Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2020-03-19
MERIDIAN PLANNINGAND E IDIAN- ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DAHO AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday,March 19,2020at6:00 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance X Lisa Holland by phone X Patricia Pitzer by phone X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove by phone X Rhonda McCarvel Bill Cassinelli X Ryan Fitzgerald - Chairperson 2. Adoption of Agenda - Adopted 3. Consent Agenda [Action Item] - Approved A. Approve Minutes of March 5,2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact,Conclusions of Lawfor Meridian Station(H-2019- 0142) by Matt McAnulty,Located at the Southeast Corner ofN. MainSt.andE. Broadway Ave.,North of the Railroad Tracks 4. Action Items Land Use Public Hearing Process:After the Public Hearing is opened the staffreport willbepresentedby the assigned cityplanner.Following Staffs report the applicant has up to]S minutes topresent their application.Each member ofthepublic may provide testimony up to 3 minutes or ifthey are representing a largergroup,such as a HomeownersAssociation,they maybe allowed 10 minutes.The applicant is then allowed10additionalminutestorespondtothepublic'scomments.Noadditional public testimony is taken once thepublic hearing is closed. A. Public Hearing Continued from February 20,2020 for Lost Rapids Apartments (H-2019-0146) by GFI Meridian Investments II, LLC, Located on the North Side of W.Lost Rapids Dr.,Westof N.Ten Mile Rd. - Approved 1. Request: Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 102 dwelling units on 5.71 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. B. Public Hearing for Delano Subdivision (H-2019-0027) by Boll Cook Investments,LLC,Located at14120 W.Jasmine Ln.and 2800 E. Jasmine Ln. - Continued to April 16, 2020 1. Request: Annexation & zoning of 15.22 acres of land with R-8 (2.76 acres), R-15 (8.82 acres) and R-40 (3.64 acres) zoning districts; and, 2. Request: A Preliminary plat consisting of 66 single-family residential building lots, 1 building lot for a multi-family development, 8 common area lots and 2 other(common driveway) lots. C. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm North(H-2019-0134)by MartinL.Hill, Hill&Hill Properties,Located at the Southeast Corner of S. Eagle Rd.and E. Amity Rd. - Recommended Approval to City Council 1. Request: Rezone of a total of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N (4.9 acres), C-C (4.35 acres), and R-15 (30.65 acres) zoning districts; 2. Request: Modification to the existing development agreement (Hill's Century Farm Commercial - Inst. #2019-033207) to update the conceptual development plan and certain provisions to allow for the development of a self-service storage facility and retail/professional office uses where single-family residential was previously proposed; 3. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 137 building lots, 18 common lots and 10 other lots on 43.02 acres of land in the R-8, R- 15, C-N and C-C zoning districts; 4. Request: Planned unit development for an age-restricted 55 and older gated community with deviations from certain development standards; and, 5. Request: Conditional use permit for a 73,730 square foot 443-unit self-service storage facility on 3.89 acres of land in the C-C zoning district. D. Public Hearing forTM Crossing-Ten MileAcademy Daycare(H- 2020-0007)by BVA Development,Located at 1001 S.Sentinel Ln. - Approved 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a daycare center (more than 12 children) on 0.883 of an acre of land in the C-G zoning district. E. Public Hearing for McMillan Independent Senior Living (H-2020- 0004) by Investcor Development, Located Approximately in the Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Rd.and W.McMillan Rd. - Approved 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family project consisting of 162 units, limited to 55 years of age and up on approximately 6.5 acres in an existing C-G zoning district. F. Public Hearing for Victory Commons (H-2019-0150) by BVA Development, LLC, Located at 130 E.Victory Rd.and 3030 S. Meridian Rd. - Continued to May 7, 2020 1. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 12 building lots on 16.74 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. G. Public Hearing Continued from February 20,2020 for Lupine Cove (H-2019-0133) by Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services, Located at4000 N.McDermott Rd. - Recommended Denial to City Council 1. Request: Annexation of 7.09 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and, 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 28 building lots, 7 common lots and 2 other (common driveway) lots on 7 acres of land in the R- 8 zoning district. Meeting Adjourned at 9:52 p.m. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting March 19, 2020. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of March 19, 2020, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Ryan Fitzgerald. Members Present: Chairman Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Nick Grove and Commissioner Patricia Pitzer. Members Absent. Commissioner Bill Cassinelli. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson, Jeff Brown and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance _X Lisa Holland (Phone) X Rhonda McCarvel _X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove (Phone) _X Patricia Pitzer (Phone) Bill Cassinelli X Ryan Fitzgerald - Chairman Fitzgerald: So, at this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning meeting for March 19th and let's start with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Fitzgerald: So, the first item on our agenda is the adoption of the agenda. I'm going to switch some things around. We have some requests for continuance, so I would like to move the Delano Subdivision up to A and move Item F, Victory Commons, up to Item B, so we can continue those. With that change can I get a motion to -- and a second to adopt the agenda. McCarvel: So moved. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of March 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 2 of 70 Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Meridian Station (H- 2019-0142) by Matt McAnulty, Located at the Southeast Corner of N. Main St. And E. Broadway Ave., North of the Railroad Tracks Fitzgerald: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda. We have two items on the Consent Agenda, I believe. Approval of minutes and Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Meridian Station, H-2019-0142, and I will go back and say the approval of minutes for the March 5th, 2020, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Can I get a motion to adopt the Consent Agenda. Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed same. I need to wait. Thank you. So, the Consent Agenda is approved. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: At this time, again, I want to say how much we appreciate your guys' patience as we go through this process. This is kind of unprecedented times and our staff has done an amazing job of getting us set up so we could hear all the comments that the public has and make sure we can continue doing the business of the city. So, as we go forward we are going to bring folks who are interested in each application forward into the room and, then, we will kind of do some swaps. We are going to take public testimony over the phone. So, it may be a little clunky and a little bit disjointed for a little bit. We are going to get through it together and be an adventure. So, let me explain the hearing process. It maybe an adventure, but we are going to try this. So, the staff -- we will start with the staff report for each application. The staff will report the findings in regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code, with the staffs recommendations and after the staff report we will have the public come forward and give their testimony. We will be taking -- if there is anyone who is here speaking for on -- for an HOA, we will give them ten minutes to speak for the HOA. If they are -- if you are not representing a larger group you will have three minutes to testify. After that we will give the applicant an opportunity to come back and give them a little bit of time to close and after that we will hopefully have an opportunity as a Commission to deliberate on the application and, then, make a decision or a recommendation to the City Council. Item 4: Action Items Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 3 of 70 B. Public Hearing for Delano Subdivision (H-2019-0027) by Boll Cook Investments, LLC, Located at 14120 W. Jasmine Ln. and 2800 E. Jasmine Ln. 1. Request: Annexation & zoning of 15.22 acres of land with R-8 (2.76 acres), R-15 (8.82 acres) and R-40 ( 3.64 acres) zoning districts; and, 2. Request: A Preliminary plat consisting of 66 single-family residential building lots, 1 building lot for a multi-family development, 8 common area lots and 2 other (common driveway) lots. Fitzgerald: So, as we go forward I would like to open the public hearing for -- the continued public hearing -- I'm sorry. The public hearing for Delano Subdivision, H-2019- 0027, and we have a request, kind of, from the team as we talked through this today to continue this application until April 16th and hold that application only on that date and that being said we were hoping that we have an ability for our team on the Commission to have a special meeting on April 23rd, so we can get caught up on the backlog of applications. So, hopefully, our Commissioners on the line -- we have an opportunity to have a special hearing on April 23rd for backlog, but we would continue the Delano Subdivision hearing to April 16th. Any comments or concerns on those dates by the Commission? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Holland: I think that will work. This is Lisa Holland. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Commissioner. Commissioner McCarvel. Grove: That works for me. McCarvel: I would be in support of -- Grove: This is Nick Grove. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Commissioner Grove. Commissioner Seal, are you okay with that as we go -- Seal: I'm supportive, yes. Fitzgerald: Okay. Can I get a motion to continue the public hearing on Delano Subdivision, H-2019-0027, to the date of April 16th? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 4 of 70 Seal: I move to continue file number H-2019-0027 to the hearing date of April 16th, 2020. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to continue the public hearing for Delano Subdivision, H-2019-0027, to April 16th. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. F. Public Hearing for Victory Commons (H-2019-0150) by BVA Development, LLC, Located at 130 E. Victory Rd. and 3030 S. Meridian Rd. 1 . Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 12 building lots on 16.74 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Fitzgerald: And, then, moving to B, could we have a motion to continue the public hearing for Victory Commons, H-2019-0150, and this is a procedural motion based on the fact that they had some challenges with their application or some -- either markings or -- I forgot what Bill exactly said, but they have staff contacts, so that -- that would be a date determined by staff, so I don't want a date certain. We will give the staff the opportunity to make that decision, so we can continue it to a date determined by staff, if that's okay with the Commission. So, can I get a motion, please? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I move that we move Item H-2019-0150, Victory Commons, to a date to be determined by staff. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to continue the public hearing for Victory commons, H-2019-0150, to a date determined by staff. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. A. Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020, for Lost Rapids Apartments (H-2019-0146) by GFI Meridian Investments II, LLC, Located On the North Side of W. Lost Rapids Dr., West of N. Ten Mile Rd. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 5 of 70 1 . Request: Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 102 dwelling units on 5.71 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district Fitzgerald: Thank you very much for the housekeeping matters. Now we will move to the public hearing -- as we move forward we are going to shift into the public hearing for Lost Rapids Apartments, H-2019-0146. Anybody out in the lobby that wants to come in and have a seat on that one they can now and we will start with the -- Sonya and her wonderful staff report. Hi, ma'am. Allen: Chairman Fitzgerald, I -- if -- if I may backtrack just a bit. I believe Victory Commons was supposed to be continued to May 7th, is that correct, or was there a conversation I wasn't a part of on that? Fitzgerald: I talked to Bill and he said that he would make that determination and you guys would tell us when you would be ready to go. Allen: Okay. Sorry about that. Fitzgerald: So, date determined by staff. You guys can tell us when you want to do it. Allen: Okay. Thank you. All righty. So, ready for Lost Rapids Apartments -- Fitzgerald: Yes. Allen: -- conditional use permit. This site consists of 5.71 acres of land. It's zoned R-40 and is located on the north side of West Lost Rapids Drive just west of North Ten Mile Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north and east is C-G zoned property, proposed to develop with Costco Wholesale and other commercial and retail uses and the west and south are single family residential homes in the development process. This property was annexed back in 2018 and included in a development agreement that allows for the development of multi-family residential apartments on this property. There was a concept development plan that was approved at that time that was very closely consistent with the proposed plan. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is commercial. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 102 residential dwelling units on 5.71 acres of land in the R- 40 zoning district, consistent with uses desired in the commercial future land use map designation. The proposed gross density is 17.8 units per acre. Nine apartment buildings are proposed containing a mix of one, two and three bedroom units ranging in size from 775 to 1,340 square feet and a 2,494 square foot clubhouse is also proposed. The development agreement for this property in the larger commercial property requires certain improvements for the overall development, including installation of the street buffers and walkways along State Highway 20-26, Chinden Boulevard, and North Ten Mile Road to be completed with the first phase of development prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within this development. Sole access is proposed via West Lost Rapids Drive, with an emergency access only driveway from the north boundary from Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 6 of 70 the Costco side and that is proposed -- if you can see my pointer right here in this location. Staff is recommending an east-west driveway connection is provided to the north-south driveway along the east boundary of the site to reduce access on the collector street and for interconnectivity with the commercial development without having to go out onto the collector street and that would be in this location right here. This -- this right here is the north-south driveway I was referring to. Staff is recommending pedestrian walkways are provided as shown on the map there along each side of the entry driveway into the site from Lost Rapids and along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the north-south driveway for pedestrian safety. And this is a copy of the proposed landscape plan with kind of an aerial view of the property. This is the qualified open space exhibit. The qualified open space meets the UDC standards and actually exceeds it and this is just kind of a perspective view of the overall site. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed multi-family structures, the clubhouse, carports, and storage structures as shown. The multi-family structures along the north and east boundaries will be three story garden style, while those nearest Lost Rapids Drive will be two story townhome style units. Written testimony has been received as follows -- from the applicant and from the public. Stephanie Leonard, the applicant's representative, submitted a response to the staff report and I will -- I will let her go through those items with you, rather than being repetitive. And, then, from the public are as follows -- and I will just give a brief summary of their issues and they are in the public record and assuming that you have already gone through those, but I will, again, just give a highlight for the public. And excuse me if I mispronounce the names. Gene Pepetone. A voicemail. He was concerned pertaining to traffic safety and impact on nearby parks. Eric Martin was against the proposed access via Lost Rapids due to traffic and congestion reasons impacting area residents and he requests the access point is changed. Linda Lewis. She was against the proposed project due to the impact on traffic in the area, school overcrowding, impact on property values and the quality of life. Dave Meredith. Against the project due to concerns pertaining to not enough parking and emergency access with only one access proposed and the ability to access the three story buildings proposed and impact on the use of area parks. Stephanie Martin requests the plans be amended to reduce the overall volume of the units. She requests two instead of three stories or townhomes instead. Concerns pertaining to an access -- excuse me -- increase in traffic in this area and impacts on area schools and three story apartments not fitting in with the height of other structures in this area. And, lastly, from Abby and Scott Eaton, they are opposed to the R-40 zoned parcel and thinks it should be zoned C-G. The zoning is not before you tonight, just a side note, and the project is already zoned, the property is, and this is only a conditional use permit before you tonight. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions per the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for staff? Seal: A quick question. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 7 of 70 Seal: Just on the -- since they are proposing it to be a gated community is that something that needs to be addressed as far as the east-west access? Allen: Chairman and Commissioner Seal. Don't believe this is a gated community. No. It is not. There is no access east-west proposed at this time to the north-south driveway on the east boundary of the site. The -- the access -- excuse me. I will go to the site plan. The access right here off of Lost Rapids is a full access. It's not gated. Seal: Okay. I was reading off the wrong one. Sorry about that. Allen: Yeah. Seal: The lot on the -- Allen: Hill Century Farm I think is what you are referring to. Seal: That's what I'm referring to. Yeah. Sorry about that. Allen: That's okay. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for Sonya? Pitzer: Just one point of clarification if I can answer. Fitzgerald: Yeah, Commissioner Pitzer, go ahead. Pitzer: Sonya, it was staff's recommendation to have an east connection to the north- south collector that connects to Costco? Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, it was staffs recommendation -- let me go to the site plan here -- to have -- if you can see my pointer here -- an access to this north-south driveway here along this east-west driveway. So, this little stub through right here, so that there would be an access to the commercial development, so that residents wouldn't have to go out onto the collector street and, then, back around into the development. For interconnectivity purposes. Fitzgerald: And I will let the applicant -- Holland: Do we need to make that a condition if we want that, too, or is it something that's part of the staff report recommendation that they have to do anyway? Allen- That is part of the staff recommendation, yes. But, no, you do not have to make an extra motion for that. Holland: Thank you for clarifying. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 8 of 70 Allen: Yes. Fitzgerald: And, Sonya, then, that was a request of the Fire Department to this -- correct? Is my -- Allen: The Fire Department -- Fitzgerald: Secondary access of some kind. Allen: It's an emergency access. I know that the applicant's been working with the Fire Department to provide one from the north, if you can see my pointer right here in this area. So, I believe either access would work for them. I'm not absolutely sure if this meets their separation requirements. I think it does, but this is the access they were talking about. So, I think that's where it's being provided from. Fitzgerald: I will let Stephanie -- Allen: The applicant can address that. Yeah. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions for staff? Hearing none, would the applicant like to come forward. And, please, state your name and your address for the record, Stephanie. Leonard: Good evening, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Stephanie Leonard. 9233 West State in Boise. 83714. I know what the problem was. That -- Fitzgerald: It's been a long time and just looking at you over there, but -- Leonard: I'm with KM Engineering and representing the applicant, our client, on the project. Sonya did a great job summarizing, so I will try to be pretty pithy with my explanation. Thank you for having us here this evening, too. Appreciate it given the circumstances. This is a conditional use permit for Lost Rapids Townhomes and Apartments in an R-40 district. As Sonya mentioned, you have seen this site before. It's within the Lost Rapids Subdivision that was heard in 2018. This was a concept -- the concept that was shown at that time -- at that time as well and we are keeping pretty consistent with that concept plan. So, here is a detail of our landscape plan. We have got six townhome buildings on the bottom here, two stories, and, then, three three story buildings located to the north and east adjacent to the commercial development that's going to be happening soon. We are proposing 200 parking spaces, which is in excess of UDC standards and, then, about half of those are covered. We are also proposing covered storage here for folks just for their extra stuff. Have kind of a central amenity shown. Clubhouse. And, then, a plaza with other stuff included. This is just a rendering to show you kind of a -- a better idea of what that looks like with all the coloring. It's a little bit easier to see. So, let's see. This is our open space and qualified site amenity exhibit, where part of the staff report requested that we include extra details about our qualified site amenities and we have done so here. We have five specific use standards for multi-use -- or for multi-family developments, clubhouse, fitness facility, a plaza, all of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 9 of 70 which will be located in this central area here and, then, we -- we are showing a pool, but we are actually hoping for a little bit of flexibility in that amenity. We would like to propose possibly doing a sports court if the demographics and market kind of call for that. It just depends on what our residents are going to be looking for. So, that's part of our request here tonight and, then, we are proposing a dog park, which the dimensions are 5,000 square feet. It doesn't technically fit the requirements, which are 50 by 100, but we feel that it meets the intent of that open space and that it's -- it will be used well as a dog park for -- for residents. Then, additionally, we are doing a picnic area, which includes barbecue and seating within this kind of plaza area. A neighborhood business center will be located within the clubhouse and, then, we are going to be constructing a transit stop along Lost Rapids for Valley Regional Transit. So, these are our building elevations. These two are three story units. Got two buildings that have 24 units apiece and they are on the north part, kind of adjacent to the --to Costco. And, then, we have got one building that is 12 units and it's on the east part of the site. And, then, we have got six townhome buildings, which comprise seven units apiece and that's on the south part of the site. So, just to give you a visual there, building type one, which is the -- the two three story garden style units are adjacent to Costco and, then, our townhomes are located along Lost Rapids, which will look kind of more like a two story home kind of elevation from that road. So, hopefully, won't be as dense feeling or as imposing to folks that are in the single family across the way. And, then, we have got a building type two, which is the three story garden style comprised of 12 units. So, this is -- these are just some renderings of our amenities that we are proposing. This shows, of course, the pool, but we could easily replace that with like a pickleball court or some other kind of sports court, depending on what would be allowed. You have seating, some hangout spots, barbecue area, picnic tables, fireplace and kind of lounge area. So, it's pretty usable. The whole -- the whole point of this plaza area was that we would kind of divide spaces up, so it didn't feel like you were sitting directly on your neighbors, but would rather be able to kind of have your own space and feel like it was kind of almost private at the same time. And this is an overview of that. And, then, just to summarize, we have got the -- the pool or sports court that we are proposing. Plaza with outdoor seating. Barbecue and tables. Clubhouse. Fitness center, which is in the clubhouse. Neighborhood business center, which is also in the clubhouse, and, then, the 5,000 square foot dog park. And this rendering probably looks familiar. I basically just put it in here so that you could visualize what we are proposing to change as far as the conditions are concerned for the -- from the staff. So, let me just get to that page really quick. So, we are proposing modifications to several conditions within Section 9-A. We are proposing to remove 3-E, which is the recommendation to include a five foot sidewalk along the east boundary. We feel that most of our residents and folks within this area are probably going to be using the ten foot multi-use pathway that's located on Ten Mile here. We don't think a lot of residents will probably be exiting here and, then, going up this way. So, we felt that would be more useful. And, then, the -- oh. Thanks. And, then, we are also proposing to remove -- hold on. Sorry. Remove the recommendation 3-F -- remove the recommendation to add a break in the berm and fence on the southern boundary. We feel that including the berm and a fence here, along with the vegetation, is going to provide more privacy and security for the folks that are living in these two units here -- or, actually, I should say 14 units, but between these two buildings. I think Sonya's recommendation was to add a pathway Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 10 of 70 there with berm. We would prefer to just leave it. Also we feel that it would probably provide some sound attenuation from the collector road here. And, then, we propose to remove 3-G -- or a portion of that. So, requiring the construction of the sidewalk along the east boundary. We would -- we are amenable to keeping construction of a sidewalk along one side of the entrance, too. So, whichever you prefer we are -- we are good with that. We are proposing to remove 3-1, which is the recommendation to construct a drive aisle to the east between buildings eight and nine. I believe this might have been discussed at some point, but we are worried, essentially, that traffic from the commercial developments will maybe find it enticing to cut through this development. So, in order to try our best to make it a little bit of a more private and kind of buffered area, we would like to keep that closed to just ensure that folks have one point of access in here and, then, with their emergency access to the north, so the fire department could utilize that. And, then, 3-J we are proposing to remove the recommendation to provide additional bicycle parking spaces. I think it was misstated in our application, but we are actually providing about five different bicycle racks that are located here, here, next to the clubhouse and, then, next to building -- I think that's I. And, then, I think there is one over here, too. In short we have --we have 20 bicycle parking spaces. So, each of those bike racks actually accommodates four spaces and I think that I had said it is two originally, so -- then we are proposing to remove the recommendation 3-K to add a children's play structure. The -- our vision for this development doesn't necessarily align with a children's place -- play place and the Keith Bird Legacy Park is about two to three hundred feet to the west, so we think that a lot of folks, if they do have families or kids, would maybe be okay walking over there and, then, we were hoping that folks within our neighborhood can use an amenity that's not available so close at another place. And, then, C-3, we are proposing to remove the recommendation to relocate the fence on the eastern boundary of the site and that would be in order to accommodate the landscaping that's required if we were to add a sidewalk here and as I mentioned earlier we are hoping to not add a sidewalk there, just because we feel that the Ten Mile pathway will be a good way for people to get to where they are going. So, Sonya showed -- or she kind of showed you what the emergency access is going to look like, but we have been working with Joe Bongiorno on this and he -- he mentioned that this was an option that would work as far as accessing it for Fire Department use if they need to as a secondary access. So, that is what we are proposing. In sum, we feel that we are in line with the development agreement for this property. We are actually lower than the maximum density that I think was allowed, which is about 24 units an acre. We are about 17.8. We are complying with the dimensional standards of the R-40 zone and we have met the requirements of the specific use standards. We think this density would be really appropriate for the area and actually be an asset for most of the folks in the area as housing is badly needed. It's near commercial. It's near transit. Chinden is a major transportation corridor, so it's close to that and it's close to parks and schools I think that it would be a valuable addition to this area, so with that I will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Any questions for the applicant? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 11 of 70 Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: You were wanting some latitude to possibly change the pool to a sport court, but would the rest of that surrounding -- that seating area as shown and the barbecue pits and -- that's going to stay as they are as shown? Leonard: Excuse me. Commissioner McCarvel, yes, that would be our intention is to keep it kind of like a plaza, hangout area, but just to switch it out, basically, with a court that would be about the same dimensions and size, so -- Fitzgerald: So, I'm kind of piggybacking on that and so you can correct me, are all these presentations going in the DA? I mean that's -- because I do like the -- the plaza you have laid out. Leonard: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, this --we are already in the development agreement for this property and we will -- I think we are holding up the -- excuse me -- concept plan that was attached to that. Fitzgerald: Okay. Leonard: This would be attached to the conditional use permit and would be required for the certificate of zoning compliance and design review that we have to later submit for building permits, so -- Fitzgerald: Thank you for the clarification. Additional questions for the applicant? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just on the -- I mean what's the reasoning behind removing the pool I guess? mean -- because it seems like you are taking away a really, really good amenity and putting in something that's maybe going to serve less people. Leonard: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Seal, we have actually been working with real estate brokers and they -- and they have been kind of telling us -- they have been forecasting that people actually prefer different kinds of amenities and we -- the demographic that we are shooting for on this property is going to be a little bit older I think and so -- and this might be something that our client could answer. He's here tonight, too. He might be able to go a little bit more detail as far kind of the thought there, but my understanding is that we are -- we are shooting for a demographic that may not hang out at the pool as much as they would like to play bocce ball or something along those lines. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Additional questions for the applicant? Commissioner Grove, Hollander or Pitzer, do you guys have anything questions? Going once. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 12 of 70 Grove: I don't at this time. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Commissioner Grove. Holland: It's cutting in and out a little bit on some of the requests that they asked for modifications for, but I have been following along with the visual, because I'm watching the live stream, too. So, I -- I think I'm pretty up to speed with, but may have to summarize some of the requests to make changes later. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Leonard: Mr. Chair, Commissioner -- is it -- Fitzgerald: Holland. Leonard: Holland. Okay. I was going to say your name up here, but she is -- I do have a list of all the things that we are requesting changes from, too, if that would be helpful for the record and for you all. Fitzgerald: That would be great. If you can give it to the clerk that would be awesome. And in regards to emergency access and the sidewalk to the east, as you are handing that over, is there a reason where -- I don't -- with commercial pads on the east -- to your guys' east right now, I'm wondering if people are going to -- I mean I -- I used to live next to a Costco when I lived somewhere else and walking to my apartment I wanted some -- the quickest access I could go. So, is there a reason we are not wanting a sidewalk along the eastern boundary? Leonard: Mr. Fitzgerald -- Mr. Chair. We prefer not to have a sidewalk there,just because there isn't really like a crosswalk that would be available for folks to go here there and there. We are proposing a pedestrian point at the northern point where that emergency access is going to be. So, we foresee that as a really good option for folks if they are going to be walking to and from Costco. But sidewalk wise we don't think a lot of folks are probably going to be walking north-south, I think it will be more cars going to and from Costco there. Fitzgerald: I think that's the reason I'm concerned, because I think there will be restaurants -- some other things that are to the east of it. I think people will be walking there. So, that's my -- because there are cars driving through there and there is no way to walk through there. So, just giving you my thoughts, because I think that -- that will be something that I think I'm concerned about not -- Leonard: Okay. Fitzgerald: -- having a sidewalk there. Additional comments before we open it up -- except our clerk left. