigation District, and West Ada School District, we have identified a pathway plan that we believe satisfies the City's requests. A portion of this pathway is located on the adjacent Sawtooth Middle School property. Per the attached correspondence, West Ada School District is agreeable with this plan, subject to confirmation by the district's trustees. The applicant will coordinate finalization of an easement once an approval is in place. The applicant will construct the pathway at its cost. And with the T.Hethe Clark Ceoffrey M.Wardle Joshua J.Leonard Ryley Siegner T:208.388.1000 251 E Front St,Suite 310 F:208.388.1001 PO Box 639 ark ardle Boise ID 8370I Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,201 —Wage 6G5°01 101 pathway in place,we understand there is no disagreement regarding open space calculation. With those clarifications, we are, again, in agreement with the Staff Report and the conditions of approval. No changes are requested. It is our understanding that Staff may be requesting clarification of two items: (i) a "policy' that would require 4-sided eaves to be constructed on homes within the City"; and (ii) whether this project "in itself' provides an appropriate transition to the mixed-use designated parcel to the south. Additional discussion of each of those items is attached. Thank you for your attention to these matters and we look forward to additional discussion at hearing. Very truly yours, ,�� C n T. Hethe Clark HC/bdb Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 66 of 101 Additional Discussion Uncodified Design Requirement of Eaves on Four Sides It appears that Staff will once again discuss with Council adoption of a "policy" that would require "4- sided eaves to be constructed on homes within the City." This would amount to an uncodified design requirement. We think this is inappropriate for a number of reasons. First, Staff has justified this by referring to drainage and aesthetics reasons. Eaves do not keep water off of foundations and are not required for drainage; otherwise, they would be required by building code (they are not). Drainage is provided by fine grading—not eaves. As to aesthetics, this project (like others constructed by Blackrock Homes) will be attractive and use eaves where appropriate (on street sides and facing open areas). But, even then, eaves are a subjective aesthetic. Many common architectural styles, such as Cape Cod or Southwestern Adobe, do not use eaves. Our homeowners prefer that that cost be used elsewhere in the home with other upgrades. Our position is that this would amount to an uncodified design requirement not required by building code. It is subjective and unnecessary, particularly as an uncodified "policy." Transition to Property to the South In addition, it appears Staff will be prompting a discussion as to whether this project "in itself" provides an adequate transition to the mixed-use designated parcel to the south and what could be done to ensure the project to the south "doesn't get blocked in." We have two comments in response. First, this application respects the comprehensive plan as it exists and as it was recently updated. We have heard the Council loud and clear when they have said not to touch the comprehensive planning in this area. Meanwhile, there is an approved commercial project with a development agreement on the property in question, including accesses directly onto Ustick and Linder and stubs to the north and east. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 67 of 101 r C a m r oCaL - - - -- - -- 1 j 11I1AA-0 j► iiii>�m� r o a i r 1 � I I = r 1 r� r LII , Ustick Road Our project includes tightly packed product that provides an appropriate transition on our southern border. We do not believe replacing these units with multi-family provides any better transition given that the density would be limited by the medium density designation and any units would require internal parking that would create "gaps" in what would otherwise be a wall between this project and the future commercial development to the south. Given this recorded development agreement and approved layout, it seems clear that there is a route forward for commercial development of this property. This project does nothing to interfere. Not insignificantly, we have discussed this application with the property owner to the south and they have approved our layout. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 68 of 101 Hethe Clark From: Yochum Joe <Yochum.Joe@westada.org> Sent: Monday,January 13, 2020 12:34 PM To: Kimberly Warren Cc: Laren Bailey Subject: RE: Sawtooth Middle School Pathway Hi Kim West Ada School District is agreeable to the proposed pathway across the south edge of the Sawtooth Middle School campus contingent on the following: 1. WASD Board of Trustees approves the pathway easement 2. Developer pays for all costs associated with the pathway (legal fees, construction,fencing, etc.) 3. Developer agrees to fence off the pathway from the rest of the SMS campus in order to force users to exit the pathway onto the sidewalk along Linder Road Thank you Joe From: Kimberly Warren [mailto:kwarren@meridiancity.org] Sent: Monday,January 13, 2020 10:19 AM To:Yochum Joe<Yochum.Joe@westada.org> Cc: Laren Bailey<laren@congergroup.com> Subject: Sawtooth Middle School Pathway WARNING: This email has been received from a source outside of the West Ada School District: Please only click links and attachments if you are sure they are safe Hi Joe— We've been working with Laren Bailey to route a pathway across the proposed Edington Sub that would make a final connection to Linder through the Sawtooth MS Grounds. Laren said you spoke previously and that West Ada would be fine with this solution. It's a little awkward for the City to condition off-site improvements, so I just wanted to confirm that it would be possible for the district to: • Grant a pedestrian pathway easement to the City for this purpose (developer to coordinate) • Allow the developer to construct the pathway on West Ada property. Please let me know. Thanks, Kim Ps.You've probably seen this plan already, but I'm including the rendering for context. Kim Meyers Warren, PLA I Pathways Project Manager City of Meridian I Parks and Recreation i Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 69 of 101 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208.888.3579 1 Fax: 208.898.5501 C�,(fE II� Meridian Parks and Recreation: Quality. Community. Fun. All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention,and may be released upon request,unless exempt from disclosure by law. 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 70 of 101 EDINGTON COMMONS SUBDIVISION February 25, 2020 Edineton ICommons Summary of Application • Medium density development near major traffic corridors (Ustick and Linder) • High-quality, low-maintenance product for "empty nesters" and small families All code requirements are met, no variances requested, E D I N G T O N PLACE SUBDIVISION IANUANT I5]030 _ ,ENSE„HE, o consistent with the 1111111MEIR11DIIAN1.IDAHO 11 11 - PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE RAN rw..n cr_r�-- comprehensive plan Resolved Items - Parking 50 On Street Parking Spaces Parking exceeds code with four parking spots per - residence and 50 on �- t street parking spots r= Rl Fire Department has - -- --- - .�.��._- --------- - - - -- __- -_ signed off on plan Resolved Items Regional Pathway ,. ��• ., :—is 0� Plan approved by Planning Staff and Parks In agreement with condition langu • - proposed by Staff EDINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION Enrollment Trends Student Enrollment 39,000 318•000 7 39.212 Resolved Items 37,33 37,000 36.M1f}7 36 11 ppp 35.fi45 35,OM 35.00n 31.00Q 13,i1I9 3n,5s2 Schools 33.000 32,OW 31.009 0999 a9�10 39I1 11 ]Z :?1} 23,14 14-15 15-1R 141Y Wes3Alla Owyhee High School and Pleasant School Eamllmeal and C.padly D-A cop 16.2017 View Elementary will be on-line Barbara Morgan STEM Acadc.rny 40 450 Siena F.lernentary 619 8W Cecil I Andnki Elemtntam 658 650 Sjlrcr r.tkmrnl9ry 354 405 during fall 2021 (before this project €;hgNu id Ekmentary Sc6od 524 650 Stu Elemenlarg 475 420 C."hief loseph 5choo1.511he Arts 565 650 SU111111erwiliLt STEM Academy 410 481 Chnsrinc Donncll Elementary $53 559 1,fatick Elementarylcla 410 MS De-rt Sage Flemmiary 637 6M willow Crsck Eerl" 561 6% will generate new students) Dlscuvcry Elemcntary 586 650 Crossroad.,Middle 151 I MU E44r Elemcnl4 ry 442 450 Faglc Siiddk 1276 10DI) Eagle hillsEkrnemary 563 545 Herilagehliddle 12,7 1 000 Spalding S E"ZJ J Aradcmr 7" 770 lake Hazel Middle 990 1000 FmruierEkwc;nnry 370 548 Lewis and Clark.141ddle 1131 1000 4744Ya 5TE1+1 A4adcmy 779 Mx) I,r1wCI1,c0lt Middle 1015 11it50 Gahcwzy Bunciatarp 340 531 MCndian Middle 1024 1250 HiJkdale Elcmentae7 542 650 Pal hways hlaldle 129 150 EWLier Elemcnwry 757 650 Sawtnt5th Middle 1063 1000 ivplin Selrmenmry' 3$9 40 Vktpry Mid-Ile 7% 1000 Lake I laze]Eiementary 439 539 CAtitcnnW i Iogh 1924 1904 Mary WPhcrson PJcmentarp 460 566 (antral Academy 159 175 Meridian Elememary 450 586 Eagk Aradeinv 151 175 Paramount Urmentary 593 650 Eagle lligh 1921 1800 pepper Ridge FJemrnlary 611 650 Idahn Fine Arts Ac decoy 189 190 Wre rtne Elementary "1 650 3lendian Acadcmy 163 175 PK KCv S'rJuxal of the Arts 692 7W Hlcrldlnat HlgJ 1651 2400 Ponderosa Ek-mmtuT611 650 6hnmtain View Mgh 2296 1900 PrmpcctElemcnlary 744 FSth Rennl4+anceFltgh 751 800 XiverVdeyFJemenwy 474 650 RuLkyMounlalnHigh 71311 IBM Scvtq C7aks F,lementary 417 666 TOW 38014 3$709 Points of Discussion • Transition to the Property on the South • Additional Design Standards (Color, Eaves) Transition to the South ' • Approved plan for r . CD project to the south a contained in existing development agreement j Y a p- - Obvious) there is ath f--_ forward for commercial L..Fw t I development of this property — it has already been approved Ustick Road Uncodified Design Standard : Eaves • Background : • Design review is required for duplex dwellings • No design review in code for detached SF dwellings Additional standards imposed by a development agreement still require a rational nexus and cannot be arbitrarily imposed Uncodified Design Standard 1' Eaves • Staff Report, p. 10: • "... for aesthetic as well as drainage (i.e. keeping water away from the foundation) reasons...' No such requirement in International Building Code • Fine grading provides drainage 1' eave will not keep water off walls s _ or foundations �i _ - • Eave aesthetics are in the eye of _ the beholder (but not in the UDC) Several common architectural styles ' do not have eaves (Cape Cod, Southwestern Adobe, etc.) _ e T_ _ ar►,r_ -�-ram' - .. ,T� vRequested Modifications to P&Z Conditions of Approval vRequested Modifications to P&Z Conditions of Approval NONE 13 Uncodified Design Standard : Eaves Practical Questions: • What will be the administrative burden/delay caused by adding this to the building permit checklist? • Is this being imposed on all single-family residential development? • If so, why isn't it in code? • If not, why impose it only on this developer? l� k t ME �/' i■■�#r Property N ighborhood Center • - •• - Transition to - South 111111 UIrEl�llhi�',i111/ _ r 11111111-1=11112 IIIIIII J 11 UM •�r • • • **nlrr _- -II IfIII+IIIEIISchool P' • =1i1 111►� site Settlers Park 0 Nearly - ofzoned Square Sub ■�jli y _ property still available at mid- . -... C mileID 0.0 ' num = — n�mrIn i; �Ilrrllr1111111111111E 20 �:��� uuu nlluuulvai able ornmercia S Property High■� r i ii i i � density southern boundary provide transition ■1■1rr� ��1��� � ■i1111 IIIrEEa�.!�` ■■E! �■ � c Neighbor has • objections t • the plan p ,:•. !�.p d� i rlfE� � - Neighbor approved stub location EDINGT • s 0 _ a- WASD School Facility Plan West Ada School School 2016 - 2028 Bond Timelines Opening Date Project Bond Date Fall 2020 High School > 2018 Middle School !�f 2024 Elementary School South 2022 Elementary School Mid-Nest Elementary School North 2025 Middle School 2023 2026 High School 20244 Middle School Elementary School North 2029 Elementary School Mid West 2026 HILLSDALE Peijeued growth data was used to estimate the timing of Future school needs. The estimates were made based on when,to total,enrollment exceeds capacity at each set of grade levels by the number of students to fill a new school. For example,in fall 2020,projections estimate that there will be 1852 more high school students esr. than capacity in the district'scurrent large high schools_ The challenge with this timing is the enrollment num- bers in some geographic areas will create significant challenges. Far example,in the fall of 2020,Eagle High could have enrollment of 2444 students with a capacity of 180t}, Whether these enrollment numbers materialize v.