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 13 of 70 Leonard: Mr. Chair, can I just ask a question? Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Leonard: Okay. So, would it help if -- so, right now there isn't a crosswalk proposed. If we were to do some kind of -- since there is a crosswalk south of the site that's at the drive aisle where the commercial and the residential are in between, would it help if we had maybe a sidewalk on the other side -- on the east part adjacent to the commercial to allow folks to go on the sidewalk that's along Lost Rapids, cross the street and, then, actually, walk on the commercial portions, not right next to residential. Fitzgerald: I think -- and didn't mean to cut you off. I think -- possibly. I think that we are going to probably hear that from some of the -- our community that's here tonight. Leonard: Yes. Fitzgerald: That's one of the concerns I think is making sure there is still a safe access to get to Costco or to add to some of those future commercial pads and so I'm concerned that we don't have that right now and -- if we start removing some of these requirements, so -- Leonard: Okay. Fitzgerald: -- I will keep thinking through it, but just for the information. Leonard: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: With that I appreciate it. Leonard: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Mr. Clerk, we are ready for public testimony. Do you have a list or do you want to start on the phone? How would go? Johnson: I had one -- some -- somebody sign in. I don't have that list in front of me. We have nobody by phone, but you may have somebody in the room. Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Please come forward and tell us your name and address and give us your thoughts. We appreciate you being here during this fun and exciting time we are all in. Sackmann: Good afternoon. My name is Lois Sackmann. My address is 3759 West Vanderbilt in Bainbridge development. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 14 of 70 Sackmann: Okay. I have heard the cautions or statements, testimonies by this lady here as far as what some of the people who have recorded of not doing the apartments, townhomes. The questions I have -- besides agreeing with those are that Lost Rapids is a two lane road. There is no middle lane to turn from into this new development that's being proposed. Safety wise what's being done. Egress-ingress look like the pictures to be one. You are talking 200 to 300 cars coming out or going in. That's just not safe. Not only for the road, but into the development, and those were my concerns. Fitzgerald: Thank you very much, ma'am. We appreciate you being here. Stay healthy. Safe. Anyone else in the audience like to testify on this application? Yes, sir. Please come forward. Thank you for being here, sir. Petersen: Oh, thank you. Tonn Petersen. 2659 West Wolf Rapids Street in Meridian. I think this project is fantastic. I live directly across Ten Mile and I agree with everything that's been presented. This is such a well developed project. It provides much needed housing in an area that just is -- it's thriving and growing. Right now, you know, in that square mile area there is, you know, everything from across the street close to million dollar homes and, then, kind of, you know, half million dollar homes and more entry level single family homes, but there isn't really this product type right there to provide this for the community. I just think it's a great -- a great benefit. It's close to parks. It's close to schools. There is connectivity. There is pathways. I think it really provides enough -- a nice buffer along Ten Mile that kind of shields and almost screens off the Costco. So, I believe wholeheartedly that our community needs more projects like these and this is well developed and I think should be applauded and certainly approve this and -- or, excuse me -- support it and recommend it be approved. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir. Commissioners that are on the phone, if you want to ask questions, please, interrupt me and chime in. Anyone additional would like to testify? Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk. Weatherly: It is possible we may have one caller that is waiting to testify on this, but we are going through the screening process at this time, so -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Want to pause for a moment? Weatherly: Yeah. Fitzgerald: Okay. Weatherly: We will let you know in just a second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 15 of 70 Fitzgerald: Perfect. Do we have any additional questions while the clerk's working to get our additional caller -- for staff or for the applicant? Okay. We are going to pause for a moment. Madam Clerk, is this where I get to throw things at Bill? Weatherly: He is currently our screener, so -- possibly, yes. Fitzgerald: Sonya, can I ask a quick question while we are doing this? Can you pull up the --the overview of Keith Bird Park so I can see it. I'm just -- I want to see the structures -- play structures that are there or the amenities that are in that park. If that's an easy thing to do. I was using the computer, but it decided to stop working. Do we know what's in that park? Is there -- because I know there is basketball hoops, kids play structures, soccer fields. Do we have anything else -- information wise on what's all there? Do you know or -- Allen: Not offhand. Fitzgerald: Ma'am, can you give me a -- your rundown on what you say and what you recall. Absolutely. I would love to get your thinking. I need you to come up and be on the record, ma'am. If you could state your name and address for the record again. I just want to make sure I get your information. Sackmann: Lois Sackmann. 3759 West Vanderbilt. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, ma'am. Sackmann: Okay. What is there is some play structures as far as climbing rocks, wood structures for -- for -- wood or plastic -- for children to climb on. There are two eating areas right next to the bathroom facilities. There are also some permanent exercise equipment there for adults or teenagers that use them. But right there there is not a basketball court. Fitzgerald: Okay. Sackmann: It is -- there is one that is -- a small one that is over at Bridgetower West. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you very much, ma'am. I appreciate the help. Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk. Weatherly: We have Dave live on the line. Fitzgerald: Dave, welcome to the meeting. Please state your name and your address for the record and we will love to hear from you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 16 of 70 Meredith: Yes. My name is Dave Meredith. A current resident of Meridian in the Bainbridge Subdivision at 4202 West Everest Street, Meridian. 83646. 1 purchased my first home in Meridian in 1975. 1 recently retired as assistant director of Department of Public Safety at Boise State University and I am a certified administrator of public parking through the University of Virginia. I am opposed to the addition of this apartment complex being built in the suggested area for three reasons. Understanding apartments and parking, there is not enough parking allowed for this project. I'm not sure what the City of Meridian is currently suggesting for parking space -- spaces allowed for apartments, but typical city standards do not represent the reality of apartment living. Apartments have many visitors, not just those living in apartments, and this creates overflow situations and there is no overflow here unless you are planning to use the church across the street. Parking on weekends before any of the new items being brought into the area is already overcrowded and dangerous. Soccer fields, football games, park activities, all available parking is being used currently. People start parking in no parking zones, creating -- creating very dangerous situations. Item two is the -- the Fire Department cannot adequately protect the structure. There is only one in and out from the apartments due to the shortage of parking. Emergency vehicles will not be able to access this area when needed. The proposed north access to the Costco parking lot is certainly not a good alternative in the sense that a passcode is hard to get through with a vehicle, let alone a fire truck. The report states that the three story building will require a ladder truck and this will not have any access to these building. The Police Department will be called many times to, please, cite these vehicles. Not fair to the public use in the nearby parks, which by the way, we love and appreciate. Have Meridian adopted open space in subdivisions. In contrast, this project is going against the open space concept. Number three is Costco. You are putting the largest traffic generating box store on the same parcel and we are considering putting apartments there. This does not even make sense in the most common of sense. I'm sure the Commission has been to the Costco on a weekend and has witnessed how stoplights are backed up two or three cycles and the Lost Rapids Drive is -- like mentioned earlier, a two lane road with a medium in the middle -- will not allow any kind of cross traffic. This is creating a perfect storm for a disaster. A Saturday with soccer games, church activities, apartments with people parking in no parking areas and the Costco traffic. It will be impossible to access this area, including the emergency services. I'm in favor of apartments and not in my neighborhood that I'm saying, I'm saying if Costco was not right next door, several parks with activities and apartments that will illegally park, then, I would not be opposed. However, from my experience this is what is going to happen. I would hope that the Commission will not -- will vote not to allow this unit to be built in this particular parcel and create this perfect storm of total confusion on weekends. Respectfully, Dave Meredith. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Mr. Meredith. We appreciate your comments and thank you for calling in with the new technology we are using right now. Madam Clerk, is that the only person we have on the line, ma'am? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, it is. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 17 of 70 Fitzgerald: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify? Would the applicant like to come back forward and see if we can answer some questions and -- Leonard: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Commissioners. I'm inviting -- Fitzgerald: Two for one. Leonard: I'm inviting our client up so he can speak and answer questions about amenities and such. We will keep our distance. Maybe he wants to introduce himself though. Fitzgerald: That would be great. Gasser: Mr. Chair, my name is Derek Gasser. My address is 74 East 500 South, Suite 200, Bountiful, Utah. 84010. Fitzgerald: Welcome. Gasser: Thank you for letting us be here. Leonard: Okay. So, I will answer a few of the questions -- or the comments, I guess, that were brought up. In relation to Lois's comments, Lost Rapids is a two lane road, but it was designed to be a collector, which is intended, basically, to get traffic to and from quicker than a local road would be and take stress off of heavier use roads. So, the intention of Lost Rapids is to be a little bit busier than maybe a neighborhood road would be, but I think in this case it will funnel traffic very well for all the uses that are cohabitating in the area. The one point of access that we are proposing I think will work more efficiently than two points of access would, as staff has recommended the access point at the far northeast corner of the site, in our opinion would create more -- more issues as far as pedestrian and/or vehicle traffic going to and from and, then, as was mentioned, Costco will probably be a pretty busy use, we perceive folks possibly looking to cut through the development, rather than going around as the roads were designed. In relation to Tonn Petersen's comments, I -- we agree -- to say ditto on what he has to say and, then, as far as David Meredith's -- the gentleman that was just calling in, we read his testimony as well, his written testimony, and I do appreciate his point of view and he, obviously, has a lot of expertise in the area. We are meeting the parking requirements and, actually, exceeding them by a few spots with what Meridian requires as far as multi-family is concerned and, then, we are providing some storage that will, hopefully, alleviate some of the strain as far as folks possibly not having enough room, they might be able to also park cars in there if-- if they so choose. So, that will hopefully help. And, then, as far as fire access, we have the secondary access to the north approved through the Meridian Fire Department. That will meet their requirements and we feel that that will be a more effective secondary access than the one on the east. And just I guess to speak on the Costco -- when this project came through in 2018 they did do a traffic impact study that took into account Costco and the multi-family use and kind of to see how the traffic would be generated and where they would go and this is something that they felt was appropriate at the time. So, I think that about covers it. Is there -- maybe Derek would Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 18 of 70 like to -- oh, yes. And, then, in regard to your comment about the pedestrian access north-south on the east part of the site, we feel that most people will probably use the Ten Mile multi-use pathway. It's larger than most sidewalks are, so it will accommodate bicycles, pedestrians, and multiple different kinds of traffic. So, we feel that that would be a better option for folks, so -- Fitzgerald: So, Stephanie, real quick before you run away. Are you bollarding the north- south emergency access? Is that the plan? Leonard: Mr. Chair, I believe that we decided on a gate is the option that we went with, which would function much the same. Fitzgerald: Knox box gate? Leonard: Yes. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Sir, if you want to come forward and just state your name again, so we have that. Gasser: You bet, Mr. Chair. Derek Gasser. Would you like an address as well. Fitzgerald: No, that's fine. Gasser: Sure. So, with regards to -- Mr. Chair, on -- on the bollards for the gate, Joe with the Fire Department said either would work. We -- we feel like a gate would be better. It is something that, you know, the option was given for either one and with regard to the -- you know, the multi-path along Ten Mile, it's a -- it's a ten foot path. We feel like that, really, for people coming from the south part of the subdivision, that is the best point of access, because there is not a crosswalk to go across Lost Rapids until you get to the intersection, so for those who, you know, shoppers wanting to go to the shopping center Ten Mile seems like a great way to go up for people within the complex -- as Stephanie mentioned going north on -- and it doesn't show on this -- on this screen, but there will be a pedestrian walkway there to the -- the west of that storage unit. Fitzgerald: Okay. I guarantee you people will use the quickest access point -- Gasser: And that -- and we have coordinated -- sorry, Mr. Chair, with -- with Costco and that to align the pedestrian walkway, so you can see on the -- on the diagram going to the left of that storage unit and, then, it connects and, you know, very quickly you are at Costco or you can head to the east to get to any other, you know, use that would be there. We and Costco are not in favor of -- what Stephanie's also mentioned with regards to the drive-thru going through to the east, we feel like that -- it's going to be a -- there will be quite a bit of volume going up and down that street and we felt that it's -- it's better for the emergency access to take it from north and for the pedestrians. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 19 of 70 Fitzgerald: And, then, in regards to the tot lot, where was that -- or you guys' thoughts about removing that? There was a discussion about not having that. I know you have the dog park. Just the demographic you are shooting for? Leonard: Mr. Chair, that's correct. We -- we don't foresee a lot of folks wanting to use the tot lot in this subdivision and we have heard from a lot of folks that they don't seem to be used as much as the amenities that we are providing are and, then, because we are so close to Keith Bird you see a lot of folks maybe wanting to walk over there to use, you know, their -- they have a little basketball court that's nearby and, then, they also have the outdoor play equipment -- the outdoor gym equipment. I stopped by there yesterday. It's actually pretty cool and there were a lot of kids out there playing. So, I think a lot of -- we do have families in this development I think that they will probably want to go play with other kids that are over at the bigger park. That's our thought anyhow. Fitzgerald: But we are trying to avoid that right now. Leonard: Yes. Fitzgerald: Weird time. Additional -- or did you have anything additional? Yes, sir. Gasser: Mr. Chair, with regards to the question on the pool, our plan is to do the pool. We have -- in speaking with two apartment consultants we have hired we have just been cautioned about looking at the demographic that will be renting and knowing that for some of them they may be looking for something other than a pool. Pickleball has become very popular, especially in the -- you know the age 55 plus demographic. So, we have just -- we have been planning on a pool. That is our hope. But we want to be sensitive to what -- you know, what we find and what we hear with regards to what would be the best -- the best amenity. Fitzgerald: Appreciate that. Additional questions for the applicant? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: It's more a question on the park that's across the street there. Is that a city park or is that -- was that included in the -- Fitzgerald: City park. Seal: City Park. Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Questions on the phone, Commissioners? Holland: I don't think so. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 20 of 70 Fitzgerald: Thank you, Commissioner Holland. Commissioner Grove or Commissioner Pitzer? Grove: Mr. Chair? Pitzer: No, I'm good. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove. Go right ahead, sir. Grove: For the applicant. Was -- is there any -- any additional parking that can be put into this project? I'm just kind of looking over the map and is -- I know that was a major concern of some of the public testimony. I was just looking at the storage unit. Is that an option or is that not something that you would entertain? Fitzgerald: Go ahead. Gasser: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, with regards to parking in the storage units, currently all of those storage units are for storage. They can accommodate a car. Those will be rented to people renting at the apartment units. They have not been counted in the parking count. In our pre-application meeting and in multiple conversations with the city we knew that that had been an area in the past of concern, garages that were being counted as parking stalls. So, there are, you know, storage units there. They -- they will have garage doors. They will look like garages for cars. They can accommodate cars. But we have not included any of those in -- in the storage count -- excuse me -- in the parking count. Grove: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, do you have any additional questions? Grove: No. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Quick question on the -- the storage units. They are only for the people that live within the complex; correct? There is going to be no public aspect to it at all? Gasser: Mr. Chair, Commissioner, that is correct. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 21 of 70 Fitzgerald: And, Stephanie, one last thing on --just an aesthetics thing. In regards to the townhomes, do they front onto Lost Rapids or do they front into the parking lot? Leonard: Mr. Chair, they front on -- into the development, so the -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Leonard: -- so the back of them are against Lost Rapids. Let me see the rendering real quick. Fitzgerald: So, I guess I'm confused on why you don't want a berm. Leonard: We do want a berm. Fitzgerald: Oh, you do. Leonard: Yeah. I apologize if I misstated. One of the conditions require -- or requested was that we do include a break in the berm -- Fitzgerald: Oh, break in the berm. Got you. Leonard: -- to include a pathway and our request is to keep that berm at four feet, so that we can have more of a privacy buffer and security buffer, so -- Fitzgerald: Thank you for the clarification. Leonard: Thank you. Fitzgerald: It's the break, not the removal of the berm. Got it. Okay. Any additional questions? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: On the -- on the break would -- instead of having it in the middle, would you be willing to put it more towards the west end? I'm just -- I'm just thinking of circulation for kids and, you know, adults that want to use that park and the easiest route to get there. Leonard: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Seal, we have had discussions regarding that and I believe that our client is amenable to that on the west side. Maybe he can talk. Sorry. Gasser: Mr. Chair, Commissioner, so we have had discussions on that. As you look over on that west side it is very heavily planted, so that was -- you know, one of the limitations on it is we intentionally -- I think we just saw it -- but you can't see it there, but on the west side we have larger trees and -- and a thicker planting plan in order to -- and I think -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 22 of 70 maybe I'm wrong on that, but that -- this just shows on ours, but I believe as you look at the other there is -- it's a little wider down there on the west side as far as what is being -- or what has been proposed on our property and the property to -- to the side. Let's see. I don't know if that answered -- so, it's something we have looked at, really, for all of the buildings, except for building E and F on the two townhomes -- so, on those 14 units. For the rest of them going through the front entrance and going along the sidewalk on Lost Rapids to the park or any pedestrian movement to the west, seems to be good and to work. Building F has a longer walk to get over there. Building E has a longer walk. But everyone else it should be fairly efficient. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: And, Stephanie, can you remind us--just so it's on the record, with the STARS program and what Costco is doing at Lost Rapids and Ten Mile, can you explain -- just everybody has that on their -- we have an understanding of what that is. Leonard: Mr. Chair, unfortunately, I don't remember all the details, but I don't know if Eric does. Yeah. Gasser: Mr. Chair, I will give a -- hopefully an okay answer on this. So, we -- as with -- and we are the developers with Costco in the ten retail pads as well with Costco and Costco is the one who has put in the STARS programming application, but we are participating in that as well. I believe it ended up being about a 20 million road improvement project. Fitzgerald: And just specifically on that corner, because that -- Gasser: On that corner. So, that corner -- so, you have Ten Mile that is being improved and you will have a new -- it will be five -- I don't know on -- on the -- on the width as far as how it changes, but currently my experience is it's not been the safest intersection. When you are trying to turn left with cars coming it -- it can be challenging. You will have a full stoplight there now with -- with a turn. So, I think it will function much better than than how it is today and -- I don't know if that -- Fitzgerald: I just wanted to -- the light was where I was going. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. Gasser: Correct. Fitzgerald: So, thank you. Any additional questions? We appreciate you guys being here, especially during this social distancing time. So, thank you. Leonard: Thank you. Unless there is additional questions for staff or anyone else, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. McCarvel: So moved. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 23 of 70 Seal: Second. McCarvel: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2019-0146, Lost Rapids Townhomes and Apartments. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Commission, the application is properly before you. Any starting off comments? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just in looking at the layout of it, I like what they have done here. I'm not necessarily against high density stuff. I mean I think it definitely puts a load on the schools, but for what they have designed here I really like it. It fits a piece of land that would probably pretty -- be pretty difficult to put something in there that's more viable and -- and we just don't need anymore storage units. So, I do agree with staff's proposal on the eastern side of the -- of the complex here. I think putting in a sidewalk in there, as well as an east- west entrance-exit is something that would be smart to do, simply because -- and I'm looking at the morning hours mostly when I'm -- when I'm saying this. As people are getting ready to go to work, to school, and everything else, Costco is not yet open, so think if they have an east-west they could actually go up and get onto Ten Mile with a right turn, you know, basically another access point for them to be able to do that. And, then, the walking path that goes up and along there I think would also be beneficial, not only for people that are in this development, but also for people that are south of it as well to be able to walk up into Costco and still have to -- have to drive. Otherwise, they are all walking through the development, which -- I mean if I lived in there I probably wouldn't want people outside of it to freely walk through it, even though it's open. I do like the idea of the pool more than I do any, you know, other amenity that they might put in there. That's just my personal preference. I think it gives it a little bit of -- it's a better amenity guess overall, so -- especially for the people -- looking at the townhomes I think that that's probably going to be a lot of younger people that are in there. I have a son that fits that demographic and -- and I think the amenities that they have in there, including the pool right now, would be more beneficial. As far as the north-south -- or, sorry, the north emergency entrance into there, I'm concerned about that. I mean if you have a crazy day at Costco and the Fire Department needs to get in there and that's their access, then, trying to fight through a parking lot is going to be in my mind, you know, a riskier endeavor than trying to come in off that -- off the east boundary that's there. But, again, I like everything that's -- that's proposed in here. I think it fits well. I just think that some of the staff's recommendations on here is something -- are -- are things that we should follow. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 24 of 70 Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I would agree with most of those comments. I like the overall project. It was something that was, in theory, proposed at the time with the other items that were before us. I would agree that I would like to see the five foot sidewalk on the east boundary,just because I think that will be used by more than just what's in this proposal. I think that subdivision from the south might use it as well and I would like to see -- at this point I'm -- I think the drive aisle between the buildings H and I is a good idea as well. I had the same thought of-- that gives another out so people aren't on Lost Rapids if that does get congested, just that entry point there. It gives enough -- except if I remember right that access up there to Ten Mile is going to be a right out only, but I would also not like to see -- I mean that would give the emergency access that they need, but I think that crosswalk right there where that other emergency access was planned I think that's a good idea, because I think people that live in that complex would want to go out that way. On the pool I could go either way, because that is such a seasonal use. I think some of the other options that they mentioned have use longer throughout the year, but I think I would be open to either one of those, as long as that surrounding area stays as pictured with the nice barbecue area and seating areas and stuff. And I'm -- I'm kind of thinking on the berm -- the break in the berm, if they had it it should be down there between E and F, but like they said, there is more landscaping planned, but I think that's the point that makes sense for people to be able to walk out and easily -- more easily access the Keith Bird Park. And I'm okay with not adding a children's play structure with the park there I think that's plenty. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, I heard your voice in there. Do you want to hope in? Holland: Sure. I would echo a lot of what Commissioner McCarvel and Commissioner Seal just said. I think I -- I think we have got to leave the sidewalk on the east boundary of the development. I understand where they are coming from on it, but I see a lot of neighbors walking maybe from the west side that want to walk to Costco that maybe don't want to cut through the development to follow that sidewalk and if they cross over to where the commercial side is and they are crossing across that traffic path twice, so I can see the need for having a sidewalk there. I'm not opposed to removing the break in the berm that they have requested, but I would agree with what Commissioner McCarvel just said on that. Let's see. The other ones -- I think that the drive aisles should be connected on the east side between the buildings H and L -- or H and I, for the same reason that other people have mentioned. If we only have one access off of Lost Rapids for cars coming in and out, I would like the ability for them to be able to exit off that commercial drive and, then, turn right off of Ten Mile from a different direction if -- if something happens and they get backed up in there. But, otherwise, I -- I -- on the pool thing, too, I'm struggling, because I really liked the look of the pool and think it was a really nice amenity the way that they have laid it out and it's hard to visualize when you see the picture of the beautiful pool tied in with the barbecue area, it feels like I'm on a cruise ship and it just looks really nice. So, it's hard to imagine that being a sport court, but certainly if we want to be flexible with them I'm open to that, too. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 25 of 70 Fitzgerald: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Grove or Commissioner Pitzer, do you have comments you would like to share? Pitzer: Yes, Mr. Chair, this is Commissioner Pitzer. I -- I really like the development, just am struggling with the three stories. I think that this is creating too much density, actually, with a single -- with a single access. It's -- there is going to be so much traffic from the Costco and, again, where they say, you know, the -- city park there, they are going to have lots of kids at the park and all that excess traffic without any kind of calming going down there, I'm -- I'm struggling with the three stories in the additional density. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Grove, do you have any thoughts, sir, or I can swing either one. Grove: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, go right ahead, sir. Grove: I -- I like the project as it's laid out. I agree with the comments about doing the road on the -- between building H-1 and also trying to find a path -- a walking path on the west side or south side to create another walk through for the development. I, too, think the pool looks great, but wouldn't be a deal breaker for me if it -- if it were to change to another sport amenity. But overall I do like this project. Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir. So, I -- I agree with majority of the comments that have been made. I -- I understand Commissioner Pitzer's comments on the three story, but I think if we are going to build three story that's where it belongs is up against something that's big a hulking mass, so they can actually see over the top of that thing or, you know, a way to look out at something besides a wall and so -- and it's further away, it's the blending of density away from the single family homes, so it's single family to townhome to an apartment and I think this was the concept originally. I think that it was more dense in the original concept than it is now and so I think I -- I like that. I do agree -- and I told the applicant as much is I think people are going to find access as quickly as they can to that commercial pads and up to Costco and they are not going to walk up to Ten Mile, because it's busy and it's an extra 300 feet and it's just not going to happen. So, I think that the sidewalks need to stay and I also agree that having access -- what you said, Commissioner Seal, that people can get access out of here and, then, go up and go through the parking lot and get out easier in the mornings, so -- the pool I can go either way. I think the look of that, what they have designed is perfect, and we all want to be in a pool with a drink right now, so I like that look, but I also understand that the demographics may change, so I -- flexibility there I'm okay with if that's the direction the Commissioners want to go. I'm okay not breaking up the berm. I understand why and to keep that security and the kind of quietness that comes with having a berm with landscaping on top of that and -- but -- and I'm okay with the play structure going away, because I think that is available down the street at the park and in other areas, so I -- based on what they are providing and the demographic they are going for I think that will all work itself out. Any additional comments? Commissioner Seal, go right ahead, sir. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 26 of 70 Seal: Mr. Chair, question for staff. On the -- the explanation for the bicycle parking spaces, did that seem okay? Is that -- I mean -- I guess I'm looking for wording that would allow them to move forward with what they have if that is, indeed, what they have, but at the same time meet the intent of -- of your recommendation. Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Seal, Commissioners, the actual number of bicycle spaces meets the code. Staff's recommendation was more based on location and spreading it out between buildings more and having it more nearby parking spaces by the buildings. So, that was -- that was the basis for the recommendation. Seal: Okay. Understood. Thank you. Allen: And that was based on the location shown on the site plan. So, I don't know that the locations were shown incorrectly, as much as the numbers may have been off. I think the locations are correct. Seal: Okay. Fitzgerald: Additional comments? Motions are always in order. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: So, let's -- I just want to go down this list before we get into the motion. Item 3-E I think we have all agreed keep that. Item 3-F, I think we have kind of agreed that we can remove that. 3-G. We want to keep that keep that. Yeah. Fitzgerald: Yeah. McCarvel: Keep that. Item 3-1, we want to keep that. Item 3-J, we want to either move or add the parking spaces. I think we just leave that. It isn't worded correctly in there, so just leave it -- okay. I think we have all agreed that Item 3-K is okay to remove. And 3-L stays, because we have agreed that we would like to see that sidewalk. Fitzgerald: With the additional entry point; correct? Or is there -- Sonya, can you give us clarification on that? So, we have a fence for part of it and then -- or explain on how you want us to word that for -- Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, there is already a condition in the staff report for that east-west driveway connection to the north-south drive aisle. Fitzgerald: Got it. Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: So, we are keeping 3-L. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 27 of 70 Fitzgerald: I believe so. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just on the break in the berm, since we are removing the play structure, I think adding -- instead of having a break in the berm, I'm in the middle, basically move that to the west end to provide better access, so that way if we are taking away a play structure there is more immediate access for the people on that end of the complex to be able to get to the park. That seems like a fair compromise, but I will listen to what anybody else has to say about it. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal, it's just connecting back into the -- into the sidewalk and, then, going around the building into the parking lot, is that your -- Seal: Correct. Fitzgerald: Okay. Seal: Essentially just provide a path for that end of the complex to be able to get to the park a little bit easier, instead of having to come all the way out to the main entrance to Lost Rapids. Fitzgerald: For that last building over there right -- Seal: The last couple buildings. Fitzgerald: Got it. I'm -- that's amenable -- I'm amenable to that. Holland: Yeah. I'm open to that. McCarvel: Yeah. Mr. Chair, I -- I agree. I -- I would like to see some access down there, but I also get the kind of safety and enclosure part of it, too. So, I don't know if other Commissioners have some thoughts on that. Want to keep that berm closed or open it? What's your pleasure? Fitzgerald: I think the -- keeping it closed along the main part of, then, having it go around the end is -- I think that's a better -- like letting it flow down or slow down and, then, have a pathway around that building would give it a balance. So, access around it -- McCarvel: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 28 of 70 Fitzgerald: -- but keep the privacy, if that makes sense. Any additional comments or thoughts on in the phone? Holland: I'm good with comments that have been made. Fitzgerald: Go ahead, ma'am. Grove: Same. Fitzgerald: Okay. McCarvel: So, Mr. Chair, in a motion do we -- wording do we want to say leave it to the applicant and staff to work out a pathway out that end? Fitzgerald: Yeah. Sonya can stab me later. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2019-0146 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19, 2020, with the following modifications: That item 3-F be modified -- modified to add a break in the fence and berm to the west side of the property as agreed upon by staff and the applicant and, then, I move also to strike Item 3-K. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second. Everybody understand the motion and the second? Hopefully everybody on the phone. Are we good? Pitzer: Yes. Holland: We are good. Fitzgerald: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor of approval for H- 2019-0146 as -- with some modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same? Pitzer: Nay. Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Weatherly: Would you like me to call a voice vote? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 29 of 70 Fitzgerald: I think I got it, but -- Commissioner Holland, will you clarify your vote. Holland: I was a yea. Fitzgerald: Okay. I have a 4-1 vote with Commissioner Pitzer as the -- yes, ma'am. Pitzer: It's nay. Fitzgerald: Yep. Thank you all for your patience as we work through voice votes. We may do some roll calls if -- if you need a roll call and everybody would like a roll call, please, request revision or request a roll call vote and we can do that. So, motion passes. Thank you all very much. Appreciate you being here. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm North (H-2019-0134) by Martin L. Hill, Hill & Hill Properties, Located at the Southeast Corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. Amity Rd. 1 . Request: Rezone of a total of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N (4.9 acres), C-C (4.35 acres), and R-15 (30.65 acres) zoning districts; 2. Request: Modification to the existing development agreement (Hill's Century Farm Commercial - Inst. #2019-033207) to update the conceptual development plan and certain provisions to allow for the development of a self-service storage facility and retail/professional office uses where single-family residential was previously proposed; 3. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 137 building lots, 18 common lots and 10 other lots on 43.02 acres of land in the R-8, R- 15, C-N and C-C zoning districts; 4. Request: Planned unit development for an age-restricted 55 and older gated community with deviations from certain development standards; and, 5. Request: Conditional use permit for a 73,730 square foot 443- unit self-service storage facility on 3.89 acres of land in the C- C zoning district. Fitzgerald: Okay. Moving down. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing for Hill's Century Farm North, H-2019-0134, and, Sonya, you are up again, ma'am. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 30 of 70 Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. My presentation on this project is going to be very brief. The applicant will go into great detail on the entire project. So, rather than hearing it twice I'm just going to let him go ahead and cover his project and I will go into the -- just the bones of the staff report. So, the applications that are before you tonight are a request for a rezone, a preliminary plat, a planned unit development and a conditional use permit for a self service storage facility. There is also a development agreement modification request that does not require Commission action that will be heard and acted on by the City Council. There were also applications for private streets and alternative compliance, which are approved by the director. This site consists of 43 acres of land. It's zoned R-8 and C-N and is located off of the southeast corner of East Amity Road and South Eagle Road. This project was annexed in 2015 with a development agreement. Two subsequent amendments have been approved since that time. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed use neighborhood. Just a little bit on the development agreement request, which, again, is not before you tonight. It is modification to an existing development agreement to update the concept development plan and certain provisions of the agreement to allow for the development of a source --excuse me -- self service storage facility and retail professional office uses where single family residential uses are currently approved. So,just real quick there the map on your left is what the current comp plan and the existing development agreement shows as and, then, the proposed concept plan on the right. So, if you will notice the -- the entire area is medium density residential, which has been reduced to the area shown here and, then, it's added self service storage and retail professional office here and, then, there is also an addition of independent living here to the east as well. There is a rezone request of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N zoning district, which is 4.9 acres to the C-C zoning district, which is 4.35 acres and an R-15 zoning district, which is 30.65 acres and that is the proposed zoning there before you. A preliminary plat is proposed shown on the left consisting of 147 building lots and 18 common lots on 43.02 acres of land in the R-8, R-15, C-N and C-C zoning districts. The associated landscape plan is shown on the right there. There is a planned unit development proposed. This is -- let me back up just a moment. This is the qualified open space exhibit. The project does comply with the city's open space standards and actually exceeds those standards and this is the overall site plan, which is associated with the planned unit development, which is requested for an age restricted 55 and older gated community with deviations from certain development standards as contained in the staff report. Conditional use permit for a 73,730 square foot 443 unit storage facility on 3.89 acres of land in the C-C zoning district and that's the site plan shown before you there. And these are the building elevations. Written testimony has been received from Mike Wardle, the applicant, in agreement with the staff report and David Palumbo and that is in the record. You should have already seen a copy of that. Staff is recommending approval per the provisions in the staff report and I can speak to any questions you may have on those provisions. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Allen: And let me -- let me back up for just a moment. Excuse me. Just to summarize David Palumbo's concerns, he -- he would like to see the improvements to Amity Road, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 31 of 70 which is a four lane roadway expansion, to be completed prior to any developments in this area commencing and, then, he does have parking concerns also related to development. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Sonya. Any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. Mr. Wardle. Thanks for being here tonight, sir. Wardle: Thanks to the Commission, both seen and unseen, for being here. Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation, 2929 West Navigator, Suite 400, in Meridian. Appreciate the opportunity to be here. David Turnbull is here with me, as is Jonathan Wardle, who is the president of Brighton Development Company, who will be the responsible party to make all of this happen. I'm not going to go into a great -- a lot more detail, because Sonya has given you the nuts and bolts, but I just want to kind of focus on -- on what's being proposed in the context of the whole of Marty Hill's property. His property was -- is everything basically north of the -- you see the line of the tan or the brown lots near the bottom of the Century Farm Subdivision and, then, the conventional lots -- if you just take that line directly due east to Hillsdale, his property includes a portion of the school, the YMCA, the approved -- prior approved Hill Century Farm commercial subdivision with an already existing St. Luke's medical facility at the northeast corner of Hillsdale and Amity, an approved Veranda Assisted Living complex, as well as the city park that is immediately adjacent to his home. What we are proposing to do in this project, as Sonya has noted, is that we are providing storage immediately to the east of the Idaho Power company substation fronting Amity. There will be a single access point that actually aligns with an existing public street, Martindale, to the north that will serve the self storage, as well as provide an access to the additional eight retail professional office uses as well. Then we have ten conventional -- a ten lot conventional subdivision buffer between the existing homes in Century Farm and the Cadence age qualified gated community and three estate lots immediately adjacent to the park with Marty Hill's home and shop on basically two and a half acres of that site. We concur with the staff recommendations for approval. They have noted several items to be addressed before City Council and that's some -- update of a landscape plan and dealing with some of the design elements of the self storage. Those items will be addressed and work with staff between -- between now and the time that the City Council meeting is held. I don't know how to move this forward. Do I have control? Okay. Well, Sonya has noted the zoning and, again, the zoning really conforms with what was previously allowed through the Century Farm commercial subdivision north of the YMCA park complex. The R-15 change is not so much density as it is setback and lot sizes. Next slide, please, just for the -- again. And one more. Let's go on up. This shows the difference between the types of lots. The green lots that are around the outside edge are front loaded. They have driveway pads, so you have got, basically, the two garage spaces, as well as the two pad spaces. All of the other units are alley loaded and conform to the requirements of the plan and right there in the heart of it, the southeast of that central core, is the community center with some off-street parking provided, as well as some additional amenity activity areas that will be detailed at the CZC design review. And one more slide I believe. Marty Hill's home site, which is denoted there, is part of the three lot of estate component of the project. When Marty provided the property to the city for the park he did so with the opportunity for him to Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 32 of 70 basically sit on his deck on the east side of his house and enjoy all the activities of that park area. There will be two additional estate lots to the north of his home. They will front a public street. They may or may not be developed by him, they might be just retained as open space or -- and held for some additional time, but at one point in our discussion with staff it was a question of redevelopment of Mr. Hill's property and while there is absolutely no intent at this point and I think there would always be a wonderful enclave for whoever, it does -- we do show how there could be a division that would be done very easily within the context of the existing public street system with those black dashed lines. That's not a -- that's not a proposal, that would happen in the future if it -- if it ever came to be through an additional subdivision process. We did note -- and there was an exception to the code. Normally you can't do a through -- you know, where you have a lot that fronts two public streets, you can't have access on both, but in reality Marty -- Marty's home orients to the north and you can see kind of that area in the -- in the home itself where there is the garage that faces to the north, but, then, he's got a large shop complex, a little office and RV storage and other equipment storage and a shop to the -- 150 feet south of the home. So, the arrows do depict the intent for and the express desire to have access for the home particularly from the north and, then, from the shop area to this cul-de-sac to the south and to the west. I don't know that there is really anything more in the project. These elevations really are showing what we have already done in our Director Cadence project in Paramount. The real live units to the upper left in the lower part of the slide are the attached patio homes. The ones -- excuse me. No. Those are the units that -- those are alley load. The ones to the lower -- kind of a central lower part of the picture are the patio homes that have the garage with street frontage. So, we have some real life experience there. We are just in the process of developing our second Cadence project on the prior approval by the Commission and Council for our Bainbridge North and this will be our third such project in the community. I really have no other information or comments. It's basically a continuation of what we have done in Century Farm with some conventional lot transition and, then, the Cadence project and, then, on the frontage of Amity was the extension of the -- and let's go back to the very first slide, the site plan, please. With the uses that have been already approved and underway in the Century Farm commercial subdivision. We would be happy to answer your questions, but we certainly will be asking for your favorable recommendation for approval to the Council for the requested rezones, for the PUD, preliminary plat, conditional use permit and related items that will be transmitted to the Council. Be happy to answer your questions and if my colleagues have any need to add to it. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Mr. Wardle. Any questions for the applicant? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: On the gated community part of this, what -- what part is gated? I mean is it the entire -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 33 of 70 Wardle: Okay. I think I can use it now. We are gated right here as you come off Eagle Road into this public street that will, then, tie into Century Farm, but there is a gated element right here and a gated element right here and so you have a public street coming in with a cul-de-sac turn around at this point. A cul-de-sac is not required here, because you actually have a public street that will continue on. So, that's where the two gated elements are. Seal: So, essentially, the conventional lots that are shown on the southern property boundary are the only ones that aren't -- aren't part of the 55 and older community; correct? Wardle: That is correct. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Mr. Wardle, is Cadence going to continue with all amenities are taken care of, no mowing, everything is taken care of in regards to 55 and older community, same -- same setup as you have done in the past? Wardle: Chairman Fitzgerald, yes, it is a fully maintained community, so that it's a lock and leave for that type of demographic. Fitzgerald: Thanks, sir. Commissioner McCarvel, did you have a question? McCarvel: I'm just -- I'm concerned -- I know it's supposed to be done before getting to City Council, but with those self service -- service storage units would look like being on such a prominent corner. Just want to make sure that you have some nice elements to them and not just metal -- Wardle: We will work with staff on that question. Obviously there is a great variety of look within the community in the self service industry, so we will work through that detail prior to Council. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for the applicant on a phone? Holland: Mr. Chair, this is Lisa Holland. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, go right ahead, ma'am. Holland: So, I'm curious on why -- why this area is subject for -- for more of the age qualified being right next to the elementary school, right next to the YMCA, a really walkable family friendly area. It looks like most of what's going in around here, with the exception of the Hill Century Farm Subdivision to the south, is targeted for age qualified and certainly they -- they still use the YMCA facilities and walking paths and whatnot, too. But just curious on -- on why it's all targeted for age restricted. And my second question is, again, on the self service storage it seems like we have a lot of our nice hard corners Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 34 of 70 in Meridian going for self-- self service storage units and it's not always my first pick when you have the option of-- of getting a commercial use -- put the storage as kind of the front corner lot. I don't know if there is any consideration to maybe tucking the storage back behind as a transition to some of that retail professional office, but just a couple of thoughts there. So, I guess two questions. Why -- why all senior focused and, then, is there a chance that the senior -- or the self storage could be buffered a little bit better. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Holland, I am not certain that I understand the question. I assume that you were wondering why the Cadence or age qualified project was not more conventional residential. Holland: Correct. Turnbull: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, David Turnbull. 2929 West Navigator. And in response to Commissioner Holland's question, we have done, obviously, a wonderful I think family neighborhood community here, but just like we did in Paramount, which is largely a family oriented development, we do have this -- the Cadence project, which is age qualified. It's a multi-generational neighborhood, actually, is what it is and -- and so it's been well received in Paramount. We are doing our second one in Bainbridge, which is also, obviously, a family oriented, but family extends to a lot of definitions and so a lot of the clientele that we attract to this community actually have children that live in the immediate neighborhood. So, we think that it's obviously -- addition to young children, it's nice to have -- and the average demographic in here is like 70 to 75 years old and having that kind of facility next to a park, next to a YMCA, we think is a great addition to the market, hence the neighborhood. As far as the self storage facility, you know, I would probably agree, except in -- in part, except that there is an existing Idaho Power substation on that corner and we struggled with what to do with buffering around that. That's not an easy thing to work around and so we do have demand out there, we figured that it would -- it provides both a buffer to that self storage -- the substation, but also provides a nice buffer to our Cadence community from the road noise that would be coming off of Amity Road. So, that's our thinking behind that, Commissioner Holland. Holland: Thank you. Just wanted to talk -- and, by the way, I didn't mention, I think you have -- you have done a nice job with the overall development concept and I -- you guys have done a fabulous job with Paramount, so thought I would jump in with questions right off the bat. One thought just for your consideration before this goes to Council, I wonder if you might look at kind of doing an L-shape for the self storage, so you still kind of have that entrance off of Amity Road that maybe you could still have a couple more retail pads on at least the frontage. It looks like it's back behind a little bit more. But just a thought for your consideration. Turnbull: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for Mr. Turnbull or Mr. Wardle on the phone? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 35 of 70 Pitzer: Yes. Fitzgerald: Go ahead, Mrs. -- Pitzer: Mr. Chair, this is Pitzer. Fitzgerald: Go ahead, ma'am. Pitzer: Yes. So, are -- yes. So, are these going to be rental units or will they be owner -- will they be -- or would they be for sale to owner? Fitzgerald: Mr. Turnbull. Turnbull: I will address that. I didn't catch the name of the Commissioner. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Pitzer. Turnbull: Okay. Excuse me. So, the areas that are shaded in the lighter color, those are for sale properties. There is a section of independent living next to our branded assisted living and memory care that would be for rentals and these are typically people that are transitioning from a Cadence type product or somewhere in between; right? And so we share services between the assisted living facility and the independent living. They get a lesser level of service, but it's still adjacent to and accessible to. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Pitzer: So, the HOA would -- they would be HOA dues with the landscaping and -- and some home maintenance? Turnbull: Correct. Pitzer: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, do you have any questions, sir? Grove: Not at this time, no. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Any additional questions? Thank you both. We appreciate it. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone wishing to testify on the phone? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we do not. Fitzgerald: Anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this application? Jon, you don't want to come up? Come on, man. Okay. Any additional questions for staff or for the applicant? Mr. Wardle, would you like to say anything additional before we close the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 36 of 70 public hearing? Okay. Last chance for questions for the applicant. Okay. Well, a motion to close public hearing, can I get one of those? Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close public hearing on H-2019-0134. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Okay. Commission, the -- anybody want to kick it off? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I like the layout of this. Bumping up in -- in the -- I mean a move up in density is something I struggle with for sure, but this seems appropriate and fits, especially considering the age qualified, and I do want to make the comment that Hillsdale Elementary is actually shut down. It's over -- it's over capacity, so if there were any kids that were going to be living here, they would not go to Hillsdale Elementary. So, I like the fact that there is a YMCA, lots of walking parks and things like that as far as the age qualifying community is involved. So, it looks like there is only ten lots that are actually conventional lots -- I'm guessing because of the age qualified gated community, but more than likely those conventional lots will probably fit into, you know, some -- somewhere in that scheme as well as far as people that want to have even more independence in that. So, overall I do actually like the layout of this, the way that it's put together and the fact that the -- it's kind of an all in one as far as the folks that are going to live there. Fitzgerald: And I -- I totally agree. I actually have heard several folks in their 70s that are looking at this, waiting to see what happens here, because I -- they actually use the Y for some of their heart healthy classes. I know that a lot of the 70 plus folks like the ability, they can step up into that independent living facility if they needed something beyond and I think there is folks that live in Century Farm that would be there to help their families. So, as we are facing a little bit of a silver tsunami in Meridian we have seen -- I think this is a -- it's -- and they have tested it in -- in -- with Paramount and so I think it matches well with what we need and I hear Commissioner Holland's comments about the self storage units and how that's laid out, but I -- that is a huge substation right there and so I think the people across Amity are probably happy that those retail professional office locations are there, instead of more lots and so I think it's a balanced approach. So, I like it. I think they did a good job. Additional comments? Pitzer: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 37 of 70 Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Go right ahead. Pitzer: Yes. I really like this project. I -- I -- I have looked at it for several days now and I am not opposed to the -- the self -- self service storage. In fact, I think that it's sort of a good unit for this age qualified subdivision as well. As the retail is not overwhelming I think it gives them a nice commercial area. I'm all in favor, I like that they have two ingress-egress. I have no opposition. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Commissioner Pitzer. Appreciate it. Additional comments on the phone? Grove: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, go right ahead, sir. Grove: I would like to just echo what everyone has said. I think that if this is to be developed it has to be age qualified for the fact that there is just no room at the school. So, I like that aspect of this. And I like Commissioner Holland's idea of an L-shaped storage. Keep the amount of space there, but to really front load Amity with retail and office if that's possible. If not I understand, but I like -- I like that concept to minimize the frontage of the storage unit itself, you know, keeping it next to the power station, but kind of going back and, you know, extending more along the Cadence properties there, allowing for the office retail to stay up front. I don't know if that's possible, but I like that concept. Overall, though, it looks beautiful and well designed. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, go right head, ma'am. Holland: I -- overall I like the development as well. I think they -- they do a good job of having neighborhoods meet and connect well together. My only -- not sticking point, but challenge is always the storage, because it seems like we always have so many storage projects coming into the valley, but we haven't had as many in south Meridian as we have had in north Meridian. I understand they are challenging next to that big substation, too, and it's hard to find a good buffering use. My suggestion would be that the applicant would still look and see if there is a way to configure it in more of an L-shape where they have made the ability to carve out a couple more of those retail professional offices on the front side and -- and extend it a little bit further to the east that way on the backside, but I don't know that I would condition it that way. I think it's just a suggestion that I would encourage them strongly to consider before going to Council. Otherwise, no -- no big challenges. I think it's a nice development. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 38 of 70 Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I would agree. I think this is a nicely laid out, well thought out project and I'm not opposed to the storage units. I agree there is not near as many on the south side of the interstate as there are on the north and with this hard corner -- would like to see Council and the applicant do something decent looking, since it is right up there. I think with that, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2019-0134 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19th, 2020. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to approve and recommend approval of H- 2019-0134, Hill's Century Farm North. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, gentlemen, for being here tonight. We appreciate it. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk, could I take a five second break, since drinking water like a champ. I'm just going to run to the restroom. Bio break. Five minutes. (Recess: 7:49 p.m. to 7:57 p.m.) D. Public Hearing for TM Crossing -Ten Mile Academy Daycare (H- 2020-0007) by BVA Development, Located at 1001 S. Sentinel Ln. 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a daycare center(more than 12 children) on 0.883 of an acre of land in the C-G zoning district. Fitzgerald: Okay. We are going to reconvene our meeting. Thank you for allowing us to take a quick break. So, moving on in our agenda, next item on the agenda is Item No. 4- D, TM Crossing Ten Mile Academy Daycare at H-2020-0007. Let's start with the staff report. Good sir, go right ahead. Dodson: Thank you. Good evening and we are finally on a 2020 hearing. That's good. Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Dodson: So, this is a conditional use permit for a daycare center, which has more than 12 children, on 0.83 acres of land in the C-G zoning district within the Ten Mile Interchange specific area plan. The building and site improvements have already been approved through certificate of zoning compliance and design review applications, as well as building permits. This request, then, is solely for the use of this building. This is the site plan and the landscape plans that have been approved. The Comprehensive Plan Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 39 of 70 supports this use, because it is proposed in a high employment area and will, therefore, be a needed commercial support service. In addition, the proposed use is a new use to this area and adds to the sustainability of the area by having a mix of uses in close proximity. The applicant has stated -- this is -- sorry. This is the proposed elevations as well. The applicant has stated they expect to maintain approximately 250 full and part- time students, with a maximum of 180 children at any one time. Staff has recommended a condition of approval in line with the expected maximum of 180 children and with consideration of the overall building size of 7,500 square feet. Based on the square footage of the building 15 parking stalls are required. The applicant is proposing 32, which exceeds UDC minimum standards. Per the specific use standards on site pick up and drop off of children shall be provided to ensure safety. As you can see on the screen here, the applicant has proposed two areas for child pick up and drop off. The preferred drop off is this location here where people come from Ten Mile round the roundabout, down Vanguard, down Excursion, and south on South Sentinel and there will be a loading zone no parking area right there. The secondary drop off and pick up would be as part of the parking lot and they have provided adequate parking for this to occur. With the available information staff agrees with the applicant and finds the loading zone as the preferred location for safe and efficient student drop off and pick up. This area will create the least amount of traffic impediments and allow an easier in and out flow of traffic applicant. The applicant also -- my apologies. Already stated that. Staff does recommend approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions of approval in the staff report. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Joe. Any questions for staff? Anybody on the phone have questions? Okay. Mr. Wardle, how are you tonight, sir. G.Wardle: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good to be here with you and this is as close as I have been to my dad and my brother in 11 days, so thanks for having us all tonight. We are going to keep this relatively short and brief. We are in complete agreement with the staff report. As they indicated, the building has already been approved. We are only here to talk about the use and ultimately -- you know, this is a C-G zoned area, that's an office park, and we think that this is an appropriate -- an appropriate use there. It's a high employment area, it's an area that is not on a primary arterial however and with the fact that all of your existing infrastructure is already in place, both of the two private access drives, Excursion and Sentinel, are constructed and in place, we think that this is a good location for -- for a daycare and for preschool. We agree with all of staff's conditions and the recommendations of approval that they have done. We think and agree that circulation is -- is a significant issue always with a facility like this and that by having the parking lot separate from a dedicated drop off area that we can accomplish both of those and we can address those needs. So, we are in complete agreement with the staff report and we would request your approval of this application as conditioned. Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir. Any questions for the applicant? Seal: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 40 of 70 Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just a quick question on -- there is not a lot of green area around here for kids to go play in. Is that something that's going to be addressed separately or -- G.Wardle: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Seal, it's -- this -- this -- this elevation plan right here is only showing the issue of circulation. The play area I believe was depicted on the other one, Joe, if you could go back. So, there is going to be, you know, dedicated outdoor play area both to the north and the west of the building, but those were subject to the -- the prior approvals with the building permits. Seal: Okay. Thank you. G.Wardle: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for the applicant? Any additional questions on the phone? Going once. Pitzer: No. I'm good. G.Wardle: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up or ready to testify on this application? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we do not. Fitzgerald: Anyone in the audience wishes to testify on this application? Mr. Wardle, do you need to say anything additional? Okay. Any additional questions for staff or the applicant? Hearing none, could I get a motion to close the public hearing. Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion to close the public hearing on H-202-0007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I think this is a fabulous location for a daycare right next to employment and the high density. Couldn't put in a better spot. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 41 of 70 Fitzgerald: I am fully in agreement with you. Additional comments? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I agree. I like the location of it. It would be nice if there was a nice park next door or something along those lines. Also a little concerned that the amenities aren't described in here. Maybe that came from previous hearings as far as what's going to be outside for the kids to play on, so -- I mean I know if this was a subdivision or something along those lines we would definitely be requiring them to show exactly what's going to be out there for them. So, that said it's going to be a daycare, preschool facility, so I'm sure that in order for them to attract, you know, potential customers and kids there they are going to put amenities in there that would be agreeable. Fitzgerald: Agreed. Comments from the phone? Commissioners? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2020-0007 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of 3/19/2020. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: And you are approving, not recommending. Just making sure we are clear. McCarvel: Got it. Fitzgerald: Is that amenable? McCarvel: I meant approval. Fitzgerald: Yes. Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve file number H-2020- 0007. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much for being here tonight, gentlemen. Be safe. Be well. Stay healthy. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing for McMillan Independent Senior Living (H-2020- 0004) by Investcor Development, Located Approximately in the Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Rd. and W. McMillan Rd. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 42 of 70 1 . Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family project consisting of 162 units, limited to 55 years of age and up on approximately 6.5 acres in an existing C-G zoning district. Fitzgerald: Okay. Moving on in our agenda. Next item on the agenda is Item E -- 4-E. McMillan Independent Senior Living facility, H-2020-0004, and, Joe, it's all you, sir. Take it away. Dodson: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Welcome to the room. Dodson: Good evening. All right. On to the next one here. The applicant is requesting a conditional use approval for an age restricted, multi-family project, consisting of 162 units on six and a half acres of land in the C-G zoning district. It is near the corner of Ten Mile and McMillan, generally across the street from the Walmart over there, if you are familiar with it. Multi-family use and this concept plan were conceptually approved by City Council in the previous development agreement modification heard and approved on January 7th of this year. The site is separated from adjacent residential properties by a collector roadway. This is I believe East Milano and West Cortona Way. These two. The closest building to any residential home is roughly 220 feet and it is to the side of the -- and the closest it is here. Generally look at it here. Continuing with the buildings. The rows of buildings do meet all UDC dimensional and landscape requirements. The buildings are separated into three wings. Two residential, one north, one south, and one clubhouse wing. The maximum height of the residential wings are 57 feet. The clubhouse is generally closest to the residential properties and has a maximum height of 37 feet. For reference the maximum height allowed in the C-G zoning district is 65 feet. The applicant is also proposing a farmhouse style architecture, incorporating lap siding and stone to match the character of the nearby neighborhood. The applicant is proposing 162 units, of which two will be reserved for guests. Of the 162 units, 123 are one bedroom or studio apartments and 36 are two bedroom units, requiring a minimum of 159 covered carpet -- carport or garage spaces and 98 uncovered parking spaces, for a total of 257 total spaces. A total of 258 spaces are proposed, consisting of 160 covered and 98 uncovered. The proposed parking, therefore, meets the UDC standards. However, staff is concerned a large number of the garage spaces will be used for storage, rather than parking, and will, then, reduce the availability of parking. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval that all garage spaces are prohibited as storage units and must be for parking only. The applicant is in agreement to this condition. Specific use standards for multi-family development. A minimum of 80 square feet of private usable open space shall be provided for each unit. The applicant has not provided floor plans that staff can use to confirm this, therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval that the applicant meet this at the time of certificate of zoning compliance and design review submittal. These specific use standards also have a common open space and amenity requirements. Based on the size of the units proposed, a minimum of 37,300 square feet of common open space is required. Staff has calculated approximately 48,000 square feet of proposed qualified open space, which, therefore, exceeds the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 43 of 70 minimum standards. Also based on 162 proposed units, a minimum of four amenities are required. However, the decision making body is authorized to require more. The applicant has proposed a number of amenities for this project, including the clubhouse, which has multiple amenities within it. I will go through some of them just for the record here. Within the clubhouse there is proposed to be a bistro, an indoor pool, a sauna and steam rooms, fitness center, wellness center, art room, library and 20 seat theater. Outdoor in the plaza area there is going to be outdoor dining areas, closet spaces, sports courts to include bocce ball and pickleball courts, a putting green, shuffleboard, firepits, a community garden, and a dog park. In addition, the project proposes multiple walking paths that connect to the existing collector roadway sidewalks providing -- providing for plenty of pedestrian access. Staff believes the proposed amenities exceed the minimum UDC requirements and is appropriate for a project of this size. There were two written testimonies that were against this project. Both discussed issues with overall height of the building and traffic concerns. One of them also had some issues with blending in with the community character and mentioned not receiving notice of the neighborhood meeting. In regards to traffic, I reached out to ACHD and wondered myself why a traffic report -- or traffic impact study was not required and I was told specifically that unless they have -- unless they generate more than one hundred peak hour trips they will not be required to do a traffic impact study and this type of demographic generally has very minimal traffic impact. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in the staff report and I will stand for questions. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, sir. Additional questions for Joe? Any on the phone? Holland: No. No questions yet. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Commissioner Holland. Would the applicant like to come forward. Was that sanitized? No. Just -- welcome, ma'am. Good to see you again. Thompson: Good to see you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. My name is Tamara Thompson. I'm with The Land Group. We are at 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. Oh, gosh. There should be -- the top one is the -- yeah, or the -- thank you. Dodson: You can drive it from up there. Yeah. Thompson: Oh. Perfect. Fitzgerald: Tamara, did you state your -- your address? Thompson: I did. 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Sorry about that. Thompson: So, with me tonight in one of the -- of the chairs is Jason Densmer, also with The Land Group, and Tylere Brennan from Investacorp and they will be giving a portion of this presentation as well. So, we are pleased to present the conditional use permit Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 44 of 70 application. The property is 6.5 acres and is generally located on the northeast corner of Ten Mile and McMillan Roads and this area we have to show you just the vicinity area and that the Walmart is across to the west of -- of Ten Mile. The CUP is to allow a development of an age restricted 55 and older, independent senior living community in the C-G zone and this parcel is -- is the 6.5 acres and you can see the infrastructure is already available at the site. The West Milano borders the site to the north and North Cortona Way is to the east. The parcels to the -- to the west and to the south are part of the same subdivision. They are called the Verano Subdivision No. 4 and that was platted back in 2007 and this is just to show the zoning in the area. Joe had that in his, but it was a little tiny, so I zoomed it in a little bit. Again, this property was annexed in 2003 and it's been zoned C-G since 2007. The property was platted in 2008 and the property is a lot of the Verona Subdivision No. 4 amended plat. It's bounded by collector roads, Milano and Cortona. ACHD designate -- designates those as collector roads. That roadway was constructed in 2004. The existing zoning is the C-G and as shown on this map the majority of the green -- or all the green areas on the four corners of the intersection are C-G and the two -- I want to call these kind of hot pink -- are limited offices on the -- on kind of the kitty corners. I'm going to have Tylere come up and talk a little bit about the site plan and the amenities and the operations of the -- of the senior living facility. Fitzgerald: Welcome. Please introduce yourself and your address for the record. Brennan: My name is Tylere Brennan. Address 3001 Ranch Road 620 South, Austin, Texas. Thanks for having me, Mr. Commissioner, Members of the Commission. Staff, thank you for our recommendation of approval. So, as you -- as you know, Meridian has been identified as one of the fastest growing cities for senior retirees in the country. It's one of the reasons we love this -- this -- this area and have chosen Meridian to be the home to our next project. With the influx of so many seniors or retirees coming here, there has been a lack of what we have seen of product and one of the main reasons they are coming to Meridian is -- is -- four real main reasons. One, quality of life. The affordability to retire here. And they are also following their -- their adult children and their grandkids. So, we decided to bring something special to Meridian and looking at this want to kind of start with the site plan. You know, we are under multi-family, but, really, we are not. We are independent living and why I say that is if you look at the building you're not a lot spread out, garden style, walk upstairs style multi-family style construction. We are really one building. We have the clubhouse in the center with two wings. And in part of our program are -- to our construction is we believe a lot in outdoor space and open space activities. It's really important to our seniors, which I will get into in a minute. Like Tamara was saying, we have two access points off Cortona and Milano. There you can see. And we have a self contained drive within the project. So, we are really self contained. And even -- it also allows us to have extensive landscaping throughout the perimeter of the project and within and -- and really set us back from the -- the collector roads. See if I can go on to the next here. Here is a massing study. You can see how we are sort of nestled in here and the reason I wanted to show this is because these trees have been growing for about 13 years, the main trees along Cortona and Milano, so we really screened by the -- by the trees, not only by those trees, but our internal landscaping as well. We spent a lot of time designing this building to have a lot of cutbacks in the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 45 of 70 elevation, the use of stone, siding, metal accents that I think will really complement the -- the neighborhood and the look of what's being built in this area. Here is an elevation of the front of our building. As you can see we set it really far back off of Milano and Cortona, the collector roads, with a fountain there in the front, a main grand porte co- chere, our clubhouse in the center as you pull into the community, and our two wings to the left and right. As you can see, again, we are -- we are trying to set the building back as far as possible to make that grand entrance, really show off our landscaping and our outdoor spaces. I'm going to get into it in a minute, but another way we different -- we are different from multi-family is, you know, we -- we are much higher staffed. You know, they say 55 plus, but we are really not 55 plus. The average resident in our communities is between 78 and 82 years old. We don't really have a lot of 55 year olds living here. We really differentiate ourselves from multi-family also because we have a commercial kitchen and we offer three meals a day. Our residents don't have to leave. They don't have to drive. We have a community shuttle bus that we drive all of our residences to the doctor's office, to the grocery store, any errands they need to run. So, they are really not driving, even though we did meet the -- the required parking spaces, covered parking and garages, a lot of our residents, again, don't drive, don't have vehicles. So, going into the lobby I just wanted to show you guys some of the interior spaces. You know, we worked really hard to bring a lot of the exterior stone and siding and wood and natural look of the building inside as well. Try to match it to sort of the Meridian look and materials found locally. This is an image in terms -- of the -- our casual dining, our bistro area or bar. We offer wine lockers for residents to have their own wine cases and locked up in their own sort of wine locker in the -- in the bistro. In the far distance we have our more formal dining. A lot of families and the grandkids will come here and meet with mom and dad, have lunch, breakfast, dinner in any of these different seating areas. Going into some of the amenities, I know staff mentioned them -- mention them again. This is our indoor pool and jacuzzi. In the back right corner you see our sauna steam room. We have locker rooms. We have skylights, because we believe in swimming all year round. I know it's seasonal here, so we wanted to create something where the residents could swim. In a nice day like today those commercial doors will open up all the way for more of an indoor- outdoor experience. I don't have pictures of all the amenities, but behind this image is a full gym with floor to ceiling glass looking into the pool. We have a beauty salon. We have massage and wellness rooms. We have -- like -- like they said, a 20 seat movie theater. We have the commercial kitchen with a chef's table where they will do dining classes, cooking classes, and tasting experiences. We also have library and one of my favorite amenities is the storage. We have -- on every floor we have a large storage room that you walk in with cages on each side where residents can store their bicycles, their travel bags, Christmas decorations, since there is not a lot of room for storage in those things -- in these and a lot of them are coming from larger homes and retiring into this smaller space. Moving to the outside amenities, this is something we are really proud of and we spent a lot of time -- again, we designed the entire building around this to allow as much outdoor space as possible. I think looking at the numbers we are about 28 to 29 percent over the required outdoor amenity space. We have a pickleball court. We have a fenced-in dog park. An open lawn area with bocce ball. We have a shuffleboard arena. We have a putting green. We have gardening plots where residents can come down and grow their own spices and herbs and we even have an indoor greenhouse Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 46 of 70 that's climate controlled, so all year around gardening can be done and our chef really likes to use that to grow some of the local spices and herbs for their own dishes. We also have one more dining area outside around a big fountain and on nice days like today, again, families can come over, eat with mom and dad, and in the winter we have a large fire pit where one of our favorite activities to do with the seniors is to do a s'mores event where the family comes with the grandkids and we put s'mores out on the back lawn. I think that's it, unless you guys have any questions on amenities, the building, open spaces. I can pass it on to Jason. Fitzgerald: Questions while he's up here? Go right ahead, Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just a quick question on some of the -- essentially some of the businesses that are operating within there. Is that something that you are trying to attract, local people that come in and fulfill those positions, or is that something that you guys provide as part of the service? Brennan: Correct. So, we -- we staff about 30 people in our community. So, again, a lot more than multi-family. This is really -- you know, we have internal corridors, elevators -- this isn't really like your traditional multi-family. But when it comes to like the massage room with the wellness room, the arts and crafts room, maybe we will bring in a painter and the -- yeah, the massage room -- I'm sorry, the beauty salon, we will contract locally to come in and the residents can make appointments and they will come and travel here to this community and cut their hair and do their nails. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions? Holland: Mr. Chair, this is Lisa Holland again. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, go right ahead. Holland: Can you talk at all about the ground that's undeveloped around you that is commercial? Do you have a relationship already with whoever is going to plan to develop that? Any ideas of how that will interact with this development? Brennan: Yes. Commissioner, thank you. We do. In fact, the gentleman that's here tonight, if he cares to speak, who owns the retail around us, we have a good relationship with him and, again, I can't speak on to what is going to be built there, but the retail is going in around us, as well as the light office to the north and southeast. Holland: Thank you. Fitzgerald: All right. Any additional questions? Thank you very much. Is there one other person that wanted to chat? Oh, we had additional -- thank you. How are you? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 47 of 70 Densmer: I'm doing well. Thank you for -- I'm Jason Densmer. Tamara introduced me earlier. I'm also with The Land Group. Our address is still 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. Tamara I think was really helpful in talking a little bit about the land use issues associated with the project and the reasons that we are here tonight asking for your approval of the conditional use permit. Tylere was able to describe to you what the building is and who the residents are and a lot of-- kind of make the business case for how independent living is really necessary here in Meridian and that this -- we just really think that this project raises the bar quite a ways and provides a level of living that would be welcome in the community. I was here mostly to talk about design and how we have focused the building and it's -- and it's design to really fit in with the context of the neighborhood. We know, of course, that there is a lot of C-G zoned properties around us, but we are on the edge of that and we are adjacent to residential homes that have enjoyed ten or 15 years now since the original plat was constructed of vacancy next door. So, we recognize that there will be a change with the construction of this project. We wanted to do it in a sensitive way that was respectful of that. The major thing we were able to do is take access in the -- kind of northeast corner of the site from a lot off Cortona and direct traffic directly into the courthouse -- or the -- sorry--the clubhouse portion of the building, which is two story, lower overall height, and a little bit more kind of business hours of an occupancy. It's not closed by any means, but the main activity in that area will be more daytime. So, out of respect for neighbors nearby they wouldn't necessarily have residential windows looking their direction late at night or in the early morning hours. The larger portions of the building -- or the taller portions of the building where the apartment units are are the north wing and south wings, with shorter sections connecting that back to the clubhouse. Those are the portions of the building that orient across the street from L-O zoned properties, providing really a lot of separation to the homeowners in the area. If you have other questions about design I would be happy to answer those or just questions in general. Otherwise, we wanted to thank the staff for their work on the staff report and I appreciate their recommendation of approval. Fitzgerald: Perfect. Jason, in regards to all the landscaping -- I know Tamara talked about it. Is there any -- you guys aren't going to take anything out that's currently there; correct? Because you have got pretty significantly mature trees around there that would be brutal to see removed. Densmer: Right. Along the street buffers the majority of the trees are being retained. I think there may be one or two that need to be removed just to construct the driveway accesses. Fitzgerald: Okay. Densmer: But definitely the majority of the trees are being retained. Fitzgerald: Thank you. And, then, this might be for Tylere, too. Elevator access across -- how many elevators are in the building and those kinds of things? So, that's -- it's pretty -- two? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 48 of 70 Densmer: There are two elevators in the building. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Any additional questions for the applicant? Anyone on the phone, Commissioners? Holland: No questions, but one comment. I just wish it wasn't age restricted, because I'm ready to move in. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Tylere had me at -- at wine lockers, so -- yeah. Forty-five with kids. Does that count? No. I have one question. Tylere, can you quickly -- where else have you built these? I know you guys are in Austin, but how -- how many of these have been built? Brennan: Yes, Commissioner. So, we have --we have built--this is our first independent, but we have done several assisted living around the U.S. We have built some in Louisiana, north of Dallas, south of Austin. We have another independent one just like this going on in north Austin and we are also in Pensacola and -- I'm sorry. Reno, Nevada. Fitzgerald: And you guys still maintain all of them?. Brennan: We hire a third-party operator -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Brennan: -- and that third-party operator actually already has property that they manage here locally in Meridian. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you very much. Brennan: Thank you. Grove: Mr. -- Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Yeah. Commissioner Grove, go right ahead. Grove: Question for the applicant. They mentioned that the parking is not an issue. I know we are pretty close to hitting the standards, but in regards to similarities to other projects that they have done, what is the anticipated percentage that they would anticipate the residents taking up of the parking spaces? Fitzgerald: Tylere, go right ahead, sir. Brennan: So, it really -- really depends demographically. Again, the average age of our residents are 78 to 82 years old. A lot of the adult children really don't want their parents driving at that age, even though they are capably able to, hence why we have all the amenities and activity director and everything. I would say that 35 to 40 percent of our Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 49 of 70 residents will have at least one vehicle and maybe drive it once a month. They really take advantage of the shuttle bus service that we provide for free. Fitzgerald: Additional questions while Tylere is up here? Thanks, sir. Appreciate it very much. Madam Clerk, do we have public testimony? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we do not. Fitzgerald: Anyone in the audience wish to testify on this application? No? Tamara, do you want to close? Do you have additional thoughts to share with us? Pitzer: Mr. Chair, this is Patty Pitzer. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Go ahead, Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: For the applicant. This -- the existing trees that are along the corridor there, they are deciduous trees. Well, we have received testimony that some of those are dying and that need to be replaced. How do you address those? Fitzgerald: Jason, do you want to take that one? Densmer: I will do my best. The existing trees along those streets appear to be in pretty good condition and they are -- they are appropriate species for planter strips in the City of Meridian. Obviously, the applicant has a strong interest in making sure the approaches and the street presence of their project is very pleasing looking. So, we will be looking at those trees through construction to make sure that they are in good health and I suspect if there is any that are terrible we wouldn't object to replacing one or two, but it definitely looks to us like the trees along those streets are in -- in good condition for the time being. Dodson: Commission, if I may, this is staff speaking. I did read that public testimony as well and it was more in line with the types of trees that are uprooting some of the sidewalks and things having to be removed for the younger trees and maybe a different type. But I would like to note that this land and most of their land around there is not their property, it is owned by the HOA for -- that, you know, operates the homes across the street. So, they will not have to -- really they can't replace those trees, other than the two that they may have to remove to do the drive in and drive out. Fitzgerald: We do all kinds of off-site work. Commissioner Pitzer, go right ahead. Pitzer: Yes. Well, I -- I appreciate that clarification. Thank you. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 50 of 70 Seal: As a follow up onto that, I didn't read the same testimony. My only concern I would have is that -- I mean essentially have, obviously, an older demographic that's living this -- in this community where they are going to be walking along there. If the roots are actually pushing up sidewalk and everything, there is trip hazards, obviously, that will be part of that, so -- I mean now that you are aware -- I mean if there is some kind of partnership that can be made with the community, especially since there is some concern over that, to make sure that that's not going to be an issue that would be great, knowing that you don't own the property, but just as, you know, basically extending goodwill to the people that will live in that community. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions for the applicant? Hearing none, Tamara, do you want to close? Thompson: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Tamara Thompson again. The main reason I want to close is because I was trying not to touch anything that I missed -- I miss telling you guys that we recently went to City Council -- Meridian City Council to modify the development agreement, so we obtained approval for that on January 7th of this year and this use and the site plan are what was approved and that's what's attached to the development agreement. So, I neglected to tell you that. But with that we have read the staff report, we agree with staffs recommended conditions of approval, and we respectfully request your approval tonight. Fitzgerald: Any additional questions before Tamara runs away? McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Thank you. Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Oh. No more questions. I move that we close the public hearing for H-2020- 0004. Holland: I will second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second. Discussion? Seal: I would actually like to hear from the -- the commercial business owner. Fitzgerald: Oh. McCarvel: Oh. Fitzgerald: Pause your -- McCarvel: Pause the motion. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 51 of 70 Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Please come forward, sir. Give us your name and your address for the record. Stroud: Travis Stroud. 1980 South Meridian Road, Meridian, Idaho. Chairman, Commissioners, in regards I think to the question -- was it the question of what's going to go there? Seal: Yeah. Just the -- I think the question is what's going to go there and how have you seen interaction with the -- the site that's being developed. Stroud: You know, at this point they are the first real user we have been working with, because it's very much in the beginning stages and we like this use and we feel it's an amenity, so we haven't really marketed the commercial until we know that we can actually market that they are going to be there, because we feel they are going to be a big draw and that's going to be a big part of what we do -- do there. I think they are going to bring that commercial. So, I can't answer it yet, but I think they are going to be an amenity. Seal: Is that something you would be -- I mean the site plan shows where the parking and everything is, where there could be walking paths in there. Is that something that would you be amenable to -- Stroud: We do have Jackson's on the corner that's breaking ground. Fitzgerald: An extra mile? Stroud: Yeah. Yeah. Right there on the hard corner. Seal: Right. I'm just going for if there is, you know, a dietary, a place of business that people might want to walk to and just providing access for that, that they don't have to go out and around the -- the site in order to get to it. Stroud: And we are open to that, depending on the use. Fitzgerald: Thank you so much for being here. We appreciate it. Stroud: Thanks. Fitzgerald: Would you like to unpause your motion, Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Sure. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead. McCarvel: I move that we close the public hearing for H-2020-0004. Seal: Second: Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 52 of 70 Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2020-0004. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Well, I'm going to move in soon, so -- send my kids to live with their grandparents. No, I'm joking. I -- I will -- it's present -- or properly before you. Do you all have comments? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I -- I really like the approach to this. I kind of like everything about it. I understand there are some concern with it being a four story building, how that can get in the way of what -- of some of the views that are out there. It's not on the other side where it's going to block the mountains or anything along those lines, it is something that's-- it's something that should -- can go there and shouldn't go there, so I think that there is a need for this in -- in our community. All the amenities are pretty amazing, I have to say, the fact that they have thought about the fact that they want to have people there, they want to maintain them there, keep them there and transport them when necessary is -- is responsible is the best word I can come up with for and so -- applaudable. I think it's something that if we had more of that in our communities, then, we would help alleviate a lot of the other problems, along with -- there is not a lot of kids that are going to be coming out of here and going to -- to school somewhere, so it's a really good use of that -- of that property as well. Plus there is supporting communities that are nearby, so that if, you know, parents, grandparents go into there, then, there is opportunity for people to follow them or vice-versa. So, overall I really like it. Fitzgerald: I totally agree. I think there is -- there is -- the only one of these types of facilities I'm aware of in Meridian is Meadow Lake, which is very far away from this location and I know Boise has several, but we -- we were lacking them in Meridian and I -- I understand that there are some maybe vision corridor concerns, but I think there is a ton of landscaping around there and, then, we will see it build up around this and I think it's a -- much like you said, I think it's -- it's something we need. I think it's the right location and I think commercial will complement it based on how it's -- when it's built and come up around it. So, I think it's great. McCarvel: Mr. Chair. Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I agree. I mean four stories to seems like a lot, but I think just visually the fact that it's a self contained building with indoor hallways and elevators on the inside and not people walking up -- I mean just -- I think that takes away some of the look and feel of a four story building that has a lot of activity around it and I think the way they have Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 53 of 70 put this on the property with the two story entry as the main focal point, this will kind of be a buffer I think with that corner and the commercial that will be on the other side of it. Fitzgerald: Additional comments? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I would just repeat my first comment, I'm ready to move in. I just wish it wasn't age restricted, but the only other really concern that I had was the height on it, but, again, I think with the distance between it and the surrounding houses and the landscaping that's going to be in between -- I like that they didn't put it right on the houses, they really tried to create, essentially, a lot of great amenities. I think they definitely went above and beyond. So, no concerns on my side. Pitzer: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: Patty Pitzer. Yeah. I'm -- I'm 65 and I would move in there tomorrow if I could afford it. But, yeah, I'm like you, the amenity of the wine locker -- I do like the -- I mean I'm usually the one that is of the height problems here, but -- but I -- I see that they have worked very hard to set these back and I do like what they have done with the entire project. I do hope that they keep the elevations, so if they are not flat like these are, but incorporate the -- the patios and balconies. I also like this is close to commercial, you know, and I'm hopeful that maybe there will be some medical around there as part of a development, but overall I think it's a great project. Fitzgerald: And there is already a St. Luke's Family Health around the corner -- right around the corner there, so just FYI for information. Pitzer: Yes. Yeah. All -- another good reason. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, do you have any comments, sir? Grove: Mr. Chair, I just echo everything that has been said. It looks good to me. I like the placement of the structure. It seems to be offset from the access point to the surrounding subdivision in terms of where the buildings start and finish in relation to the street, the taller portions of this project. So, I think it looks great. Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland, go right ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 54 of 70 Holland: I was going to say this might be an easy one for me to make a motion on, since it's harder to do on the phone, but -- Fitzgerald: Oh, you are always making motions. Go right ahead. Holland: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve the conditional use permit request for McMillan Independent Senior Living H-2020-0004, for the hearing date of March 19th, 2020. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to approve H-2020-0004, McMillan Independent Senior Living. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same. Motion passes. Thank you all for being here. Travel safe. Be healthy. Hopefully we will see you soon. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. G. Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020 for Lupine Cove (H-2019-0133) by Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services, Located at 4000 N. McDermott Rd. 1 . Request: Annexation of 7.09 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and, 2. Request: Preliminary plat consisting of 28 building lots, 7 common lots and 2 other common driveway) lots on 7 acres of land in the R- 8 zoning district. Fitzgerald: Mr. Parsons. As we move down, last item on the agenda is file number H- 2019-0133, Lupine Cove, and open that with staff report -- or opening it up and start with the staff report. Bill, you want to take over? Parsons: I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Last item on the agenda this evening is the Lupine Cove Subdivision. Their request is for an annexation and preliminary plat before you this evening. The future land use map for this particular property is medium density residential, which the city can anticipate between three and eight dwelling units to the acre. The current zoning of this properties is RUT in Ada county and the site consists of seven acres and it's located at 4000 North McDermott Road and, then, as you can see here in the aerial that most of this area is still primarily rural in nature, but as this Commission is aware of there is a high school under construction out in the area, which has extended sewer McMillan -- McDermott Road -- sewer and water down McDermott Road, which will facilitate the development of this particular property. To the north of this property was the Aegean Subdivision that you see in the zoning map, which is zoned R-4 and R-8. That is a preliminary plat approval on that particular property. There have been no final plats submitted in relationship to this particular property. So, I wanted to just -- as you are aware staff is recommending denial of this particular Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 55 of 70 application. I think the Commission is aware, even though it's medium density residential, the property -- the project fits within that stated density of the Comprehensive Plan. The land use and the FLUM designation is more than just density and how many units you can get on a particular property. The Comprehensive Plan lays out ways on how to integrate open space, how to tie into adjacent subdivisions, and how to provide transitional lot sizes adjacent to county residences and so that's some of the framework that the staff laid out in the staff report for this Commission, that although this plat before you does meet the R-8 standards it's still other policies in the Comprehensive Plan that we feel are not being met with the subject plat before you this evening. So, as I alluded to in the beginning of my application -- or my presentation, the applicant is requesting to annex approximately 7.09 acres of land with the R-8 zoning district, which, again, is consistent with that MDR designation. The proposed plat that's before you is proposed to have 28 residential lots, seven common lots, and two other lots. One of the lots will have the -- contain an existing home on it, which is Lot 13, Block 2, which is located primarily internal to the development. Access to the site is provided from North McDermott Road that will -- and as part of connectivity this will extend any local street connection into the development and, then, terminate on the south boundary providing future connectivity. With the Aegean Subdivision to the north there was a stub street that was provided in this general location along the northern boundary of this property -- or close to the northern boundary. ACHD did not require half the crossing for the culvert over the Five Mile Creek or McFadden Drain in this area, so the applicant and -- of this property and the property owner of the Aegean Subdivision will have to figure out how to pay for the construction of that roadway. I would also mentioned to you that there is only one road coming in and in the staff report staff had made mention of the large amount -- or the high number of common drives proposed with the proposed subdivision. In the staff report I noted that approximately half the lots will be taking access from essentially four different common drives within the proposed development. I know this body has had concerns with on-street parking when that occurred. I can let you know that the applicant is proposing some on-street parking in this area here and, then, also at the end of the -- the local street proposal of the development of -- or outside of the -- or just off of the ACHD turnaround. In the staff report we did make mention that without extending that stub street from the north into the site and with the numerous number of common driveways staff was not supportive of the proposed subdivision. It's not consistent with one of the objectives in the UDC. The app -- this particular project is also -- because it's seven acres in size it does -- it is required by the UDC to have a minimum of ten percent open space and one site amenity. The plat before you the applicant has indicated that there is approximately 11.7 percent open space. As I mentioned in the staff report, we had some concerns with what the applicant was counting towards qualified open space and I will briefly go over that with you this evening. So, currently I had mentioned in the staff report that Lot 7, Block 2, did not meet the landscape standards of the UDC, so that could not be counted as open space. The internal common lot along here with the guest parking does not meet the 50 by 100 dimensional standards in the UDC for open space and cannot count towards the required qualified open space. The pond that's located in Lot 13, Block 1, exceeds the 25 percent maximum per UDC. It cannot count towards the open space. That has to be removed out of the qualifying open space. However, if there is an area that is 50 by 100, which was indicated by the applicant, that area would count Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 56 of 70 towards the required open space. And, then, looking into the southeast corner of the proposed project -- because this street -- local street that comes into the development is over 150 feet, the applicant has to provide a required turnaround per ACHD standards. So, the applicant has included that in the -- rather than restricting a buildable lot for the turnaround, the applicant's actually -- actually included that within the larger central open space in the southeast corner of the site, which, again, that impervious surface cannot be counted towards required open space. Therefore, this area does not scale 50 by 100 and cannot count towards common qualified open space and so in the staff report I have mentioned to you that based on that analysis we are finding that this plat does not meet the UDC standards for open space. The applicant has provided three amenities and those include the half basketball court, which is located in the southeast corner. We have some interconnected pathways to the south. We have a tot lot and a gazebo area in this northern -- northeast section of the open space, which, again, is two -- two above what the UDC requires. So, staff is supportive of the proposed amenities for the subdivision. The applicant also proposed a fencing plan with the proposed subdivision. As I alluded to, the -- some of the fencing that the applicant is proposing does not comply with UDC standards. I did call that out along -- particularly this location here. There is solid fencing proposed along this common lot and the UDC requires that it be semi private or open vision. The applicant's also proposing some semi privacy fencing along a portion of the north boundary and along the east boundary. That -- they would just add that to the north boundary along here and along this open space, which is Lot 15, Block 1, 1 believe, the applicant would comply with the fencing standards. The applicant did propose some conceptual elevations for you to take under consideration. To show you just kind of the flavor of what the homes would look like, you can see there are some two story homes proposed within the development -- development. A majority of them are single family. So, if the applicant does any -- propose any two story structures up against McDermott Road they would be subject to providing additional modulation and mix of colors and building materials along that roadway to provide some variation in those proposed elevations. Staff did receive written testimony from Penelope Constantikes in response to the staff report. In looking at the public record I do not see where anyone -- any other public entities -- or, excuse me, any other members of the public commented on this application. Again, staff is recommending denial of this project primarily based on the fact that the applicant did not provide any transitional lot sizes along the south boundary, nor did they address the transportation and open space, the elements per the Comprehensive Plan or the UDC. With that I will conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Bill. Are there questions for staff? Anyone on the phone? Holland: No questions yet. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Constantikes: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Penelope Constantikes. Post Office Box 405, Boise, Idaho. 83701. And the name Riley is so much easier to pronounce than Constantikes, so feel free to use Ms. Riley if you would like. That's fine. I have prepared Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 57 of 70 a fairly detailed presentation. There is a lot of material to cover, so I'm going to start with a brief discussion of the subdivision. We have 27 lots and one existing home, as staff's indicated. We are in close proximity to the new West Ada Schools and there is a new charter school to the south of us. I believe it's called Gem Prep. It's on the same side of the street, just a little bit south of us. The density is compatible to and with the adjacent approved preliminary plat. That would be Aegean. And it does meet the medium density residential standard in the Meridian Code. We do have approximately 11 .9 percent of open space and I will cover that in a few minutes. It utilizes an existing artesian well as a water amenity, which is part of what that pond is about. The layout was carefully designed to include appropriate design -- or sized lots. They are all about 45 feet wide, which is wider than they need to be. We spent a lot of time refining the lot sizes, so that there wasn't anything oddly shaped or difficult to develop. We are going to try and preserve as much of the existing tree canopy as possible and we recognize that our tree mitigation plan is not adequate at this time and we are working on updating that. I will cover some of that tonight. And the area is located in recently identified area that City Council has spoke to with regard to appropriate for development. This is a redline of the updated subdivision plat and it removes the guest parking. We thought it might be a nice amenity to have some guest parking, but that didn't fly. That's fine. The water amenity and the stormwater pond combined is -- has been resized, so it's now at 23 and some change. It's under the 25 percent that's required. We have a hundred percent of the landscape buffers eligible and I don't know if Bill covered that or not. McDermott is now a collector street, so we are allowed to claim the entire landscape buffer. And while the Five Mile Drain cannot be included as a formal amenity for the project, we are on the road side of that drain, so it will be used informally, we just can't claim it. So, the next slide I am showing some density transition information. First of all, when Aegean Subdivision came in essentially it was 14 to one. So, there was quite a bit of a differential in the density between subject site and the Aegean preliminary plat when it was originally submitted. There is a little lighter layout and I will cover that again in a few minutes. Next I would like to cover the transition along our south boundary and the Aegean south boundary -- excuse me for one minute. Okay. Going back to my density transition discussion. So, what I have done is I have laid in the -- the transition across the southern border of Lupine Cove and the southern border of Aegean Subdivision, the approved preliminary plat, and, by the way, they are in drafting stage now for submittal of their final plat. So, what we have is five to one at the corner, three to one and one to one in Lupine Cove and, then, we are into Aegean and we have four and a half to one, three to one, four to one, four to one, and four to one. So, I understand the staff is mindful of density transition, but we are falling in line with what's been previously approved adjacent to that south boundary. So, conceptual approval of Aegean included that little -- not quite as dark area in our site on the right-hand side. I will show you the existing house. And, then, this layout that's to the left would be located in the area on the left side of the red line. So, a couple things to note about that. There is no stub street to the south and there is no stub street to McDermott and the reason I'm speculating in addition to standard stub street protocols, as a -- just a template that gets applied uniformly across every project -- part of the reason that that stub street was probably anticipated to begin with was because the developer must have anticipated purchasing this parcel in the past and it just didn't occur. So, I want to talk about that Patimos stub street. So, total build out for Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 58 of 70 Aegean Subdivision is 2,000 -- the vehicle trips will be 2,046. Phase two is going to have a total build out trip generation rate of 1 ,018. So, according to the TIS that was submitted with Aegean Subdivision, the traffic engineer anticipated that 35 percent of that traffic would be southbound. So, you will note the location of the stub street -- oops. It's going to fall right across the second row of houses. So, there will be a loss of three lots if the stub street is placed there and, then, the bigger item -- I spent a lot of time doing a traffic impact study -- or traffic impact trip generation work on development. So, there is about 150 feet between the centerline of what would be the extension of Patimos and the edge of pavement for McDermott Road. Standard engineering practices state that somewhere between 22 and 25 feet is the average space that each vehicle takes in a stacking scenario. So, essentially, there is room for six vehicles to stack between an extension of Patimos and McDermott Road. So, I just think that's important that -- that traffic impact studies tend to estimate on the conservative side, so they tend to go high, so if we put the stub street in we could anticipate that there would be in the peak hour 85 vehicles trying to get south on Patimos and drive through Lupine Cove to get to the McDermott Road to go southbound. So, ACHD criteria for evaluation of street continuation is pretty standard property size and configuration of the current application, size and configuration of adjacent parcels, redevelopment potential, location of pedestrian and vehicle attractors such as schools, parks, pathways, commercial and neighborhood commercial, emergency service provider needs and the location of existing stub streets. So, obviously, Patimos is not in existence at this time and I will cover that a little bit more later. So, location of canals and necessary crossings is some of their criteria. The cost to assistive benefit of requiring a canal crossing. The functional classification -- classification of the adjacent or nearby roadways. So, as you know McDermott is a collector street and Highway 16 is being extended to the west of us, basically cutting off any access from McDermott to the west along that entire mile between McMillan and Ustick. The benefits of connectivity and stub streets -- just, by the way, I was a planner for ACHD in my distant past. The idea is that it reduces vehicle miles traveled, that it increases pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, increases emergency access, reduces the need for accesses to arterial roadways of the highest classification, efficient delivery of trash, mail and deliveries, promotes intra-neighborhood connectivity to schools, parks, commercial centers, transit stops, et cetera. TIS for Aegean did not trigger any additional roadway improvements, such as signaling along the connection between Aegean where Aegean Subdivision has a connection just south of the Five Mile Creek out to McDermott Road, except for a left turn lane. So, there is only one thing that's going to be added and that's that left turn lane in between the two travel lanes there where Aegean's residential collector connects to McDermott Road. There is a very low potential in this instance for reduced vehicle miles versus the cost and the impact of adding the stub street. One of the more conservative estimates I have got for engineering and construction of that bridge would be in the vicinity of a hundred thousand dollars. McDermott is a collector street, so access is not an issue. No pedestrian and vehicle attractants are located south of -- or on the other side of McDermott. There is a 300 foot wide swath. It's going to be occupied by Highway 16 with no connection over to the schools, so they are, basically, building a mile long barrier between McDermott and anything to the west and both parcels can develop appropriately without the stub street. The TIS that was developed for Aegean anticipated all of their traffic and provided for sufficient traffic circulation without the Lupine Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 59 of 70 Cove Subdivision stub street. These are just two letters that have been submitted to both the City of Meridian and ACHD regarding the Aegean Subdivision's intent to move or request removal of that stub street from their final plat application. This is an open space exhibit and I did provide staff with ten copies of this when I brought the response letter in, but I wasn't sure whether or not he would be able to get those to you. So, I will just go over it. A couple of notes. Mine are the ones in lavender. The engineer did the ones in blue and red. So, we have taken the guest parking out, so we have got some additional open space. The common lot where the water amenity is located, it's been resized and the pond has been resized, so that it meets the UDC code and we do have that 100 by 50 rectangular shape that fits into that open space for compliance with UDC. The -- one of the concerns staff had was about impermeable surfaces. So, in that turnaround at the south boundary we have added a half basketball court and hopscotch template and the idea is if they are on pavement that we have to have anyhow, then, we are not adding to the impermeable surfaces by putting them in a different location. Both of those would need to be paved anyhow. So, we are happy to landscape that micro path in Lot 7 to make that part of our open space requirement. This is a view of the tree mitigation that was done. This is a veritable forest on this site. It's crazy. And just as an aside, the developer would be happy to donate any of the trees on the site that can't remain to other developers and to the park system. They would be happy to pull those trees up and allow them to go live somewhere else. This image that I have here -- and I'm going to turn it so Bill can look at it briefly. So, what I have done is I went by this line by line to look at all the trees that are on this site and, obviously, the ones in the street or the ones that are in the center of building lots are not eligible to remain. The biggest item is that row of conifers or pine trees that is along the south boundary. That's a great location to leave trees. Eleven out of the 90 -- well, there is 98 existing healthy trees and there are 11 diseased trees that need to come out. So, there is absolutely no reason to pull that out of there. It's a great buffer and they are all healthy and should remain. So, when you do some arithmetic it -- based on Bill's numbers, we have around 1 ,650 caliper inches that need to be mitigated and there was a landscape plan submitted with the application, but it's very traditional, it has a tree in every front yard and trees in open spaces and landscape buffers, so I think we can do better. So, if you take away the 380 caliper inches, which are the traditional landscaping that's proposed in the landscape plan and the 184 caliper inches that do not need to be mitigated, we have a total of around 1 ,300. So, the -- the average dimension or the average size of each of those trees along the south boundary is about ten inches. So, right there we have got 980 caliper inches that we can knock right off the top of that deficit that we have. What we like to do is redo the tree mitigation plan and in addition to the south boundary, there are a number of trees located along the irrigation facility and those can all remain, too. They have been there for a long time. Is that me? Okay. I'm just about done. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Constantikes: So, there are some elements to consider. It is a very unique shaped site. There is a large volume artesian well. It puts out water 12 months out of the year. It's bounded on two sides by an irrigation facility that's not included in the master pathway plan and it's not ideal for inclusion. Nampa-Meridian won't let us use it for an amenity. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 60 of 70 It's identified as unsuitable for development. City services are being extended at this time. Everyone seems to be deferring to Aegean Subdivision with regard to whether or not the stub street should be there. There is 400 to 500 feet of separation between the south property line and the homes in Apple Valley. Fitzgerald: Okay. Hold on one second. Hey, if -- whoever is on the phone, if they put themselves on mute, please. We can hear you in our meeting, so--thank you. Go ahead, ma'am. Constantikes: Oh. Sorry. I just have a number of elements here -- we can do maintenance for the shared driveways with the HOA. We do exceed the amenity requirements. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Pitzer, can you put yourself on mute, please, ma'am. Do you have star six ability? Okay. Do you have star six capability? Can you hit star six and it mutes everybody for a moment. Or do you have that ability? Weatherly: Well, there is two merged conference calls. Fitzgerald: Okay. Maybe we are good. Okay. Sorry, ma'am. Go right ahead. Constantikes: That's -- that's fine. And I did want to mention with regard to that bridge, even with cost sharing, which hasn't been accommodated in the ACHD staff report, a 28 lot subdivision is absorbing more of that cost than the 214 lot subdivision to the north and we think that -- that's a little bit of a financial burden. It will help fund a regional sewer lift station to the north if this project does go in. Let's see. Oops. I'm going the wrong direction. So, we are requesting approval of this application this evening and we would like to eliminate the stub street to the north. Not all lots -- or not all parcels are -- are created equal and not all stub streets are beneficial. We will do a development agreement as needed. We would be happy to do that. We would like to work with the city staff and the arborist to eliminate or mitigate that tree mitigation. All the standard City of Meridian language and conditions is, of course, appropriate. We would like you to incorporate the open space exhibit, the new one that was submitted. We will address fencing, street names -- let's see. And the articulation of residences next to McDermott. We will landscape the micro path. We would be happy to work with staff to locate the stormwater facilities that are located in the shared driveways with staff to take them somewhere else or in a separate lot and we will do CC&Rs that address maintenance of shared driveways. So, with that I would be happy to answer questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you so much, ma'am. So, I do have -- as you mentioned the shared driveways, we have had challenges with those, so why the choice to have so many? Constantikes: It is -- excuse me, Mr. Chairman. It is an extremely awkward shaped site, so in order to fall within the medium density residential there is just -- there is just no other way to -- to do the subdivision without them. Now, we can change some of the lot Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 61 of 70 orientation, so that there are more lots that are accessing the main street -- the public street, but there is just no -- there is no way to do it any other way. Fitzgerald: So, it's just random and using the stub street and making a big S like you -- much like you have, but not having access onto Ten Mile, that just seems like a more practical way of doing it and than actually accessing Ten Mile. So, you don't have that cross-access into -- you don't have them coming into your neighborhood and going out onto Ten Mile. Like a big S -- like you have it mostly right now, but it would go around much like this. Constantikes: Oh. Fitzgerald: The existing home and using that stub street. Constantikes: Pardon? Fitzgerald: And using the stub street. It just -- it seems like there -- we are overusing common lots -- or common drives. I'm sorry. So, I'm wondering why we are not using that stub street. It's coming straight down and going over-- much like you have right now, but just coming straight down and, then, going around. It just seems like a more equitable plan than using common drives. Constantikes: Okay. And I apologize, I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Fitzgerald: Okay. So, the stub street coming down off -- Constantikes: Aegean? Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Constantikes: Okay. Fitzgerald: And coming around -- but the existing home site -- so, just like they had -- that plat had been there before, they had that concept one that was a -- that was a cul- de-sac -- Constantikes: Uh-huh. Fitzgerald: -- so, you could still do that and you can go around the existing home and get exactly where you are going now, but not have access, because your concern is that if vehicles backing up -- and I'm concerned about the -- not using the stub street, not cross- access, and using common drives -- overly using common drives, it just seems like a safety issue for me in a couple spots. Constantikes: Okay. I understand, Mr. Chairman. The Fire Department was another one of our obstacles, because we need to provide them with access that's suitable. So, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 62 of 70 the Fire Department isn't going to be using that stub street to access any of the parcels in our subdivision and I don't believe they are going to use it to get to any of the lots in Aegean either. So, we got caught between Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and the Fire Department and Aegean's proposed subdivision. So, the -- we worked really hard to try and make this as well designed and as appropriate as possible and with the density -- I mean if we took the -- the shared driveways out we would lose 50 percent of the lots. So -- and they are not necessarily bad. I think probably from a real estate perspective they are more desirable, because they are quieter and your kids can ride your bike -- their bikes around on the -- on the driveway and not have to worry about public street traffic. So, in -- in response we did our absolute best to make this as appropriate as possible. Fitzgerald: Appreciate that. Thank you. Questions for the applicant? Commissioners on the phone? Grove: None at this time. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Commissioner Grove. Commissioner Holland or Commissioner Pitzer, do you -- Pitzer: I don't have any. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you very much. We appreciate it, ma'am. Constantikes: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Any questions for staff? Anyone signed up to testify that's not in the room? Weatherly: No, Mr. Chair. Fitzgerald: Ma'am, do you want to testify? Please come up. Thank you sitting with us. We are socially distanced now, but -- Fishburn: I'm supposed to say thanks for being here. We were really happy to be on the agenda. Fitzgerald: Well, could you state your name and your address for the record, ma'am. Fishburn: My name is -- my name is Gennie Fishburn and I guess I'm not going to -- I'm not addressing anybody properly. I'm sorry. Fitzgerald: You're fine. Fishburn: I live at 4000 McDermott right now on the property itself. I am the -- the realtor that's representing the person who owns the property at this particular time and I just wanted to say that as Penelope had -- as she was addressing the property, we have gone over and over and over on this odd shaped piece of property and found that it's just so Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 63 of 70 difficult to design it any other way. It's not wide enough -- you know, you like to double side the roads so that it's economically feasible and the property is just a little bit too wide to get two roads in there and it's almost too wide for the one road and that's why we did those little streets. I was thinking about another project that's off of Pierce Park in Boise and as you drive up the road they have got the same thing, they have got three of these short streets as you go into the main development and, then, they have got a circular road that has houses all along it and, then, it comes back out that same one entrance in and out and it seems to have worked very well. So, we had -- on a little tiny project like this it seemed like, you know, the other ones -- the other applicants that came before us, they are bigger projects with all of these other things going on, but it seemed like we almost had more challenges than they did. So, I just wanted to -- to say that in regards to all of the things that we have tried to do, we -- the different things that we had to comply with the -- the Fire Department, like Penelope said, and the City of Meridian requirements and the ACHD and the -- all those various things -- the wonderful tree mitigation. Of all the places in southern Idaho that's high -- high desert and no trees grow naturally, here we have got this forest like you would have on the east coast. Okay. So, anyway, with all of those particular things we -- we are very willing to make the adjustments that we need to stay in compliance, but there were a couple things that we felt that were --that were killing us with the -- the stub street, because all the traffic from the Aegean -- excuse me -- is going to come through. There is no benefit to us whatsoever to this little subdivision, but it's -- as all this traffic is going to come through and as you had said, Commissioner Fitzgerald, in regards to some of the other applicants, people are going to take the shortest route and so this is just going to become a really heavy thoroughfare, whereas Aegean was already designed before we even came and submitted. They were already designed for their traffic to flow the different directions that it needed to flow and that they didn't even need us for -- they didn't even need this property for an ingress-egress. So, anyway, I just wanted to explain a few of those things and I -- I hope that you will look favorably in regards to the fact that we are trying very difficult to be in compliance and -- and are glad to make some of the adjustments that we need to make, so -- Fitzgerald: Thank you very much for being here. We appreciate it. Fishburn: Okay. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Bill, can I ask a question? So, the permeable versus nonpermeable conversation in regards to that common area where the basketball court is, is there -- can I get some direction on -- it seems like we are in disagreement with the applicant on -- or there is a disagreement between staff and the applicant on regards to that being qualified open space. Is that fair to say? Parsons: Chairman, Members of the Commission, absolutely. This is an annexation. We are charged in the comp plan to create livable communities, vibrant communities, community identity. I mean I can't recall any subdivision in the City of Meridian where we had a basketball court on an ACHD turnaround and to me that just doesn't -- I have seen where lots have been restricted and they are nonbuildable until such time as the road is extended, but to me just to count a turnaround and put an amenity in so you can count it Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 64 of 70 as open space just doesn't feel like it's what the vision is for the -- for the -- for the Comprehensive Plan and that's why I brought it to your attention. I would also mention to you that this particular common driveway is also on the common lot. This is not a separate common lot, it's on this bigger area with the well and the amenity. So, again, you have to take those things out, they just don't -- they just don't count. That's how we are viewing it. I mean it's just annexation, it's just -- it's just not good planning. It's not a good use of open space for residents. Yeah, I hear what the applicant says. I understand it's a small project. Certainly developers know that in order to spread costs you need more property to offset some of the costs for development, but just because the stub street is going to provide more traffic through the subdivision, that's what we want, we want to have people using local streets to get to collector roadways. That's the idea. We want the roadway to connect sidewalks to the adjacent neighborhoods, so kids don't have to go out onto McDermott Road all the way up a quarter mile and turn back into the subdivision. I mean that's connectivity with the subdivision. So, that's why staff is -- Fitzgerald: You're getting theme song in the background. Parsons: I think we are in that elevator at that -- that assisted living -- or the independent living. (Pause in proceedings. Technical difficulties.) Fitzgerald: I apologize to the good Commissioners for calling you out for being noisy. It was not you. I admit it. I'm so sorry. You can beat me up later. Okay. So, Bill, without the theme music, would you like to continue, sir. Parsons: Commissioners, I believe the last time you asked -- you had a question regarding the blacktop and the open space. Fitzgerald: Yes, sir. Parsons: And I was explaining to you that annexation -- staff didn't feel that was appropriate use of open space and cannot count that as part of the required open space and, then, I went on to say that the stub street is more than just vehicle connectivities, pedestrian connectivity as well, to Aegean Subdivision. If-- if that doesn't happen, then, this subdivision is walled off until properties to the south develop and anyone in this subdivision that has friends in Aegean Subdivision is going to go -- have to go out onto a collector road and walk way out of their -- go out of their way to get to their friend's house and that's what we try to avoid and that's why the city in the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC support interconnectivity between subdivisions. It's something our code strives for. At -- at the time -- I can give you a little bit of background why this stub street discussion is happening this evening. The previous owner had reached out to the city to -- Mr. Weaver was the previous owner and he asked staff about a concept of where he wanted to keep his home on a two acre lot and he wanted to due the cul-de-sac almost -- have some half acre, one acre lots in the front of his property to sell and at the time he and I met we had several conversations and I told him if you were going to do an estate lot style Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 65 of 70 subdivision I would think that a common drive on McDermott Road would be appropriate and only have up to six homes taking access and more than likely a stub street wouldn't make sense at that point and to and behold we started meeting with the applicant and that went from six lots up to 20 -- to 30 something lots and, then, we settled on 28 lots after we went through numerous pre-application meetings with the applicant trying to get them in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC standards and that's why we are here today and so that--that conversation with Mr.Weaver spurred a conversation with the developer of Aegean and all of a sudden now everyone's in favor of a stub street being removed, except for the city and ACHD and that's where we are at tonight and that's why we have an approved preliminary plat that has a street planned to this project and the only way that we are going to be able to --Aegean is not going to be able to submit a final plat, I think they are going to get out of the requirement of stubbing a road. That's in a condition of approval of their preliminary plat. They are going to have to modify -- either do a miscellaneous application, go back before City Council and get that road removed, so they have some -- they have some additional work. It's not just a simple staff can waive it, they have to go before City Council and asked for that condition to be removed more likely through what we would call a miscellaneous application. There is no -- or they could submit a new preliminary plat without a stub street and start all over again and get new conditions. But right now the conditions of approval for that project is based on this property and we pre-app'd with the applicant two or three times and I think our pre-app notes were very consistent, we wanted the extension of the road, and so I won't belabor that too much, but certainly -- again, my staff report -- my oral presentation to you, staff believes that this project does not comply with the ten percent open space or the UDC standards as before you this evening. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Bill. Are there any questions, Commissioner Holland, Commissioner Pitzer, Commissioner Grove, that we need to ask staff? Holland: The only question would be for staff. I know this sounds like a really challenging piece, but I think I'm leaning towards agreeing with staff's recommendation that there is just some challenges the way that it's set up here. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove, do you have any questions? Grove: No, not -- not right now. Fitzgerald: Okay. Commissioner Pitzer, do you have any questions? McCarvel: Patty? Pitzer: No, I don't. I think there are a lot of challenges and -- Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Any additional questions at the dais? Pitzer: No. No, I don't. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 66 of 70 Fitzgerald: Do you guys have any questions? Okay. Penelope, would you like to come back and close, ma'am. Constantikes: Penelope Constantikes again. Thank you. And thanks for your innovative use of technology. So, first I wanted to talk about the cul-de-sac and the use of that cul- de-sac as an amenity. I still think we can get the ten percent that we need, even if we take the cul-de-sac out and so, basically, I do want to let you know that Corey Barton Homes is in the process of gearing up to do that miscellaneous application. I know they are planning on asking for that stub street to be removed. So, we end up being in between a rock and a hard space. We can hold off and wait for them or move forward based on what they have represented multiple times, including in writing, their intention to request deletion of that stub street. So, we are --we decided to move forward with relying on their written -- essentially written testimony stating their intention to request that be removed and, again, from a traffic perspective I can't overestimate the amount of traffic loading that will occur. There is no attractants -- there is no reason for anybody to go south, except to shortcut. That's the only reason. There is no -- we are putting in detached sidewalks along with McDermott, which is the whole point is to make them pedestrian friendly. The whole point of walking is to get exercise. So, I mean where are they going to be walking? Four-tenths of a mile to get to their neighbor? It just doesn't make any sense to --to force a pedestrian connection when -- when there are other facilities that are available that would add some small amount of distance to their walk, which is the point of walking, I think, is to get exercise. So, anyhow. So, we -- we just feel very strongly -- I -- and I do as a professional land planner and as a former transportation planner, that that stub street is just one of those circumstances where connectivity in this instance -- one hundred feet from McDermott Road is not a good idea. It's just going to burden this smaller subdivision with an untenable amount of traffic both in the a.m. and p.m. and it doesn't facilitate emergency services, it doesn't -- it doesn't provide --for a hundred thousand dollars -- I'm not sure that it provides enough of a benefit. And, then, with regard to the open space, we are pretty confident that we can make that work. We take the park -- we took the parking out. We can't claim the cul-de-sac. I understand that. We still have additional open space there that can be applied towards our total I'm assuming and -- and if the city -- all of these problems would go away if the City of Meridian would like to take on the Five Mile and McDermott Drains as a part of their master pathway plan and, then, we could put a lovely path in there and we will have more than enough open space. But until the City of Meridian wants to step up and do that we can't use it and Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District was very adamant about it in my phone call with them, you may not use it for an amenity unless it's publicly maintained. So, we couldn't do anything with that. Again, I think there is perhaps some work that still needs to be done, but I think it's a good development. It -- it's in an area that's growing. It's in an area that the City Council has identified as an area of growth, appropriate grow, and it adds -- it adds to the community and it--we would ask that you find some way to approve it. Thank you. I would be happy to answer questions. Fitzgerald: Thank you very much, ma'am. Any additional questions? Constantikes: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 67 of 70 Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2019- 0133? Seal: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. I think we have a -- anybody have a -- a supported motion from the maker? McCarvel: Patty? Pitzer: Aye. McCarvel: There we go. Fitzgerald: Okay. We have a motion that is approved to close the public hearing. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: The motion -- or the application is properly before the Commission. What do you -- thoughts? McCarvel: Said there is a five second delay. Fitzgerald: Weird. Grove: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove. Grove: My initial thought on this -- it feels disjointed and doesn't feel connected in a lot of ways that our residents want to feel connected in the community. It doesn't feel like it's going to stand the test of time in terms of what residents are looking for. Fitzgerald: Appreciate that. Thank you for the comment. Additional thoughts? Commissioner Seal. Seal: Mr. Chair, I -- I agree with that. I think that there is -- I mean they are kind of a victim of geography here for sure, so I mean I sympathize with the open public space piece of this and knowing that they are surrounded by the -- I mean, essentially, the McFadden -- portion of the McFadden Drain and all that and there is quite a bit of buffer that's around the whole thing. Impossible to use for open space and development as far as putting walking paths and things like that in. That said, the private streets or private aisles there I think -- I mean in looking at it, if they could do something with cul-de-sacs instead and, then, provide for the -- the connection into the other subdivision that might Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 68 of 70 make this something that -- you know, a layout that might be workable, but the way that it's laid out right now I just -- it just doesn't -- it just doesn't flow very well and there is just a lot of issues with it. I mean between the Meridian Fire Department, ACHD, and what the city has recommended, I mean there is three huge hurdles right there that make this something that I couldn't -- I wouldn't be able to justify trying to pass this at this point. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I agree. I think all the common drives is just too much -- I mean to solve the open space issue they have taken off the one thing that may have made up for the -- all the common drives was the additional parking and to just try to find a way to eke by the minimum -- I think we can do better on an annexation. I understand it's limited on a lot of-- a lot of fronts, but I would rather see it be on the low side of density, rather than all those common drives, to have it be just bigger lots or whatever. I mean -- Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I would echo the comments that were made by everybody else, but I think there is just a lot of challenges with the site and I certainly sympathize with them as well, but I'm not a big fan of the big long common drives and I think there are challenges for safety when it comes to police and fire and the ability to service the project. The open space is a challenge and I would disagree, I think we can -- we can do better and if we can't do better with this much density I think -- I would prefer to see it go down a step and have just a nice loop with smaller -- or bigger lots, less density, if that was an option, or looking at maybe a townhome style that could add more open space or something like that. I just think we can do a little bit better than this one and I certainly feel for the applicant and where they are at and -- but I would agree with staff's recommendation at this point. Fitzgerald: I -- I think I echo. I -- I give you all a ton of credit for trying to get it worked into the medium density residential area that we are -- that that area is targeted for development, but I think with the -- the laterals you have -- and the drains you have to deal with, I think it just doesn't fit right now. I think there is a different way of approaching it, utilizing the stub street that we want to have interconnected, and so I think there is a different design to get to here. So, I -- I am leaning towards what staff has recommended, so -- Commissioner Pitzer, is she on or is -- have we lost her? McCarvel: Give her a second. She said there is a five second delay. Fitzgerald: That's a long delay. McCarvel: I know. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 69 of 70 Pitzer: Thank you. I do have a five second delay. I apologize. I see this in-fill as -- as premature. I think there needs to be a better designed to the common lots, even if they remove the -- the stub street there is still the -- there is still too much density for this -- for this in-fill with -- with all the common lots. I think there just needs to be a better design. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. So, with that do I have a motion or someone who would like to make a motion? Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of file number H-2019-0133 as presented during the hearing 3/19/2020 for the reasons outlines in the staff report. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to recommend denial of H-2019-0133 for the hearing date of March 19th. All those in favor say aye. Thank you. Motion passes and that's the recommendation. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: We appreciate you all being here tonight. Thank you. I need one more motion. McCarvel: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I recommended we adjourn -- or I move we adjourn. Fitzgerald: I recommend we adjourn, too. McCarvel: Yes. Fitzgerald: Do I have a second? Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:52 P.M. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 19,2020 Page 70 of 70 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 4 12 12020 RYAN FITZGERALD - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 3 A Item Title: Approve Minutes of March 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meeting Notes: C-/WE I� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item - 3.A. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item -Approve Minutes of March 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Meeting Minutes Minutes 3/9/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 4 of 266 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 5,2020 Page 51 of 50 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Holland: With that I believe we just have one more motion of the evening. McCarvel: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I move we -- we adjourn. Grove: Second. Holland: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? All right. Meeting adjourned. Thank you. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:25 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED LISA HOLLAND - VICE-CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 55 of 266 E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 3 B Item Title: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Meridian Station (H- 2019-0142) Meeting Notes: C-/WE I� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item - 3.13. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: Title of Item - Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Meridian Station (H-2019-0142) by Matt McAnulty, Located at the Southeast Corner of N. Main St. and E. Broadway Ave., North of the Railroad Tracks ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Findings Findings/Orders 3/10/2020 Exhibit A Exhibit 3/10/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 56 of 266 CITY OF MERIDIAN w IDIAN;--- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ! DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit to Exceed the Maximum Height Allowed of 75 Feet in the O-T Zoning District for the Purpose of Constructing Two (2) 100-foot Tall Vertically Integrated Structures for Meridian Station,Located at Southeast Corner of N.Main Street and E.Broadway Avenue,by NeUdesign Architecture. Case No(s).H-2019-0142 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. February 20,and March 5, 2020 (Findings on March 19,2020) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 20,2020, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 20, 2020, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 20, 2020, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 20, 2020,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0142 Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 57 of 266 upon the applicant,the Planning Division,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of February 20,2020, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for conditional use permit to exceed the height limit of the O-T zoning district from 75 feet to 100 feet is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of February 20,2020, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-617.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period.Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight(28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52,Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of February 20,2020 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0142 Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 58 of 266 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 9th day of March 2020. COMMISSIONER RYAN FITZGERALD, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL VOTED COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL VOTED COMMISSIONER PATRICIA PITZER VOTED COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED Ryan Fitzgerald, Chairman Attest: Chris Johnson ity Clerk` 7 Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2019-0142 Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 59 of 266 EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT E IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 2/20/2020 Legend DATE: - 0 Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning FFM Supervisor 208-884-5533a Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager '' 1 — 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0142 Meridian Station '- 71 f i1 ®E LOCATION: SEC of N. Main St. and E. Broadway ------ Ave.,north of the railroad tracks. ' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum height allowed of 75 feet in the O-T zoning district for the purpose of constructing two (2) 100-foot tall vertically integrated structures. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 6.13 Future Land Use Designation Old Town Existing Land Use(s) Outdoor storage and vacant industrial buildings Proposed Land Use(s) Vertically Integrated Buildings Neighborhood meeting date;#of 10/30/2019; 13 attendees attendees: B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access to the site is proposed from Main St. and NE. 3rd Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Street. Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 60 of 266 1 1 1 r r ■■ �n SI• '� its : I. d ,, ■■■ ■ Illy 111■I -�E `�� ~+� a��. son NIEMEN II iE nlpm ju u Z PINE Z PINE Illln■111711:1i L' � - lIII.A11l111■e--an a nm nn rnN � 1 s .x�.,,y � �. ,,,:� 1 ■.dlll:1:��nlr F.y �[�u■u•Itll;nn L'llllllll��� '.: 1 • FRANKLIN '�� �" `� FRANKLIN 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a.- • 1 - . - • in i■u■. • • • 11��• ■ ■.. i�■ I� ■■ ■� v =yM � Illl u= 1 �+i1■SI nm ■=■ • i ' • '■ •• mn n=■ i111u IIII■ ■.�■�- ll 1■■11•Ill•rlEll i:■.I■F■1■N Il p •��••� ■ IIII IIII■lu 111■� i� • �,� Z • IIII■ mm nm �u nm:m-nlr ��I,,,,mnmx ■■■■��i it—' =._..nEl■PI N En nn.nnn nn• �-.�� PI'N E Ir IIIIIIII nu 1_�:■„z�a Y �� 111:IIII!PI[�11[I II' ,,y 1111■■Enll�11..•.■ -�. n�..oum■�:nm l■u■■11111111 �J I 0 IIII-�11111111■--.IIII'�II� 1�11!■■IIII 11111.11.!ILY I I;;r • In■.■un:IS■■ m n'� �-I■III �nliii unl auu- l■S■ LY�■MINIM I■■■Ir■S■ Ennis 11111 FRANKLIN_-- • IIIII Illlla ♦ ♦ 11 i C. Representative: NeUdesign Architecture—725 E 2nd St.,Meridian ID, 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published 1/31/2020 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/28/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 2/9/2020 on site Nextdoor posting 1/28/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map(FLUM)Designation(https://www.meridiancity.or /�compplan) This property is designated Old Town on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(FLUM). Per the Comprehensive Plan,this designation includes the historic downtown and the true community center. The boundary of the Old Town district predominantly follows Meridian's historic plat boundaries. In several areas,both sides of a street were incorporated into the boundary to encourage similar uses and complimentary design of the facing houses and buildings. Sample uses include offices,retail and lodging, theatres,restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. A variety of residential uses are also envisioned and could include reuse of existing buildings, new construction of multi-family residential over ground floor retail or office uses. In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historic character,the City has developed specific Design Guidelines for this area.Pedestrian amenities are emphasized in Old Town. The applicant is proposing to construct two (2)vertically integrated buildings consisting of 29,000 square feet of retail space and a total of 385 residential units on approximately 6.13 acres of land in the Old Town District consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the following policies that support the applicant's proposed development: • "Improve ingress and egress (both pedestrian and vehicle)in Old Town."(3.03.01C) • "Promote high density residential development in Old Town."(3.07.01 C) • "Locate high-density development,where possible,near open space corridors or other permanent major open space and park facilities, Old Town, and near major access thoroughfares."(3.07.02L) • "Develop continuous pedestrian walkways within the downtown area."(3.03.02E) • "Pursue construction of the City's pathway network to and through downtown."(3.03.01F) • "Encourage infill development."(3.04.02B) B. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: All of the uses have ceased on the property. With the development of this property,the existing buildings will be removed to make way for the proposed vertically integrated development. Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 62 of 266 Further,the east building is proposed to be constructed over public right-of way dedicated with the Amended Plat of Rowan Addition.Prior to the submitting a certificate of zoning compliance for the east building,the applicant should submit and obtain approval of a vacation application to vacate the public alley and Railroad Ave.ROW. C. Proposed Use Analysis: Phase 1 of the proposed development will consist of two (2)vertically integrated buildings as follows: • West Building: 7,748 sq. ft. of retail; 185 residential units(studio, 1 and 2-bedrooms); 168 parking garage spaces and 4,713 square feet of common open space. • East Building: 17,656 sq. ft. of retail; 200 residential units (studio, 1 and 2-bedrooms); 382 parking garage spaces and 8,213 square feet of common open space. • Interim surface parking with 109 parking stalls. With Phase 2,the applicant is proposing to convert the interim surface parking(western third of the site) and intensify the use further,by constructing two(2) office towers which will require additional land use approvals from the City. D. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-41: Vertically Integrated Residential Project: A. A vertically integrated residential project shall be a structure that contains at least two(2)stories.Both of the proposed buildings are seven stories in height in excess of the code minimum. B. A minimum of twenty five percent(25%)of the gross floor area of a vertically integrated project shall be residential dwelling units, including outdoor patio space on the same floor as a residential unit.Both of the proposed buildings provide residential dwelling units in excess of 25%of the gross floor area. C. The minimum building footprint for a detached vertically integrated residential project shall be two thousand four hundred(2,400)square feet. The two (2) buildings exceed the 2,400 square foot minimum. On the submitted plans, the proposed footprints are 57,355 sq.ft. and 26,917 sq.ft. respectively. D. The allowed nonresidential uses in a vertically integrated project include: arts,entertainment or recreation facility; artist studio; civic, social or fraternal organizations; daycare facility;drinking establishment; education institution; financial institution;healthcare or social assistance;industry, craftsman; laundromat;nursing or residential care facility;personal or professional service;public or quasi-public use;restaurant;retail; or other uses that may be considered through the conditional use permit process.No other uses are being proposed or approved with the subject conditional use permit application. E. None of the required parking shall be located in the front of the structure.Parking is proposed behind the main buildings in accord with this standard. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): In the Old Town zone,new buildings shall be a minimum of two stories and cannot exceed 75 feet, unless approved through a conditional use permit as requested. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed from N. Main Street and NE. 3`d St.N. Main Street is designated as an arterial street and NE 3'Street is designated as a collector. The UDC restricts access to arterials when local street access is available. Staff is amenable to the access to 3rd Street however,the site plan should Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 63 of 266 be revised so that the second access is provided to Broadway Ave., not Main Street in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. G. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking exists on the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and 11- 3C-6B.3. In the Old Town district,the requirement is one(1) space for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for retail and one(1) space for all of the residential units. Based on the square footage of the retail use (29,000)and the total number of units,(385 d.u.), a minimum of 414 spaces are required. The applicant is proposing 550 off-street parking spaces between the two buildings and 109 surface spaces which exceeds UDC standards. NOTE: The west building does not contain the required off-street parking based on the residential unit count and commercial square footage(required 195; proposed 168).If the entire project remains under single ownership as proposed,the parking ratio for the site still meets/exceeds the requirements of the UDC. With a future phase of the two(2)office towers,the parking ratio for this site will have to be re- evaluated to determine if parking is adequate for the site. H. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalk currently exist along Main Street and 3'Street.With the proposed development,the applicant is proposing to improve the streetscape along all of the street frontages to enhance pedestrian connectivity. The City's Master Pathways Plan calls for a10-foot multi-use pathway along Broadway Ave.,NE. 3'Street and the rail corridor. Further,the City has adopted as a reference to the Comprehensive Plan,the Downtown Meridian Street Cross-section Master Plan. Specific details of the streetscape has not been provided with the submittal. The site plan submitted with the CZC application shall include the cross-section for the streetscape improvements along Main, Broadway and 3rd in accord with the adopted Cross-section Master Plan. Further,the applicant should construct an on-street of the multi-use pathway along Broadway and 3rd Street in accord with the Cross-section Master Plan and the portion of the pathway along the rail corridor should comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-8 and 11-311-12. 1. Landscaping: The Old Town zone and the proposed vertically integrated use does not require open space or site amenities for the development. The applicant has provided a landscape plan the details the proposed open space and amenities proposed with the construction of the development. The east building depicts two(2)rooftop courtyards with outdoor kitchen/barbeque, fire pits,raised planters and multiple seating areas. The west building depicts a single rooftop courtyard and the same amenities as the east building. The Broadway street frontage also has a street-level plaza area with designated walking paths,decorative concrete/pavers,tot lot,fire pits and seating area. In general, staff is supportive of the open space and amenities proposed with the development. Details of the open space and amenities should be provided with the revised plans submitted with CZC application. Landscaping for the surface parking area should comply with UDC 11-3B-8C. J. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-A): The Hunter Lateral runs along the northern boundary of this site. A majority of it is tiled however,there is approximately 160 feet that remains an open facility. With the development of the site,the applicant is proposing to tile the lateral in accord with UDC standards. The submitted site plan does not depict the width of the irrigation easement. The site plan should be revised to depict the Hunter Lateral easement and the applicant should coordinate with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District regarding Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 64 of 266 the improvements within the easement.A license agreement with NMID shall be executed prior to the issuance of the CZC. K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): If fencing is proposed for the development,the applicant shall comply with the fencing standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-7. L. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Public Works has confirmed that there is sufficient water and sewer capacity to serve the proposed development. If public infrastructure is required to be extended with the proposed project,the applicant should provide autocad file of the expansion with their certificate of zoning compliance for review and approval. M. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual renderings were provided with the application to provide representation of the scale and mass of the two(2) structures on the property to determine if the requested height is appropriate for the subject property. Specifics on building materials and color is not depicted on the elevations submitted with the application. The UDC requires the proposed vertically integrated buildings to comply with the standards in the Architectural Design Manual. Staff does not have enough information with the submitted elevations to inform the Commission if the Buildings conform to the ASM. Staff is supportive of the requested increase in the height however,staff believes the East Building should incorporate additional architectural features to hold the corner(Broadway/3 d St.Intersection) and be a prominent focal point of the design.Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual and UDC 11-3A-19. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on February 20, and March 5, 2020.At the public hearing,the Commission voted to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing a. In favor: Jeremy Putnam b. In opposition:None C. Commenting: Shannon Ingle,Lindsey Anderson,Tina Sayko, Cheryl Jones,Kayloni Perry,Mike Prata and Kyle Jones d. Written testimony: Cody Cuccia.Ryan Steinbroner, Cheryl Jones,Dan Basalone.Josh Evarts,Mick Armstrong,Kelli Badesheim,Lori Jones, Sean Evans,Heath Van Patten, Martin Schindler,Lindsey Bowshier,Nick Aldinger and Kristin Ne il�ski e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Parking in the downtown. b. Transparency of projects being shared with downtown business owners. c. Height of the proposed buildings and the interface with the adjacent single family homes. d. Proposed improvements within the 200' railroad corridor. e. Street closures during the construction of the proposed buildings. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 65 of 266 a. Height of the proposed structure in relation to City Hall and the TM Crossing development. b. Redevelopment of downtown consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. Adequate parking in downtown. d. Proximity of the 10-foot multi-use pathway along the rail corridor. e. Less parking and residential units if the project developed at the 75-foot height limit. f. Continuing the project to gain other Commissioners perspective on the proposed heir g= Re-designing the to fall within the parameters of the 75-foot height limit. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 66 of 266 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan EE BRO/ff,"AYE__ IT TT,Pl TL - o Z - 3 Z G T emLol 1I _ _-_______.__----- SREPLAN- OVERALL _ —__.--------- _---_-..-.._..------ _. '._-____ UMON PACIFIC RAIL -. .. _..-.r .-_-__I_____ Sl1EPWl-OVERALL Page 8 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 67 of 266 B. Landscape Plan ne design F----------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- -- P-SCHED- 0 0 CDD) 0 zQ rz, z F3 n 12 7t ti 0 0 0 C) ---- ------- ------- ------- LANDSCAPE PLAN L101 Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 68 of 266 C. Perspective Views ne design 11 L�� �III■pa ~ 1 II,11['� m p 9 r' k00 1 ® � ; 4 ■ 0 11j oil I LL \ z � � z BROAOWAY LOOKING AT COURTYARp L�ROAD& RDrMR _, Q i a a Milo 09' O1� a ■ Ali "Iwo: "W""tz i�.—�ii,-- ,, WX 1 L� oil. rr rrr man �^Itl r LL1RI tl4 I a>•LL+III1lkyyyzzsr--''' � \ �� ERSPECTIVE SROADWAY&3 D LOOKING 50MLASk' 12 MAkN d BROA�WAY AERIAL A-911 Page 10 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 69 of 266 ne design 0 ■ i l µ, N 1 ■ 11 �I ■ � �■ ■ it ■ 1 wit o -- -*0 Mimi t1 B _. O _ z z „wesr war ewLDLNG I FOF r0 nruiiiri ® �� ■■ii�■ ■ ■ ■I■ ■ni ■ ■ �■ ■■ ■ate ,emm) 1� PERSPE V, A-912 RAILROAp LOOKING NORRILOOKING NORRI Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 70 of 266 EAST APARTMENT LEGEND..' 0 z a W z O z a a n z o_ O f � L L AREA PLANS GE 102 EAST APARTMENT LEGEND �� � O ■���u�u� : ,,�„ neUtlesign — — — — z 0 qjz W z _ o o a � z S — — 11-11-11-11 , 119 AREA PLANS GEI03 Page 12 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 71 of 266 WEST BUILDING APARTMENT LEGEND - - - - - 7ro :P..a z 0 z m z z --` a z o Q�F AO1 s AREA PLANS —� GWI02 Page 13 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 72 of 266 D. Parking Plan ne design II - i � II II — — o - z FOP a0� EAST BUILDING PODIUM LEGEND ■o...� re ssm ■,. . mn �wo �wm-i«ioawro. m i:ss gyp" •"" AREA PLANS 0.� �rw.xc m ssn9 10 ne.design WEST BUILDING PODIUM LEGEND i 3 .4 xc iw sssu O o rnur re run O a a z o 17 A KI 5 L S a l7 � FO? �01 a a AREA PLANS 1 P R I G T L 0 K N S A is GW 101 Page 14 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 73 of 266 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-4 1 Vertically Integrated Residential Projects. 2. If public infrastructure is required to be extended with the proposed project,the applicant shall provide autocad file of the expansion with their certificate of zoning compliance for review and approval. 3. The site plan shall be revised to depict the Hunter Lateral easement. The applicant shall coordinate with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District regarding the improvements within the easement. A license agreement with NMID shall be executed prior to the issuance of the CZC. 4. The east building shall incorporate additional architectural features to hold the corner(Broadway/3rd St. Intersection)and be a prominent focal point of the design. Final design of the buildings shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the Architectural Design Manual. 5. Details of the open space and amenities shall be provided with the revised plans submitted with CZC application. 6. The site plan submitted with the CZC application shall include the cross-section for the streetscape improvements along Main St.,Broadway Ave., and 3'St. in accord with the adopted Downtown Cross- section Master Plan. 7. The applicant shall construct the on-street portion of the multi-use pathway along Broadway and 3rd Street in accord with the Downtown Cross-section Master Plan. The portion of the pathway along the rail corridor shall comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-8 and 11-313-12. Prior to occupancy of the first building,the applicant shall execute a recorded pedestrian easement with the City for the portion of the pathway along the rail corridor as proposed. 8. The parking lot landscaping on the west portion of the site shall comply with the standards in UDC 11-3B- 8C. 9. Prior to the submitting a certificate of zoning compliance for the east building,the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a vacation application to vacate the public alley and Railroad Ave. right-of-way platted with Amended Plat for Rowan Addition to Meridian. 10. The applicant shall comply with the proposed parking plan. Parking and drive aisle dimensions shall comply UDC Table 11-3C-5. With a future phase of the two(2)office towers on the west portion of the site,the parking ratio for this site shall be re-evaluated to determine if parking is adequate for the site. 11. The site plan shall be revised so that the second access is provided to Broadway Ave.,not Main Street in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. B. Meridian Fire Department https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=181404&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioX C. Meridian Police Department https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=182010&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU D. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) No Comments at this time. E. Department of Environmental Quality https:llweblink.meridianciU.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=181370&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 74 of 266 F. West Ada School District https:llweblink.meridianciV.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=183066&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX G. COMPASS https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=182234&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use with the increase in height and meets all the dimensional and development regulations of the O-T zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds theproposed use and height is harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan (see Section V for more information). 3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the operation of the proposed use and height should be compatible with other uses in the vicinity and the intended character of the area and not adversely affect such. 4. That the proposed use and additional height,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed use complies with the condition of approval in Section V11 as required, the Commission finds the proposed use and height should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Because the site is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary and has been annexed into the City, the Commission finds the proposed use and height will be served adequately by these services continuing to be provided. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Commission finds the proposed use and height should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Commission finds theproposed use and height will not be detrimental to anypersons orproperty or affect the general welfare by any of the means listed as the proposed use is actually less intense than many uses located in this area. Page 16 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 75 of 266 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance in this area; however,finds the proposed use and height should not result in damage of any such features. Page 17 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 76 of 266 E IDIAN --- IDAHO PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA Planning and Zoning Public Hearing Outline and Presentations Meeting Notes: Changes to Agenda: th Item #4B: Delano – Request for continuance to April 16 th Item #4F: Victory Commons – Request for continuance to May 7 Item #4A: Lost Rapids Apartments (H-2019-0146) Application(s): CUP Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 5.71 acres of land, zoned R-40, located on the north side of W. Lost Rapids Dr., just west of N. Ten Mile Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: To the north & east is C-G zoned property proposed to develop with Costco Wholesale & other commercial/retail uses; and the west & south are SFR residential homes in the development process. History: This property was annexed in 2018 & included in a DA that allows for the development of MFR apartments on the property. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: A CUP is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 102 residential dwelling units on 5.71 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district consistent with uses desired in the Commercial FLUM designation. The proposed gross density is 17.8 units/acre. Nine apartment buildings are proposed containing a mix of 1- (30), 2- (51), and 3- (21) bedroom units ranging in size from 775 – 1,340 s.f.; and a 2,494 s.f. clubhouse. The DA requires certain improvements for the overall Lost Rapids development including installation of the street buffers & walkways along SH 20-26/Chinden Blvd. & N. Ten Mile Rd. to be completed with the first phase of development prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within this development. Sole access is proposed via W. Lost Rapids Dr. with an emergency access only driveway from the north boundary from the Costco site. Staff recommends an east/west driveway connection is provided to the north/south driveway along the east boundary of the site to reduce access on the collector street and for interconnectivity with the commercial development without having to go out onto the collector street. Staff recommends pedestrian walkways are provided along each side of the entry driveway into the site from Lost Rapids & along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the north/south driveway. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed multi-family structures, clubhouse, carports & storage structures. The multi-family structures along the north & east boundaries will be 3-story garden style while those nearest Lost Rapids Dr. will be 2-story townhome-style. Written Testimony: Written testimony was received from the Applicant & from the public as follows: Stephanie Leonard, Applicant’s Representative – Response to the staff report Gene Pepetone (voicemail) – concerns pertaining to traffic, safety, impact on nearby parks. Eric Martin - against the proposed access via Lost Rapids due to traffic & congestion reasons impacting area residents – requests the access point is changed); Linda Lewis - against the project due to the impact on traffic in the area, school overcrowding, impact on property values & on quality of life Dave Meredith – against project due to concerns pertaining to not enough parking & emergency access with only one access proposed & the ability to access the 3-story buildings proposed & impact on the use of area parks. Stephanie Martin – requests the plans be amended to reduce the overall volume of units (i.e. 2 instead of 3 stories or townhomes); concerns pertaining to an increase in traffic in this area; and impact on area schools; and 3-story apartments not fitting in with the height of other structures in this area. Abby & Scott Eaton – Opposed to the R-40 zoned parcel & thinks it should be zoned C-G Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions per the staff report Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2019-0146, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19, 2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2019-0146, as presented during the hearing on March 19, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0146 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4C: Hill’s Century Farm North (H-2019-0134) Application(s): DA modification (doesn’t require Commission action) Rezone Preliminary plat Planned unit development Conditional use permit Private streets (doesn’t require Commission action) Alternative compliance (doesn’t require Commission action) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 43 acres of land, zoned R-8 & C-N, located off the SEC of E. Amity Rd. & S. Eagle Rd. History: This project was annexed in 2015 with a DA & two amendments have been approved since then. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-N Summary of Request: Modification to the existing development agreement for Hill’s Century Farm Commercial (H-2018-0127, Inst. #2019-033207) to update the conceptual development plan and certain provisions of the agreement to allow for the development of a self- service storage facility and retail/professional office uses where single-family residential uses are currently approved; doesn’t require Commission action Rezone of a total of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N (4.9 acres), C-C (4.35 acres), and R-15 (30.65 acres) zoning districts; Preliminary plat consisting of 147 building lots and 18 common lots on 43.02 acres of land in the R-8, R-15, C-N and C-C zoning districts; Planned unit development for an age-restricted 55 and older gated community with deviations from certain development standards; Conditional use permit for a 73,730 square foot 443-unit self-service storage facility on 3.89 acres of land in the C-C zoning district; Private streets for access to single-family attached and detached units in a gated development; and, doesn’t require Commission action Alternative compliance to UDC 11-3F-4A.4b to allow 124 units accessed off private gated streets; and to 11-3F-4A.6 to allow 2 common driveways off private streets. doesn’t require Commission action Written Testimony: Mike Wardle, Applicant (in agreement w/staff report); and David Palumbo Staff Recommendation: Approval per the provisions in the staff report Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2019-0134, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19, 2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2019- 0134, as presented during the hearing on March 19, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0134 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4D: TM Crossing Ten Mile Academy Daycare (H-2020-0007) Application(s): Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 0.883 acres of land, zoned C-G, and located at 1001 S. Sentinel Lane, in the TM Crossing subdivision. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Commercial zoning in all directions. Corporate office uses to the south, and North. Vacant to the East. Future medical to the West. History: AZ-12-005 (Ord. 14-1588, DA #114002254); MDA (H-2016-0054, amended DA #2016-062220); Lot 7, Blk. 2, TM Crossing Sub.; A-2019-0348 (PBA, ROS #12109); A-2019-0386 (CZC/DES). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The Applicant requests conditional use permit approval to operate a daycare center (more than 12 children) on 0.883 acres of land in the C-G zoning district and within the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). The building and site improvements have already been approved through Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications, as well as building permit applications; this request is solely for the use of the building. The comprehensive plan supports this use because it is proposed in a high employment area and will therefore be a needed commercial support service. In addition, the proposed use is a new use to the Ten Mile area and will add to the sustainability of the region by having a mix of uses in close proximity. The applicant has stated they expect to maintain approximately 250 full and part-time students with a maximum of 180 children at any one time. Staff has recommended a condition of approval in line with the expected maximum of 180 children and with consideration of the size of the building being over 7,500 square feet. Based on the square footage of the building, 15 parking stalls are required; the applicant is proposing 32 parking stalls which exceeds UDC minimum requirements. Per the specific use standards, on site pick-up and drop-up of children shall be provided to ensure safety. The applicant has proposed two areas for child pick-up and drop-off. The Applicant’s preferred drop-off/pick-up location is on S. Sentinel Ln. heading south, directly abutting the building. With the available information, Staff agrees with the applicant and finds the loading zone as the preferred location for safe and efficient student drop-off/pick-up. This area will create the least amount of traffic impediments and allow an easier in-and- out flow of traffic. The applicant also recognizes that some parents may want to park their vehicle to pick-up and drop-off their children. The applicant has identified the parking area directly to the west of the building as the secondary location for this. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX in the staff report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0007, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of 3/19/2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2020- 0007, as presented during the hearing on 3/19/2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0007 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4E: McMillan Independent Senior Living (H-2020-0004) Application(s): Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 6.5 acres of land, zoned C-G, and located approximately at the NE corner of McMillan and Ten Mile. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Commercial zoning to the south and west; Office use and L-O zoning to the north and SE; Residential (R-8 zoning) to the east. History: AZ-03-005 (DA #103097612); MI-07-013 (amended DA #108059794, Verona Commercial); RZ-07-017 (new DA #108059800, Verona Commercial); PP-07-022; FP-08-010; A-2019-0290 (PBA, ROS #12081); H-2019-0126 (MDA). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: Applicant is requesting conditional use permit approval for an age restricted multi-family project consisting of 162 units on 6.56 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The multi-family use and this concept plan were conceptually approved by th City Council with the previous Development Agreement Modification, heard on Jan. 7. The site is separated from adjacent residential properties by a collector roadway and existing street trees and the closest this structure is to the residential homes is roughly 220’ to the side of a home. The proposed buildings meet all UDC dimensional and landscape requirements. The buildings are separated into three wings, two residential and one that will hold the clubhouse. The maximum height of the residential wings are 57’. The Clubhouse is generally closest to the residential properties across Cortona Way and has a maximum height of 37’. The maximum height allowed in the C-G zoning district is 65’. The applicant is proposing farmhouse style architecture incorporating lap siding and stone in order to match the character of the nearby neighborhood. The applicant is proposing 162 units, of which 2 will be for guests. Of the remaining 160 units, 123 are 1-bedroom/studio apartments and 36 are 2-bedroom units requiring a minimum of 159 covered carport or garage spaces and 98 uncovered parking spaces for a total of 257 spaces. A total of 258 spaces are proposed, consisting of 160 covered spaces (118 carport spaces & 42 garage spaces) and 98 uncovered spaces; the proposed parking therefore meets the UDC standards. However, staff is concerned a large number of the garage spaces will be used for storage rather than parking and will then reduce the availability of any guest parking. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval that all garage spaces are prohibited as storage units and must be for parking only. Per the specific use standards for multi-family development (11-4-3-27), a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each unit. The applicant has not provided floor plans that staff can use to confirm this. Therefore, staff is recommending a condition of approval that the applicant meet this at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal. These specific use standards also have common open space and amenity requirements. Based on the size of the units proposed, a minimum of 37,300 square feet of common open space is required. Staff calculated approximately 48,000 square feet (or 16.8%) of proposed qualified open space and therefore exceeds the minimum standards. Based on 162 proposed units, a minimum of 4 amenities are required, however the Commission is authorized to require more. The applicant has proposed a number of amenities for this project: the clubhouse is proposed to hold a bistro, lounge, indoor pool with sauna and steam rooms, full kitchen, fitness center, wellness center, art room, multi-purpose room, library, and 20-seat theater; outdoor dining areas; plaza spaces; outdoor sports courts to include: bocce ball and pickle ball courts, a putting green, shuffleboard, and outdoor checkers; fire pits; a community garden; and a dog park for residents. The project also proposes circuitous walking paths that connect to the existing collector roadway sidewalks providing for plenty of walking paths. Staff believes the proposed amenities exceed the minimum UDC requirements and is appropriate for a project of this size. Written Testimony: Sheryl Tolman – Overall height of the buildings; blending in with the community character; neighborhood meeting noticing; and traffic concerns. Teresa Kaufman – Overall height of the buildings and traffic. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX of the staff report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0004, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of 3/19/2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2020- 0004, as presented during the hearing on 3/19/2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0004 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4G: Lupine Cove (H-2019-0133) Application(s): Annexation and Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 7 acres of land, zoned RUT, and located at 4000 N. McDermott Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Approved and existing residences, zoned R-4, R-8 and RUT in Ada County. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR 3 to 8 dwelling units to the acre Summary of Request: The Applicant requests annexation of 7.09 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district consistent with the Medium Density Residential (MDR) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed preliminary plat consists of 28 buildable lots (include the lot where the existing home is proposed to remain), 7 common lots and 2 other lots on 7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district. Lots range in size from 4,500 to 12,674 square feet (s.f.). The plat is proposed to develop in one phase. All of the lots conform the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-6, however no transitional lots are proposed along the south boundary. Access: One access is proposed via N. McDermott Rd., a collector street; local street access is not available to this property at this time, however a local stub street was planned from the Aegean Subdivision to the north. The applicant is not proposing the extension of the roadway. Staff believes these two projects should be connected with a public street connection. UDC 11-3A-3 requires access to local streets when available and the Comprehensive Plan requires interconnectivity and the extension of stub streets with development. In addition to the stub street not being extended, approximately half of the residential lots take access from common driveways. The long term maintenance of the common driveways will be the responsibility of the HOA. Further, Public Works Department is being less supportive of common driveways because of the separation requirements between the services. They also oppose the extension of any mains (water or sewer) in said driveways as currently proposed by the applicant. Staff finds excluding the extension of the stub street and the excessive number of common driveways does not meet this objective of the subdivision regulations in the UDC. Landscaping: A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along N. McDermott Rd. (measured from back of curb), landscaped per the standards in UDC Table 11-3B-7C. The proposed landscape plan depicts the buffer in a common lot as required by the UDC and landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E. Trees are proposed far exceeding UDC standards. Tree mitigation is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C. As noted above, the property contains many mature trees that are proposed to be removed or retained as part of the project (approximately 1,958 caliper inches). The applicant is proposing to retain 134 caliper inches in the form of existing trees and mitigate 184 caliper inches. The remaining 1,320 caliper inches are not being mitigated. UDC 11-3B-10C.5(a) requires 100% replacement of the caliper inches. The mitigation plan as proposed by the applicant depicts mitigation of 184 caliper inches which does not comply with UDC standards. The applicant should coordinate with the City Arborist on the mitigation plan to ensure the development can accommodate as many caliper inches as possible. Qualified Open Space & Site Amenities: Because the area of the preliminary plat is above 7 acres in size, the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 apply. The applicant has provided an open space exhibit to show how she derived at the qualified open space for the development. In reviewing the submitted plan, some of the areas, the applicant is counting towards qualified open space does not meet UDC standards as follows: Lot 7, Block 2 is not landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-12 Lot 6, Block 1 is not improved with an amenity (parking lot does not count as an amenity) or meet the dimensional standards (50’ X 100’) to count towards qualified open space. Lot 15, Block 2 is proposed to be developed with ACHD temporary turnaround. This area must be removed from the open space calculations. If this area is not dimensioned 50’ x 100’ with the removal of imperious surface, this area does not meet the City’s open space standards. Lot 13, Block 1 depicts a pond greater than 25% of the common lot and does not meet UDC standards in accord with UDC 11- 3G-3B.7 and 8. Lot 1, Block 1 is not included in the open space calculation. If this area was enhanced and improved in accord with City and the irrigation standards and integrated in the subdivision design as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant could include this lot in the open space calculations. Without this lot, staff finds that the qualified open space proposed with this project does not comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3G-3. Amenities for the development include a gazebo, tot lot and basketball court in excess of UDC standards. Fencing: The landscape plan submitted with the application details the fencing proposed for the project. Six-foot tall vinyl fencing is proposed along the west, south and a portion of the north boundary. The portion of 6-foot solid fencing along the north boundary is adjacent to a common lot and cannot be 6-foot tall solid fencing as proposed by the applicant. The fencing along the entire north boundary of the buildable lots, including Lot 14 and 15, Block 1, must be constructed as a 6-foot tall semi-privacy fence as proposed along the interior common lots within the subdivision. Six-foot tall semi-privacy fencing is proposed along the internal common lots and the northern boundary of Lots 16-22, Block 1 in accord with UDC standards. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevation photos were submitted for the proposed homes, as shown in Section VII.E. Building materials are proposed to consist of a mix of stucco, wood, and stone wainscot. Field and trim materials are distinguished by color and texture; window and door openings are accentuated with trim. Because the rear and/or side of 2-story structures on lots that abut N. McDermott Rd. will be highly visible, Staff recommends those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g. projections, recesses, step-backs, pop-outs), bays, banding, porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. Written Testimony: Penelope Constantikes, Applicant’s response to the staff report Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the proposed annexation and preliminary plat due to the project lack of transitional lots sizes on the south boundary and does not adequately address the transportation and open space elements of the Plan and the UDC. Notes: Possible Motions: Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2019- 0133, as presented during the hearing on 3/19/2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2010-0133, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of 3/19/2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2019-0133 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) v �,t�,r .Ar' ��o„�1 .�. '�..�'"• ;ti �'Yf�` ''::✓�' r.'� •�i: •1R.r\�e�,_ _ cr ,.. ':�r_ .� '�� _'P-Qti r � rs- r � "'+•..Y,►�5e"i'1 � � firs-_ _ � �. "' I � N � -.....-. �'+ray. �r►�-i - �4'Il.j„' �� 0 '�L 1. ,�' - _ _ _ `��:'r Y. Y � ✓!r 1 }�, g.h. �y,. '1 - iY�yy'�� ,c-'�.v. �r '"`� d. ' �� >�,+, r(- ,.�� t J. 1.��r•u>47 �¢ _ I _ T r�,p,f Y•^t�`3� ��.�� .' - .�rl����A�� � {.r,��v.1r�. � ,r � ±c,,,r�_'7. c�� � 'i. r - ���' `w� - Ate ���1 _ ��: sPJ� at•�f�j,� �`''� �`� �•,� �:-- ti- .Y. r. i �. i:, _ s. ." - r �k�_ �F i � •L��u ,.�� � r��v `� � � ,lac 1-7 � iiow '��. � .r� t ,i r iy •• �eta s ��., � "l /4 y �. ��,��� ny''FY:. a ,--is°'�� :. w..- � � � -.•. is✓/ice } ��.,L; ,�� I�t.. � �PI <��F?,r� � A � , � �■may r on ■ � 1 i - i ML Arms _ 11 IN ri1 ■ Hill ii'•` y - f w _ - ; _ r u — _ N1111 r■■�i�■■■ u1g ��1� '.5'�=�•' _I_. r _' '7� s onI111111.: 1111�11 1 ii =IIIN11 ■■■■ 111111■ IIINIII 1l!1IM11111 11 =l1 ■ 1 11 -- II I;+'1+ 111111111■1 1 N111111111■1 Elio 1 ■ 1, �_ 1 • -_' 1 2 1111111 '- 11111 1 '� 1 � 111111 111111■ Z I1111� -� ■ jc ± 11 uuuu =� 11 Illu � • ■uuu uuu■ _ . lull ; : __ •_ 1 �'�i ■• Z f i ■ 11. llNlll w 2:■■ ?� IL I1111111 =� - IIf11 1111 �� --- -•l�.I J: 111111 Il � ■■ lilll 1111111 -■1■Ill 1l 1■1 1111 1111 � Illll i y �.r� 111 If111 ■. 1 11111111111■ 11 Illl == =2 == ' ■Ill■ 1■ 1 _ * ■ 11 IIN1111 I 1 11111�111 •ti A 1111■111 i w fi1i� �Z 1f11 l l 1 ti ■ ■ ■■■ I111111 �� ■■ ■� :� ■� 1 1 2 Z - ■ ■ 1 �:� ' . �,1■1111 Ira 111 I■■ ■� ■� milli INlm 1 = a —� ■ I� �� .w .� �1111111111 INIIIIiVI ��1 ■�� ■— lllllull ■ ■l , �� ■ ■_� ■ 111 llryl .� lull 111 ■ �� IN=i Iiii■ ��■ 1 �` - = p r� "1 ■l1lllN■� _ __ _ �■ 11111 11111 i mlmlmlm 1111111 1111N1 ■ 114 1 l l■ 11 • , ' I-•• � i� �� w z N llllllll 11 l llll Nl oil �' ■� -= 2 18 _ ■llll Ill , 1111 f - ■11 lull = _ �� llNlll mmmmmmmmmmt Ills art Illll a 11 _ Ill 1■1■1■ 11■INI i■ ■ �11 '§■ Nll :---milli __l]l Llll 1■1'll �:��PJI .r��'`- w ..� 11 llmt ■ 1■1■ "IN 1 - a — ■■■ra IIIII �- 1 ■ IIIN w� llllll ll� ,�1 IIIR l ■ jl ll■l iii � lllllll ■ 1�17i �� :�. _M �- ..,�''�� •r JAINIl i H■ 111 - �11■ a ■ 11 Nlll '• �w+ llll •.Z = llllll +�*�� �._„ ■ •�+ - ■■_ 2■1 �� lllNlll i + i lnml 111 w iZ oil 11 1 1 11 l 1111 = Inlln r'l■lF i + - + Nllmm ■ ■ ■1■1 m1l llll Ill. --_ lull ■ ■+' -- - ill ■� �i 1 w lull LOST RAPIDS --- -a„— ;— OVERALL GENERAL SITE NOTES s SCALE:......••....._.........4'=40..O. ■.e_ EXISTING:...............R-8 I,u ro-� w i tK. I } Site Plan TONING.�. �- ZONING!PROPOSED)............ R-15,1-40 ¢ ! TOTAL AREA:..•.............•5.72 ACRES ' " w DENSITY PROPOSED:.........17.0D.UJACRE SITE NOTES: NUMBER OF APARTMENT SUILCINOS:.•...••.....9 NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS:..•....•....•..102 30.1-BED.i-BATH UNITS I29%1 51.2-BEO.2-BA7H UNITS(5D%) 21.S-BEO.2 BATH UNITS}21%) TOTAL PARKING RE4UIREO+PROPOSEO:....194 200 OPEN SPACES:..•...................93 CARPORT SPACES 107 --- _-.— __ _ COVERED SPACES REOUI REXPRO POSED:•...IM107 Lp$7 RAPIDS BICYCLE PAAIONG SPACES PROPOSED{1:25):•....S •, •�. - � — APARTMENTS AND 7OWNHOMES RF COMMON OPEN SPACE REOUIREB:•....•27.600 S.F. E 81 D.U.1250 S•FJD.U.-20.2500 S.F. 1 21 D.U.x 350 S•F,rD.U.