� depends on the rate or construction and sale of proposed residential subdivisions across the district, 17 Uncodified Color Requirement • UDC does not impose design review or color requirements on detached single-family homes • We build product that is attractive to future buyers — very successful homebuilder with sold-out projects Questions: • What will be the administrative burden/delay caused by adding this to the building permit checklist? • Is this being imposed on all single-family residential development? • If so, why isn't it in code? • If not, why are we imposing it only on this developer? - U pno 0 i r Tuesday 630 m 1 -07-2020 -� f Wei sd :30am 1 -08-2020 - _ ��i� �' �, � ~� — .«Y� — Y `i. I is - • — �Iw-- � ''Y � f l •r � 7`- 1 $ti Parkine Photos �• �. 4 _ ' A .� P y-+7�+r' i�rrrrrf e u v' Resolved Issues Secondary Fire Access • We understand and agree to the condition limiting _ development until secondary access is provided (to the south) • In the meantime, Lot 22, EDINGTON PLACE SUBDIVISION O IANUAA 'S'o=0 ,E_sE_,�n Block 2 will be available MERIDIAN.IDAHO PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN11 for temporary access Resolved Issues Relocation of Lot 21 We have heard Staff's • - we also have triedto accommodate our; N 25 0 25 50 Q' 2 SCALE: 1" = 50' SAWTOOTH MIDDLE SCHOOL r, L I \ \ TB TB TB \ \ TOE I _ TB TB- B TB—TC—TB —EG TB\_CO ZeA4, w T T q� i � I I2 4 I �' I �� 7 0 \Tg TB Tg 6 \ \ / , /? 8 TB TB B B 1 TB o \\Tg\\TB \ \ Tg —_ - - -- - - - \ �•� \T�\T� 13 14 15 16 I I 517 18 1- - - - - - - - - - \ 19 20 tj EDINGTON SUBDIVISION REGIONAL PATHWAY EXHIBIT Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 71 of 101 CAEI�iAIv ITEM SHEET IDAHO Council Agenda Item - 7.A. Presenter: Chris Johnson Estimated Time for Presentation: 2 minutes Title of Item - Ordinance No. 20-1873: An Ordinance (H-2019-0097 Percy Subdivision) For Rezone Of A Portion Of Government Lot 2 Of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho; Establishing And Determining The Land Use Zoning Classification Of 30.02 Acres Of Land From R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) Zoning District To R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District In The Meridian City Code; Providing That Copies Of This Ordinance Shall Be Filed With The Ada County Assessor, The Ada County Recorder,And The Idaho State Tax Commission,As Required By Law; And Providing For A Summary Of The Ordinance; And Providing For A Waiver Of The Reading Rules; And Providing An Effective Date Percy Sub Rezone Ordinance Council Notes: ATTACHMENTS: Percy Sub Rezone Ordinance Ordinance 2/19/2020 Percy Sub Exhibits Exhibit 2/19/2020 REVIEWERS: Department Legal. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 2/19/2020 - 6:56 PM Legal. Albertson, Michelle Approved 2/20/2020 - 10:38 AM Approved Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 96 of 101 i i ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2020-023153 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 LISA BATT 02/26/2020 04:17 PM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1873 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER i AN ORDINANCE(H-2019-0097 PERCY SUBDIVISION)FOR REZONE OF A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2 OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST,BOISE MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 30.02 ACRES OF LAND FROM R-4 (MEDIUM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT TO R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE;PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE;AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit"A"is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian,Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for re-zoning by the owner of said property,to-wit: MWT LLC. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby re-zoned from R-4(Medium Low Density Residential)Zoning District to R-8(Medium Density Residential)Zoning District in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances,resolutions,orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed,rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. RE-ZONE ORDINANCE-PERCY SUBDIVISION-H-2019-0097 PAGE 1 OF 3 SECTION 8 . The Cleric of the City of Meridian shall , within ten ( 10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho , to -wit : the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho . SECTION 9 . That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half ( 1 /2) plus one ( 1 ) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one ( 1 ) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication . PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this day of FQ ri6c 2020 . APPRO ED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO , this 2 �I day of Feb ri c, < , 2020 . 'r TED A /00 MAYO ROB . SIMISON Q�aA S 'ilofw� v C RIS AN1� � IDAHO SEAL STATE OF IDAHO, ) 0 the TREPSJ���Pv ss : County of Ada ) On this o�rJ day of , 2020 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State , personally appeared ROBERT E. SIMIS and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho , and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written . (SEAL) CHARLENE WAY Notary Public for Idaho COMMISSION 067390 Residing At: `fiYjjl.I:O� c 3 n NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires : ,3 STATE OF IDAHO [MYCOMMISSION EXPIRES 3128122 RE-ZONE ORDINANCE - PERCY SUBDIVISION - H -2019 -0097 PAGE 2 OF 3 EXHIBITA Legal Description and Exhibit Map DESCRIPTION FOR PERCY SUBDIVISION R4 TO R-8 REZONE A portion of Government Lot 2 of Section 31,T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows. Commencing at the W1i4 corner of said Section 31 from which the NW corner of said Section 31 bears North 00°37'56"East,2641.54 feet, thence along the West boundary line of said Section 31 North 00°37'66"East, 320.00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said West boundary line North 00°37'56"East, 1,000.77 feet to the NW corner of said Government Lot 2; thence along the North boundary line of said Government Lot 2 North 89'39'29"Fast, 1,186.00 feet to the NE canner of said Government Lot 2; thence along the East boundary line of said Government Lot 2 South 00°31'21"West, 1,326.94 feet to the SE corner of said Government Lot 2; thence along the East-West centerline of said Section 31 South 89"57'28"West, 326.22 feet; thence leaving said East-West centerline Borth 05°35'32"West, 142.10 feet; thence North 30°58'40"West, 126.57 feet; thence North 00007'32"West, 70.09 feet; thence South 89°56'59"West, 779.56 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 30.02 acres, more or less. N 77 ;6 Ivlt�t o G,C, Percy Subdivision H-2019-000 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 100 of 101 EXHIBITB S.25 S.30 E. AMITY ROAM ! Ih { C) NE COR UNPLATTM) GOV'T LOT 2 N69'39'29"E 1186.00' 1 1 { Q z �? Q �T Q a PERCY FARMS, l.LC m`y Z — EXISTING R-4 TO €.r cecpp R-8 REZONE 80.02 R.C. f13 1 1L Cy RPQf3� N0.07'32"W S6�'S6`59 W 779.56' 70.09' ! N3o•58'40"4�1�1 t� JOSE ASEGU€NOLAZA . 126•57' M N5`35'32"LV��� 142.10 Ar 1 f4 S.36 S131 1,169'57'20E 862,24! 326.22, SWER V1E19 ESTATES SUSDIV€StON 0. 7729 150 Goo 91AL � 0 79 300 9p0 SCALE. 1" = 300' Y IDAHO REZONE EXHIBIT —_. ORAWMMdG FOR 1"SWEIAMLOW R-4 ZONE TO R-8 ZONE 1 tm SURVEY aase.aav�osroa PERCY SUBWASION 1 GROUP, ^���7��-yy 1 �}� i �^. raSaT saa-ecto 47RVLJi� �1.3.J WCLKIM III CabF#k VIt LOT 2 f1=SECT=31.T.�"3..ItM,E1,4., OWR:DATE ME VAtf.MA CCWTY.IDAPO �j.°t4I�II14 Percy Subdivisiur, H-4G',a-0097 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 25,2020— Page 101 of 101 i CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY . William L .M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public . 6��Wlo William L. M. Nary, City Aft ey SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. Z d � 1 73 An ordinance (H-2019-0097 Percy Subdivision) for the rezone of a tract of land as defined in the map published herewith; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification from R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) zoning district to R4 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date. A full text of this { ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B . ] I� I i REZONE ORDINANCE - PERCY SUBDIVISION - H-2019 -0097 PAGE 3 OF 3