= 7.350 S.F. MERIDIAN.IDAHO Pedestrian Plan '�`I " °; COMMON OPEN SPACE PROPOSED:...••29.000 S.F. .- NIIAIOF. � ��_ � ' MAX.BLD.HT PROPOSED..................38'-0" (TOP OF SLOPED ROOF} SITE DEVELOPMENT AMENITIES PROPOSED: limurrrmnin wrt. A CLUBHOUSE f • r;; .. nwr B. FITNESSCENTER WITHIN CLUBHOUSE) C. POOL I MOM rt t T � D. COG PARK I " �� E. ON SITE STORAGE f14 STORAGE GARAGES) 4� FINISHILOLl11 ELEV:25S7-00REHM" - - wunll o DEVELOPER: OFI MERIDEAN INVESTMENTS 11 .-. 74 EAST 500SOM.STE.200 4. kmkmle BOUNTIFUL.UT 84016 001.512.2221 AL MMAM I �� y; ••�� r _ I =ry:.._...-gin � Staff recommendedy�- sidewalks L I� kk L:kl.h]1aZ@ �Ef TAv r 6' r�T'�+i13L ARC HrrEgPAOLLcoNCEPT THEIHM"t PIR sni xLm 1FVIr 1 wwrlr i t --me 77 ACKR CKV P iIMMMTmo ww ■ L9 ti r AWN Apr Cosy �.. _ Qualified Open Space Exhibit I WMWN MDf OW9 OPMSPACE MMCN ` CIMMON mMMON img l Ums 3d605F COMMUNITY I f I + ' GARDEN DA PLAZA L NR�1 1 p P I BUILDING H Ong DUILDNIB F I I i � � + � I I I co� � 1 I I � lIN911i 1: �s I ti MGM PPAPEAIV IINE ti GIUBHOUSE I �.� FITNESS 2PLCLLECIER .. ���. NIN91NR9 CENTER AND _ - 1 BIKE STORAGE `'•. `. + POOL A'NLtl6 FFNOE ~' wnN�]'rxL 9ERL ~ (NNLBND I 1I L-PIFVg `� II BUNAENp C 1 QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT LEOI�i7M7N + l ip 60 9A 'S�g I PIen,IPnafY[Smlc 3'2P ,1��� I � C4NTACT INFORMATION �y LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT APPLGWT�DEVELOPER �'�.,N. Crz®SF CO II NY E NmANG.U M WHOM IMA: EM II tMM7 9155 uEyT STA1E SfNEEi T+EAST]00 mm.sm NO }b�, 1E11 I MM IM0 A]fi+ Bw L,W POMP FTICI£{�p6i 6FM3M PH:IE�®]1]-312-PPP1 `ti �p WAT�'&�ns E Pu .. P RELIM I NARY SFFE CALCU LATIONS I NUILDINB A Try a-Ec.T WE 5.72 ACRER D]PEN SPA(E PER"ff-36 l-I1FE E •'E'E'. E -IIFE E -E 1, MPrctEsl'+,f 2f 5F E E T-E F -I10E E -E : .E ..-.E .E ----------- "E IIFE E -E E .07 aCiERr}A,ACS 5F -- y k J I E E T-E F -I10E E' -E i0 m y ..1F1E)[PFN SFdLE FER JCU 11-]-C '--- ' ii+..iFE:i in'D,1—E I'M VCD 11-f-S-77 r GROUP a ti # •� �v + ""� Jar � _ � ITT . 10 •- �. - r -•few- # �, • +f '� s s ypr AP + f pk • Sri - .� •j } � - ______________________________________ ___--_-__ • • • ■ • ---------------------- i__11_ 11 I::■:@I @@■:€ 11 _11_11_ 11 ::■@@I "In...■� 11 II _11_I F ewe _ -- ��I� 11��ril — 11�1 lliq IIII ., - - a volIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII : k II ■■ :■ ill °°I i I.� II=II ■I In I II II ■+ is= Q — 0 ---------------------- ---------------------- -------------- ------------------- ---------------------------- I- II II II ::■€in II run:'---------------- Eff iJIIIIIIIIIIII IIII �1IIIIIIIOF11111 m'M'e, ■€n : I1111IIIIIIIIII�III III:•-1=I11= r iii 1 IIIIII I�I �I�I mm mi II - -:::: �I�II�m III =IIII I��In II Lu MIS ION a JI III = III Lu J III ■ ■ s . f -- - == - I "i - -- -- - - - — AM - IIIIIIIII - I - - =_IIII - �= ==_ c =� : I 11= [NU 1_ r , • 4■ al 111111111— 1 � II--- _ -_III ON WIN4 4�- ------------------------------ ------------ -- IIII uiTiuuoTiu_uoium or IIIIIIIIII uouumiim -- IIIIIIIIII — 1_ � I } :_- IIII . = @ .. =11- = u = J U I I N '11HIE1,11 a �.:� j 1 I _______________-_________======= -______ ___=_ _= __ -= == IIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III�1111III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII — — IIII= = III _11_ 11 II �n II �'R'� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII =11= 11 11 � " ��n' " I = == C 1 f ,No MEN .1 oil mill 41 N. �. EN •' Ill�i 1 - ' up mill '■�:'■ I I 111�11111111p 1u15� uuuu= Jti llti lr L'J''�—� _ !� 5;-.U.r— r ■ - "'TT"`I■■■i IF AMII111 L■ W --_--- �utiiuul' r' ■�. �U �- —__ ' _II III II •' '' 1 11_111111111'� _ —II I..II II — I:11I.I1.7I 1111111 2 ry ■1 ��:I-111.11._I 1 — �R� ::1 0 --� I: �I: . Y■■ u.uuuu�I I1: ' nu:ii:-�'�,11�1� I:�:: ■• , EN -Ili: uJ _J loll 7 •i:•..' _ milli ■ul ll�Z=. I11.11 ENir�_=���d � I •_ ,T _ r{�5�:11111� 'h�l 1� -' -f . : .•Its EN P& NNE --1 1 11 1-z1111111111 1111P-2i111111111 _ • .1. ........ --- -- ?� - 1111111E •- -_ _---' s _- _ �__-'__-___ill -__ '�Ilil � J ,NEEN iI � ■ �� 1.:•:_=1111 II111 _ "''•_=111111 �1Y 1`•�• fL. NE M uT_=111 I11 i 7::�:��'+ I11111'•- ' �, r .t uuu'•----•-- MISS N Him MINE �■ I11. =nu 11.11. .. : uu : ■ �uwu=_ - : i uuu. •' r r:�ti, EN .ull .... ■ �uulu= °.uu = :.i a -:-- - .::�.. uuu. ul u.F -' i...... uuu■ 11111.- — . — — —___— };y� ti : II:•�I- 11111 := _ ■ ■ � _ II111 :— _ „ s.I1.11.1 .11111111 =•__-}L:::" �.:'' ti.,,, ,'� so Im OWN � - " k•::" I s o i i:u i umm uuuw - •: ■ ■■ 1�is.u � - u . lol 1::i::: :::iii:, "u■4uu. ''::.' 1 is a_���_ ENEu� -auu uuuu 9 { am_YQI = a 11■ylll�ll`� - ul a ul INS y 111�11�- -r I� 1111 ' �� _�i�r�i� INS uwIIII- uwuu- t�' ru- Development Agreement Modification Existing Concept Plan Proposed Concept Plan I4+1+r" l REVISE.]) I pdated Flan Idalyd: I21M .41M :Vpru%ivd b3 Cit) Cutincill an IIJIIU2918: � -`-; MITY ROA i I I Properties IDA odificati t� } FIILL ERG ~ SELF-SERVICE STORAGE RET ILJPROFESSION L COMMI L su IViSI N �. OFFI E • _ INDEPENDENT W4 CELL VERANDA I L LU i I J I- el -� CADENCE �'� �� LIVING AGE LIYJ}khIF1Ed �l COMMERCIAL r ry ESTATE � QI! "411 ' ILLOTS y( J _ [L"`+Hillsdale � � •` OM*W 94/A61 , a - + 1 City Park + Al ONVE ALLOTS �9 f "NEALTHY LIVMG �1JADiYI#101�** � i rM'E".iTA*ri ELEwEmrARV SC" 0(-_ 17 1+YC GlTY PARK LMRIIAR # E �rM CI`rdrEa;r CO�4►ft EXJ IL }S NI ISI H III m - -3---------------- iy �T ��a HILL's CENTVRy FARM NORTH T* tj'S (1 N7 URV FA,RM 5U60R"S rr>N a,rru��rr ri fr�Rr�,ir Y�rw �a ,i.• October 30,2619 CONCEPTUAL—SUBJECTTO CHANGE Proposed Zoning IL AMITY ROA C.c CwN- cm W ` _, m �7 p " � ` _ Hillsdale77 r -. city Park 3 1�. M 1 ALIN .r '-'� 11 sdal , f Ele HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH ZONING _ ;o EISTTI�TG / PROPOSED rn Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan F.AµFy Rd . -- — - — r D' D F1 r O 0 CD G) y SSIMMVlCl9L FMASEW COlALIERLIP1 WlR5E{CiII _m� _.: R91WfiN1 RORlH RILS${ ' I+ ------ -- — UMYVASLL�p m11uBClu K+il �& �` — :.:.o-:-:::: 000000004oan00000 ® o o - _............... --- ---- _ Ll aoocoo a M w o f C. �oc� aoQQoc� 0000cr� C� ® � � � .•:• _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _'•' •:•:•.•:•.�.•:� Z f --_ _ � � � YOHi1 � ,' _ � ExluxwlaW. O a Tee - - - - •�• W MnNMBOIN. .•, � 10 . ELL • .... w.M�hA.i ur :.:/ C7 � V' \::7' V• ® .-.. . . . I-.-.'.- ]e.�g y'. r� �: L? Cl C VO Q L_ •�4''��.::���:i:':... fl Q D . . . . . . . . �l ----- ' ".' ) 1� W.RM RrJW PiOk ST. PELOEMr14N(IRTH PH0.Y �WRgCk HFf�'TDRIRT, it 9 i �'�� ' I � T r T y w.•L RYJUYKOM 4T. y�.'• •'• uES�Fmx wuRa Ma55[ • _ _ I�aYtll.}LFriwltl u �Iw1ltt 11W,1 SUlaMY011Y0.1 HU9 CEMLwY FURY ILLS CFMIIRY FARM Al16PNWON Itl.1 � wem�oiox Rra x Qualified Open Space HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH OPEN SPACE EWBIT OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS '�IL a v 9�Irt�•f F-E+ - za.a• ,m>t x°�.��„� =b.w.,tea 4uwFl[oca[xm� 0 � � g REsmwnnxsamxm•asE O O Q LEGEN❑ 0 � � Pvmrvy Iw.w,rs orw s xq OQ O ' oc,xuex�Inw.Ev,uax swcsl li O aD O D O O O Q O O O O O O O O O e Q � Q COMMON LOT AREAS]RESIDENTIAL NORTH PHASE] S,SNO Q u Q N AA �'/� 1aER 0.04 IIPII I 1 '1Ra� 0.°x COMMON LOT AREAS{RESIDENTIALSOUTH PHASE} EI Ipr Q d '7' wr s7— COMMONxrn isn °�,cm ox. o Flm E �6jI O _uuv ao fx .. � s rwrrtn swv ,� d9�.fe LOT AREAS(COMMERCIAL PHASE) Q •: .,. ._, suck i wr i z�IsfA yrc�f`-°'Fl� ] O � Q d v,•va,� ,?� a a ,a am xx"eaxliea�u�" �A•4�—"f.9PMtli`i�"�xxr� ——— —� I• ,saws °arm °Re vcx cF are xRrun smu Flrolw s°'Of°wrE ° R a P Fl sue:onwon rw.x PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSIRDLTIDN OPEN SE EXHIBIT ofvEEorEwormEE HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH i�50Ff°*ao OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT u,s.ca MERIDIAN,IDAHO on �l}Nb.5 �h4 °turtxE.^, x' s+ Su,c1.A ® EET EIO. Overall Site Plan ' Y M I TY 1 1 I . HILL'S CENTURY FARM *T�� RETAIL/PROFESSIONAL t SELF-SERVICE STORAGE OFF ICE COMMERCIAL SUB�IVISIQN '`. R ; ' INDEPENDENT LIVING 1 a C �r/ 7 ' TOWER VERANDA ` 7 -,T "1-''1 � ~. ASSISTED CADENCE ,, . LIVING �. — - i I k i } r ESTATE ' mI A _ ' _ LOTS 01 � ~� r - � .. } Hillsdale I° ' City Park 1 1 _ CONVEN Ci AL�OTS 41 j llf5dalgo v -_ ; r .kILL'S TURY FARM SUB VISION z� �! qq HILL'S CENTURYFARM NORTH m October 30, 2019 CONCEPTUAL-SUBJECT TO CHANGE Residential Setbacks for Cadence - RUD Lv 4 I o o W.DALRYMPLE LN, J i O E.HILL PARK W, z - a ~ LIT=! :n I Q Q D E _ III LU _ Y// EXISTING RESIDENCE NI.ROCKHAMPTON ST AND OUTBUILDING t. .. .. _--! - N HOME I LOT TYPES: FRONT GARAGE.- SIDE: STREET SIDE: REAR: TRADITIONAL-ALLEY GARAGE 6'fi 6'-0• 4'•0" 6'�• 6-01 CADENCE J TRADITIONAL ALLEY PARK 510E fi'-0" fi-0' 4.dV. 61O" fi'-W AT u:l PATIO-FRONT GARAGE ,a-o• 20'-0" 4'-u" s'a 17-0" CENTURY FARM STANDARD•FRONT GARAGE 15'-U' 20'-0" 5'-0" 15'-01 15'-0" n ATTACHED HOMES SETMXC ARE TO BE MEASURFD FRAM RACK OF$pE WAI K Proposed i ■ fns for CadencePUD 4 � v 'rliri■I .. �. ��■ � I -I- III Ila■■■■■I � s:�Y•�a�.. ._� I 1II • ..�` Ill #' � �4 �•�.ate— .. iii�lii li f' h I �•��l�F j � 11'li 1� �ri�•���i I 1 l■■Ihhhl � 1�1�1� � I Imrprul�nu�uul lun�nujl�°q�rr 11:�1 �■ �■���■ I I• �� I_ � � � . I f � � � IEI a I�I aI111111111�1111111 1111111�11111 � �; ��:�� �■ I ;III•w � -;� � ,; `` ��III.• '-��I�I�I�I�II�I�I�I�I� I���I���ll���l i �,�; TYPICAL PATIO i ■ so .. ■. % — � ■■�■■ � Irl Ire n�;III � ■■� � :�� aiii � ■ Flu �� ■ �" i � ii�ii � I' 1�1 11�nl I I �*1 II�ilul�I ii i TYPICAL y ALLEY HOME ■ SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR STORAGE FACILITY t �� e.lurrreowa y Ul i • i L' ' -k d[ • c# I if V ' — CC i r — — f c# f R f R a� xr�i sm umwa. *I*urm !Erw v AM r-h 1 17+ A-0S Conceptual Elevations for Storage Facility Avl q - j I gi��IOTLO . - --------J ------ --- - - - - - - 140RTH 6VERM EIVMDN Illr.rr i . j L ,_! 2 MA YERMI RINATION Inr.rr Y g1!,+¢.ra YEPAll UEVAMN O k x d y - �61LIIC4 RFlRI M[lAL U.4R LR]N6 �'�1 �WIGMIM SIYGSTNSM 6YISSl9l�A�A.IYrICA: .lN1�SLUYRSr _ .LIII OYd!Rm allLR fi ran�MrnT rlwcwrn .ua¢wllnxLLULl:�uma NCAI{R4M8 R4LR: Tlu SICf[MRll A'LIUYGC9RVC6- F _ w1LLXll4r 1�IN[%S IO S10W SICfi AfSVIMALL WSa���I"I Id'VL7lIICJI;RlhTAi MCAl4lCC]rAR6 'I f HOPS OVEUUELEVAMN-DEfAJL VIEW 51FAMYLOWMEHTF7 N`FIHdOYEQNI9FVATgN-FEA3YI4EA2En7Ff:- Items #4D: TM Crossing - Ten Mile Academy Daycare CUP FLUM Zoning Aerial Legend Legend Legend -- Project Location I , Project 0 FOProject Location • - Location vED] e - MU-Res leesidential j ►�r , LY �W 1 lens W ' z c - - hti' III c -E z 111[ Ill III z � a I - .�.mow.3 '.,c-- - � - --• "0'77= RUT .� E rn • I • ient � 1 �q OV'ERL-A,ND a OVERL-A,ND _ ��Q OVERLAND-- � . �� �. Landscape Plan ED r �•'�' S , 75''. �, t� '`126'# 4 T71WE ,TTTI E41) rw I �3 3 # 4.11 E 7 I + a. J .. r ..• .I• �I .�. l J + + } � i � W Y f' i— �a—� I �� �� -•ik+,� �#,fi#'F i+�F +�k�#•F�#F +F +ky # +• {, JURISDICTIONAL 8"GATE VALVE I a i ,_{�:-.�,:-.•:•:-.�:-.�:-.�,:-.•:•F.{�F.{�F.{ i I ADA RAMP, TYP- PROPOSED . . 17' N f I s. ' BUILDING LGC rrm �• I {� MEN�I I { BEWE 147C i FlRE RISER ROOMS APPROXIMATE 23.3' 3 •x-.• � FDC L00,4TION — r I �' •• -•*:.:i •.[Y�_ _ �•'r �I I I � I S�\-���]L�`.+G�'v -i.•l v *i'+ � a a+alai• fa er�f 414 a'�aFttw• .. .�C. ', � -Gtl- _Iti '*' } � _a}lf,�� F • • ' Fri'+'F�i'#'k�iT Lam+' 4�I�}V'� f' •�1 ice' -L '+'F�i'+'4�i'y i'+F 4 i+ +Y -ti1_ i1 — t17 + • �,.}st •b .�.�, �.+.,`yi.,`.�.�,.i�, a+,`.�.,`.i ,�. +�.�.�,.+ i ti r�1 pLFIRE17 HT II TH-tea 1FEE PFRWM . W.NAVIGATOR oft. Site Plan CZC LANDSCAPE PLAN ■ Approved Elevations JCOLEI ARCHITECTS 1 EAST ELEVATION NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION ON5ULTANT i � k rrVrnE`'s:rn.nirw PRDJ ECT INFOPMATIDN 2 NORTH E LEUATION . RalL i A LnUIFF REPOERY DAYCARE TEN MILE ACADEMY curcrcuu-snce c,u - .cR=rR�u-.,noa., ISSUES 3 SOS N@EL-.. SHEET NAME _ EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET rvuusER ._ •.TORRR':Hi'Ir1.C':," .. .. CM✓^d+'IIINJfaCF.JF'll .. ..iilaCfR:'!T'4H[':/,4� wE TELEHAnaN A3.01 TEN MILE ACADEMY (CUP: H-2020-0007) Child Drop-Off & Pick-Up � _1i- III 1 J fJ l :.l*.1 f TTrf�il lilt H. I'Tlii�.....; ' _- Drop-off & Pick- up ft Hil �Ii k V locations Tiff W_ Frriir�]p. ! I11111 _ rront Entry iTTj�7177 1 Loading Pone �.�� Imo] ii +� 1 No Parking ti f x _ IL Additional Entry Park or Drop-Off • • liiillll 11111111111AI■ ► Legend Project Location Project Location mill im mill Prc �11 1ii111i1111111111 �Ililll _ ,IN11 ■■■Il1■■i.� J\Ilill1lm1l■• - • ,l1111— 11 1■■■I11 111�' ri!!I!�I 11�1■11�1�■,!I■+■�1lN1+1N■■i/l���fry1�y I-��■'1■■■!lnl!■■ ��1■1e1■11le1 11■ff! ■mills11 1111 ■■ jjjjjjj ■■■1 . ■1111■►� lliFylr ~s r z �wrtx; WIN , . _ . III • ! - 1■■l■ ■1111■�� F!i■ Q•�wli��■1!1!■■■ ■L _ ..41r ,l - ■ ■■■■■■ molMIN l■■■■■ -■� JI�Ir J -�■ 11111 ■■-- *■■lll■ ■m111■a■ • 111111111 • ~1�1111 ■■-■ 1111l11lrrr ■ Z IIIIIIIIrrC 1!�■■lll■ .,, � __ ,:_ � � . �� ��:Ilii►j�i:==�11111l111+ ■■�s■■■■ll■ W e alliilj�i:p■�m■l1l1111+ ■■11■■lll■■ !�1111r► nai1111/,,�- ...1li..al �r...■.. � � �- ...11iaal �r...... _ !! 1=/linrl�� x � IIIIi�■■IIIIIi11i `'�1■I■1■■■■■ � :� ! IIIIi��■IIIIIIIIi`���1■I■l■■■■■ �. � � 1� - `. 111111 :r 1111! : 11111 :r �- ■ 1111! `; 11111 Z 11111 • 1 9 - I 111111 , 1111111111t �� I _ , ,,, e �� LLJ �_� _ ■llllll ■ I�' 1 �i� j%III , 1 fr► i/� Il - rl '� IIIIIII\� 1�� - - ■■■■>i■ IIIIIII\�f 1�- = .� � s' I I Z: = 11111 _ ■tttlttl 22 ' i■■ttttttl -Al ■ o I ► - tt1 11111 l P� 1 tt ."W 1'' ,1111111'� L� _ �mi■Iipt1 � ,1111111,� i I ---- t ; �, _ =1� �IIIIIJ + �I J, I _ - - .a _—tea !�I� E. :J�L MCMILLA111 MCMILLAN- c F ilulli�=� �===■C/111■!■■l!j � illllll� � ==�� � -Ira :' `' I. 1�■C C� ��►' �1111 C■■_! I ��I■!■�l■►jh����� �: � -__ ��I■!■�l■■jh� � ��■■ ■IR' - `IIIIIIII �G■ - 1111■11�;I 1 t 111111111\`� - mill r` ,I� �- --- Illllt - !1 • D - �I"♦ ■--■ 1 +\I111�'�� ' IIl1I►�����s� � "ram � !f�-'' � , ul[IIl1\�//Illi■i►1 � - !1� - o - o �A iil�llll►�//II .111�,1D!■' �j'�. �A Y `�L�JPI! _ i� �� �, � � '� a �i-} �������� -_r■ ��i.►�■ �►_J _ III � �ii■►�■ �� � �.� T _�R a LA,ALJ9.NAS `Ill���� f �� `Ill�1�� � ��' r~ _ �- - r,�rT'�_'�.►�,�--�-� �i', Landscape Plan - - _-_ asarew�xwc�,m. TREE SCHEDULE PRELIMINARY NOT OR�'� " U� consTuucTRH IT IT— L FT- (GENERAL NOTES i.. t 6 ~ 4H , � c� Cbark• a.� °ram ��. PAGE BREAI(LINE SEE * '� !PAGE BRFA[LIME IEE L2.03 Z. z� Via. . F MIWX Li "c NORTH r (LAN DSCAPE PLANTING PLAN OVERALL w t '� '� �.✓ r- 1 ; f- , �i ,' r •, YI YI Yi YY ... Fi o ■ &. �_ asiiYe.!,,_.,, YY IY -IYI II iumm�n MEME — "• IN I MEME MEMO I MEME ME: MEMO MEME MEME lIY;, MEMO IYi ■■ � ■■ ■■ 1 II II IY ■ YI ■ ■ DIY YY IYi_III II i 11 i ui 11 I ii ii I_ i 11 I Jill ili iu 91; I1 MEN ��� "�■� 11 11 Jill • -- _o_ e _ii� iiii41111! v im. MEMO :Ii :ii: MEMO IYI p •II •• "• ■ MEMO YI 1 MEMO :ME 1 ■ 1"IN •.. o .. m mi INN 91 ■ 11 YI 11 I YI ■ II "IYI" 1 IY IY II ■ 1 YI innmm� nlml In _ wu Inm innm uul el -91 IN MEMO YI 1 YI ■ MEME YI MEME ME: i1 ■ IYI ,Aft— I � � �'. ■ MEMO_ YI '.� C ■ �: ■ � � II i G ��1�11��'�11 Y� �� _ _ _ _ IN ■ 1111111111a1111_Ilil'i iiii ii ®ii I 1 1 1 YY 1 1 �I IY Y� ■ IY 1 IY I nn - uri Gnnnnnp iiio 11inuni I11 Y I 11 MEMO MEMO ■ ME: IIIMEIN, I II nluuiw �.: ■I IN am YI 1 �Y �Y 1—IY= 11 YI YY YI YI II 1YY 1 1 1 1 1 II IY- YI ■ IY 111 IN m Im III IN miiiniillm lmiiiiiirim mpiinii m . lfiiflnlln mnlllll „I II YY I„ IN IN ■ Y■ ,,.I IY IY it IY lY_YI Y1— YI 11 I uY— 11= ��� I I 11 11 YI ■ Y �I N �'�, _ .. ... ■ee ■el le. ... .. .. ... ... ... •.. .. .. 1 ■■ ■■ 1 ■■ ■■ m ■■I TO 1 ■■ ■■ 1 ■■ .. ■■ ■■ .. ■■ ■■ I YYI ;� Sly IY �Y C YI I �Y �Y 0'■' IY WWII! YI JI II II YY YI CC CME oil lY YI i s I IN ■ YY 1 YYIII MEMO YI 11 I IN 1 11 is MEMO MEMO MEMO llllllllm it m pm YY 1 IY YI_I 1 I IN 1 11 YI II YI ■ lY ■ 11 iiilll 1Y YI I I®ilia �I 11 Y� 11 Y1 ■ 1 IYI MEME � MEME III ■ MEME ■ ME I MEMO II ■ YI YI ■ 91 ■ -- illlllllm ■iiiiiiiil : YI Y I_YI II ■ IYII„ YI _■_ YI ■ - �l� Y I-YI ME MIN, ■ MEMO YI MEMO :: —ry a Site Plan ..HOT FW .. 4,yt,Yk,,,a43,w5„5tt *' {I�; .- h , rb 'hY�o-r�s,'.r■'� a:ea�a w�a Lw4TRLKT" f•" -,.+"F±44,_ '_ J•r - �5♦ -_ _,__ J' IC. 4n �wrrV+�. a4S'a�ly �rsi , 7. Lei �4titix`"tii 5'aia }. � Y_�..x i -a_..7 f//��i�'� -. �y"*TY}ti4ti, �F.��}• . ' l.y . - y �F +�Aaa4ya �� - "' � _ •-� E- }�`�'w��,� _ Tom' r�MiMy+hirS+'Frt�� Fdr■r. - - - _—�#• :4.�k.� y � - '--tip -r ._ vaw yaw "Feri u.R,lrrtINV, •, C� � fe4A h 1■ _ {� I I I - M Q,� +�7 L —1 TT�v p rL 4eK xao0.°crx4` `� :' - i �fif[e0«--ai �r ■ tuuDFrtEl ■ w i 1a1._ 4 ry # dJ s — To-`. - �%. Qa■ R.T `1` yr.■� z ra {'JIFPOdIT.4i .•� `lw .i�. 5 �« R e� a 31 I PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m Open Space � a �3 ..xhibit y"�.I MERIDIAN INDEPENDENT SENIOR LIVING _T OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS I_�l ff f`Aga � _ �m n s sr 1 J f .1 11 __ TOTAL LOT SIZE-285,873 SF - - _ �.� QUALIFYING OPEN SPACE-57,724 SF(2o A) N - - QP - iI, a a FFER TOTa�aa�asF i - --PE a _ I o ' 3 Wv yUj d' — V a w iJ b o a a If r� PAGEBREAKLINESEEL— ® � �w PAGE 6REAK LINE E L1,p2 f 0 J — g IZCD a q I > N N 2 I _ ry"3wasr _ �I 0 ru G tu: aj r J R Z w _fp I W NORTH I 1 L.ANDSCAPE MATERIALS PLAN ._.. is .. �� oau mm wzo �� L1 .01 Items #4G: Lupine Cove Subdivision Annexation & Pre-plat FLUM Zoning Aerial R Legend Legend Legend R-15 let let PrcJe�ct L=3 ion Pm7p-a4 Lon-❑-ror i I Pre`-sr-+ L=3 ficr; JL -I +4ed-H ig UT �-"e PF I e!,identia Me diem D ensify -A e zid entie I MU-N ; Y RUT - Proposed Preliminary Plat " 71'6 U-1}I�TE ".—E --I I I�ZSION _ :" 7�M'1NC A1h7 SETF1As7FM'�xflL'rti Jxtx y RfFEREHGES n•TOF..,-�YE,.tiRI[N14H;N. COl1HTY OF ,[._ ,+c xa •/a c -ac�at�,+r.#..n•. a.M,9.Y. _ --. _ _ :_�_ - . ! aaa.E rr•�ier s;,va•a, eac m CIr.Tr — MA—STATE�OF R1AHO ti nTse•n - _ _ __ _. AFPtICAF}T ! BASIS OF BEARWO QDM'ERAi 97F NOTES: •��V-V'L8-E SEr.MN F0Gn MOh.m FF = - e SCA4 FIE F'th4 PT TFE r/#CGWSEE4 nx—w R]SEC71645 - - _ _ r . _ . I GPIt'I4v TG SEGn¢vS 7i�ER J3.d',1J •+[xt.•:-ri: ���rr_ � + :.. _ _- _ _ -- .: . R.� r N°d'103'sYf FPG`� Ora;". LEGEND ',w i�y�. 4.MO E.F — r Jcc-osrt_ uss xrrruv�a�r x nrrer i 6L4CIK T L"1 IWlrn s.r. { .u.n rt FF X' r� S. •wi:F tlVo,vc_ Y X f1f E—� PAM G$/�7JP 09J }6 OIGVraryr c� Pxaro rnrf •,S]i 9F. m' M5 a . P. a]vaFR•,�0/TE �/JYi fXll9 — —..—(•.•iFr',x1En i I ' irVIF } 1 lino•[y:w SF_ �EF 01 f lii SF. .. n �'n""'c _ .� • q y4 .. sF. 1]`8. _ .. LJ re F - �� \ F 5':.F:: F. .112 • +arra tre-.aar+a -p a ,� �•. �./+ L flR�7VF, iANE;-'w-[M1— — _ n s, .rr�sr[w�.•r„uc �i I ,' _ /=-.: .. ,� a' _ I. Y s.F saurur stloe uw.�xe .� "✓. °�s `, til Rr �:f � swxwr sam uwnlr 'r •a �. w --' ' e,� ... r. t - S b1 LISP X.M b1 p O F40- i C 4 � ■ Grpr ElVAf F '� l =.xa s.F. �} p { wc�rmEa, •da __ Y .. 1 S.Y..F a•0.o'r s267 4F. sP86 5F. 1236 9F.F i.�u'3F% +T �`F cF .x.rML f — -- r dP'r7'I9?'µ'" rr]a9a• •llr.+iCT I . �rir ux,Lr smrxmw f i _ {,tl. a k kIw yp �7wt Nathan�' °�M1lq[ad�aYY n"j.7d k� r!� 7.s r 78 1 J. Dan �,.07 : 4' 3aF rz Worns+.�,x"y I 114$3 I 1• i1L Ylla Immix 3S il4K�� i%Blllf. _ Ni MAG< i4iliYL /1BpI gIPB - �I�I-ITT kdWM WflB �''— r — ?OF 3fl'Mwllti s'rrl[ .5•THltlf ilaY]Allf 4YAG�s•iHICYilOF?NAIk D-% : s•w+�erHee� M6 ff"-3.0 hEk Mil6iLW.SQ76f Y61f{'�kE Ifq FfJYI iIAF.i0.Thf ].6.OFII6rawXMIS tl3I Yl4rCF Ikr1M WHI w5 PMN[5k.3.tl50 xs aFunwfrak.a.aso wcHlvri HI)L ressnl Nalurl wa C Kk AdDHJSUWM1 M WEF 6•YYIS MTWX tlrnFIE1�"1 p°41&54]q !EAAZH 6Glgtl 4)L70Z 0. YOFl IMIS a'6F, - hEkAdl[1Sl1FF.i47N HkACHtl 1]ih.30.78I LF•OF 6•MMIS IIrW � //�� �� ACHD LOCAL ROAD SECTION SHARED DRIVE U soc Pvir,,.,y{„hr.n.'trrnz {E00J 38X-•4327 .NT.S. Proposed Landscape Plan 6 T. H s ITAII LOCI a 5 PLANTSCHEDULE REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE or.�rc`eo.M'ie`"mrmam p o..e. .ry xme ur.r au�wooUT i R 1 6 L1 i io,mm,.mrmcv rla � 5 � rwn�rm e } � "' wwr wmxcy icarr1wr mxr ,u r v:wu n o��r W`•c wm. m�,v.v,+rro.�. �a �ina�mv iiir�or li ..�s.�r�rrers. 1 r rye mr.mw�, sfrex � ,a .�., dmw.o.� Ilw�cun►,Ixc. �• , u IPmlrrc RMx� ^�", �� r� s,ac.vin ------ .. .. .. .. � 5 3 ,a io x 4i91 Brace a p 3 �} 0 �J e .. xcio xcr= 013 =- • I d .♦ 11 tt � • n 0�+ Y —cs W Q ti ' z ro ✓ s O a W CL • L �_ rf I 12 • y xd ,..r.. � p LUPINE LANE(PRIVATE) + �9w Y 5P ➢ 1 � l:l 0L:I i1 LJ h 11 kwc 32 LANDSCAPE p 2 PLAN � � j 71 � F � 23 L1103 n H0F{iH +•-� t 2 3 4 s e 7 a 4 m Open Space Exhibit 6 1 T. H s ITAII Loci a 5 PLANTSCHEDULE REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE or.�rc`eo.M'ie`"mrmam p o..e. .ry xme ur.r au�wooUT i R 1 6 L1 i io,mm,.mrmcv rla � 5 � rwn�rm e } � "' wwr wmxcy icarr1wr mxr ,u r v:wu n o��r W`•c wm. m�,v.v,+rro.�. �a �ina�mv iiir�or li ..�s.�r�rrers. 1 r rye mr.mw�, sfrex � ,a .�., dmw.o.� Ilw�cun►,Ixc. �• , u IPmlrrc RMx� ^�", �� r� s,ac.vin ------ .. .. .. .. � 5 3 ,a io x 4i91 Brace a p 3 �} 013 .♦ 11 LU tt � Q ti - ' z ro ✓ �s� O a W • a ��JJLEI • � L �_ �rf I � 12 • y xd ,..r.. p LUPINE LANE(PRIVATE) + �9w Y 5P ➢ 1 � l:l 0L:I i1 LJ h 0 kwc 32 LANDSCAPE p 2 PLAN � � j 71 � F 0 a �. t � 3 L103 n MIRM +•-� 1 2 31 4 s e 7 a 4 10 Proposed • ' Elevations y,"01.40 Isom —. E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 A Item Title: Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020 for Lost Rapids Apartments (H-2019-0146) Meeting Notes: CiWEI�� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.A. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: Title of Item - Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020 for Lost Rapids Apartments (H-2019-0146) by GFI Meridian Investments II, LLC, Located on the North Side of W. Lost Rapids Dr., West of N. Ten Mile Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/13/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 77 of 266 3/19/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 3/19/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-A Project Name: Lost Rapids Apartments Project No.: H-2019-0146 Active: Signature HOA HOA I Wish To Sign In Address For Neutral Against Name Name Represent Testify Date/Time Dave 4202 W 3/17/2020 Meredith Everest St Brighton X X 1:25:41 PM Go Back To List Export To Excel ©2020 - City of Meridian, Idaho internalapps/SIGNINFORMTOOLS/SignInForm Dash Details?id=427 1/1 STAFF REPORT C� W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A H O DATE: March 19,2020 `— Legend Continued from: 212012020 fLI t Lucfl�rti I i 0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission --- FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner e 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager - - 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Lost Rapids Apartments H-2019-0146 PROPERTY LOCATION: North side of W. Lost Rapids Dr.,west l of N. Ten Mile Rd. in the NE '/4 of Section 27,Township 4N.,Range I W.; Parcel#S0427110350; I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit(CUP)for a multi-family development consisting of 102 residential dwelling units on 5.71 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details ` Page Acreage 5.71 Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped agricultural land Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-family residential(MFR)development Phasing Plan(#of phases) One phase Number of Residential Units(type 102(MFR—apartments) of units) Density(gross&net) 17.8(gross) i Current Zoning R-40 Proposed Zoning NA — Open Space(acres,%) 0.80 acre/14%per UDC 11-3G-3B;0.69 acre/12%per UDC 11-4-3-27C Amenities Clubhouse, swimming pool,fitness center,enclosed bike storage,community garden or a plaza Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 78 of 266 Description Details Page Physical Features(waterways, The Harrell Lateral runs along the southern boundary on the hazards,flood plain,hillside) eastern portion of the site. Neighborhood meeting date;#of 11/13/2019;9 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2018-0004(AZ,DA#2018-079970);A-2018-0165 (PBA, ROS#9195);H-2019-0056(FP) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) No(no report will be issued;previous conditions of approval for the Lost Rapids development will apply) • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One(1)driveway access via W. Lost Rapids Dr.,a collector Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) street Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.5 miles(Fire Station#5) • Fire Response Time 5 minutes(under ideal conditions) • Resource Reliability 8 1%(meets target goal of 80%or greater) • Risk Identification 2(current resources would not be adequate to supply service) • Accessibility Does not meet all required access,road widths&turnarounds. • Special/resource needs Aerial device required(cannot meet this requirement in the required timeframe if a truck company is required—the closest truck company is 7.6 miles away and 16 minutes travel time under ideal conditions) • Water Supply 1,500 gal./minute for 2 hours,may be less if building is fully s rinklered Police Service No comments received West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) 3.1 miles(Ponderosa Elementary); 5.9 miles(Star Middle); 4.2 miles(Meridian High) • Capacity of Schools 650(Ponderosa Elementary); 1,000(Star Middle);2,400 (Meridian High) • #of Students Enrolled 761 (Ponderosa Elementary); 696(Star Middle); 1,995 (Meridian High) Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services 0 feet • Sewer Shed North Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 13.83 • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Water Distance to Water Services 0 feet Pressure Zone 1 Estimated Project Water ERU's See application Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 79 of 266 • 1 1 1 1 1 -7 _}...1 NO Am ■ - �mlul(.': IIINIII��11��'!LH'� � IIIH'•'N1.7�I'=1,;1;%� ...'�_. _ I. IIIIN111111111■1 ■IIIIII '-� IIIII 1�� .■■IIIIII• I+' - ,71i. 11111111__ 11 IIIII � -.IIIIII IIIIII■Z I}' -!_ 1 �'1 _ 11111111-� IS - IIIIII II INI-uu - 'I•..II_I is - uulll -cull IN ._ w mill � wu uuuu■■■.11 IIII -:ii::i ■114 I•u III IIIII:■IIIIII■ ■IZ III IIIII __ 2 'NIIII((( 1■■ Ll I �y y 'NIII•__ a' ■ 11� =1�1_ y,1■IIII 1u I.I _ '�#.v- T -�li 1 4 �I.: HIIIIIIIII INI1111� _ - ■ IIIIN I� : �. s i ; _� '� � IIIIII■■■ � .a,Pxf� N i _ - �I 1a:�� I _ IIIII III �:�_ �.klli _ ��� �' .=� � �:2 •• '�4 .IIII _ ■N IIIII -- _____ ____ _ YN IIIII •�- LU 11 III Fill—minimll Inl k'�• - uuu 1■IIII I7I.N J1 -w IIIII - . - . N 11Yu1hu ■]■ mil■I9■" - 11 II6. mil■ II IINIII.": J.1RI III 71 ■IIIN � IIIIII II' �1 111R I I ■1■17• .t.'. _I 1 ' x�'�-"' NIIII ;: no ■■1 f'y17'►„•r} -■■' II f�1IlI NFy ..._. II■II : 111 :2__ III YI■II � r NIIII■ ■-„■■ �� III -IIIII� ys i� �. w P11 1 11 1 I HI IIII"� I�Lm 1 d-: IIYI III 2Z 1 x III■ Nllll •..u1.0 mil !11 III - u 3_ +IIIN(( .+.. uuu■� - F u11�I11 1 II=_ IIIIIIII1 I 1 clllll■ II :■ ■1 : � a ull+lu IIIIINIIII� �I! IIII IIIIII Nmluuw uup IIIII ._ mill■■■ IIIII 1 uu.._uuuu- nuw uuu• -■ II IIIIII=� 11 IIIII Ilil4== =��II- - IIIIII■IIIII■ ■u■unw 1 111 r IIIII y [ __ ■ uuw -cull II _ _ _ :Ilii�iiii III■I ■11 IIN IIII 11111111111.11 IIII _Z-_ IN I■ I I * IIIII II I I III IIIII:■IIIIII■ ■IIIIII '�'�I�YY!�--Z=__ min IIIIIINI•=- : �. 1 _ ____ . y,1■IIII 1r•111 I.I :� IIIII IIIII _ _ ■I ■ ■ 1� __�_. . Rl11111111 IN11111 NUNN INN • :2 1 _:On I 1 :_••IIII II j _ = IIIII IIIII : uuur uuw IIII ■ 11 -. �i'■ III IN I- . : I mill NI I■ II .i • �. IIIq■■u : N uuuu■ u IINIII IIIIIIIIIR� I�:IIII IIII■: iN II IIIII III.IIII_ IIII (IIIIN� NII I IIIII 1i IIIIIIIIIIIIIIY ■1 _ 11 � IIIIII �. IIIII III IN ■I III IIIII IIIIII IIIIII■1 NO ■■■I IIIII9■ N HII 111 ■■■N 11 III: ■I■■■■ III,■ 1■1■ II II■I � 111 (IIIIII ■IIIN � IIIIII III N■■I I• F.! IIII •-2� IIIIII NI■II � NI III :-■■� _, II II Z■1 1 (IINIIIIIIII N(I I IN I g IIII - II■II IIII IIII I r N■II!■ i ■1■1 _� III NO IIIII I I RIA VQLJ Wall III■ LIMA II ELVAGWIF . 11 11 iI i� l • B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Stephanie Leonard,KM Engineering,LLP—9233 W. State St.,Boise, ID 83714 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Postin Date Notification published in newspaper 1/31/2020 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/28/2020 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 2/11/2020 Nextdoor posting 1/28/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) (Note: This project was submitted prior to the new Comprehensive Plan being adopted; therefore, this project will be reviewed under the previous Plan) The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Commercial. The purpose of the Commercial designation is to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area resident and visitors. Uses may include retail,wholesale, service and office uses,multi- family residential, as well as appropriate public uses such as government offices. The Applicant proposes a high density multi-family development with 102 apartments at a gross density of 17.8 units per acre consistent with the Commercial FLUM designation. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development: • "Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, medium-high and high-density single-family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities."(3.07.01E) The proposed apartments will contribute to the variety of residential categories in the City; Staff is unaware how "affordable"the units will be. • "Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City."(3.01.01F) City services are available and will be extended by the developer with development of the site in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Require open space areas within all residential development."(6.01.01A) A minimum of 10%qualified open space is required to be provided per UDC 11-3G-3 in addition to that in UDC 11-4-3-27C required for multi family developments based on the Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 81 of 266 square footage of the units. See Section VI below for details on open space and site amenities and the project's compliance with UDC standards. • "Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels." (3.06.01F) Because the proposed development consists of residential uses, it should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses. • "Provide for a wide diversity of housing types(single-family 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 multi family units will contribute to the diversity of housing types available for rent in the City and specifically in the northern portion of the City. • "Locate high density development,where possible,near open space corridors or other permanent major open space and park facilities,Old Town, and near major access thoroughfares."(3.07.02L) The proposed high density residential development is in close proximity(300'+/--) to Keith Bird Legacy Park, a 7.5 acre City Park on the south side of W. Lost Rapids Dr., which includes a walking path,picnic shelter, restroom,playground, outdoor gym,public art and open play area. This site is near a major access corridor(Ten Mile Rd. & Chinden BlvdISH- 20-26)and multi-use pathway along Chinden Blvd.ISH-20-26. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices." (3.07.01A) Although not on this site, a 25'wide dense landscape buffer containing a 5'tall 4:1 sloped berm with a 6'tall wood fence at the property line is proposed along the north boundary on the abutting commercial property(i.e. Costco) to the north. The proposed development plan is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density and transportation. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Conditional Use Permit(CUP): A CUP is proposed for a multi-family development on 5.71 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district per requirement of UDC Table 11-2A-2 and per provision#5.1.8 in the Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-079970). A final plat(H-2019-0056)was approved by City Council on May 28, 2019 that includes the subject property; recordation of the plat is currently in process. Development Agreement(DA): The DA requires certain improvements for the overall Lost Rapids development to be completed with the first phase of development including the following: construction of a detached 10' wide multi-use pathway within the street buffer along SH 20- 26/Chinden Blvd. and dedication of a 14' wide public pedestrian easement for the pathway; and installation of the street buffer landscaping and 10' multi-use pathway/sidewalk along the entire frontage of SH 2O-26/Chinden Blvd. and street buffer landscaping and 5' wide detached sidewalk Page 5 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 82 of 266 along N. Ten Mile Rd. These improvements are required to be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within this development. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on the site; a detached sidewalk and parkway landscaping exists along W. Lost Rapids Dr. Proposed Use Multi-family development consisting of 102 residential(apartment)units in 9 structures consisting of a mix of 1-bedroom(30),2-bedroom(51), and 3-bedroom(21)units at a gross density of 17.8 units per acre. Square footages(s.f.) of the unit types per the submitted floor plans are as follows: 1-bedroom units are 775 & 816 s.f.; 2-bedroom units are 1,054 & 1,174 s.f.; and 3-bedroom units are 1,251 & 1,340 s.f. The proposed number and type of structures and number of units in each is as follows: (2) 3-story garden-style 24-plexes—Type 1 (Buildings G&H); (1) 3-story garden-style 12-plex—Type 2 (Building I); and(6) 2-story townhome-style 7-plexes—Type 3 (Buildings A-F). Two(2) 5-bay(depicted as Storage 1 &2) and(1) 6-bay(depicted as Storage 3) storage structures are proposed for residents' needs;the 6-bay structure houses (2)bays for maintenance equipment. Dimensional Standards: 11-2A-8 All development must comply with the dimensional standards of the R-40 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 and 11-4-3-27B.1.When the property is subdivided,the proposed structures should comply with the setback standards and the Building Code separation requirements. Site Plan: A site plan was submitted showing how the site is proposed to develop with(9)multi-family structures, (3) storage structures to accommodate residents' needs and a 2,494 s.f. clubhouse with associated parking and access driveways(see Section VII.A). UDC 11-3A-19B.2 requires pedestrian connections provided from adjacent properties to be extended; a pedestrian connection to this property was required to be provided with development of the property to the north(i.e. Costco). The site plan should be revised to depict a pathway connection in alignment with that provided to the subject properties' north boundary; said pathway should connect to an internal walkway.Walkways should also be provided adjacent to the curb/driveway on the east side of Building C,the west side of Building B, and along the entire east boundary of the site. Open Space& Site Amenity(UDC 11-3G-3): Residential developments over 5 acres in size are required to provide a minimum 10%qualified open space and site amenities per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3; this is in addition to that required for multi-family developments in UDC 11-4-3-27(see analysis below under Specific Use Standards). Based on 5.71 acres, a minimum of 0.57 of an acre of qualified open space and(1)site amenity is required. The proposed plan complies with the minimum open space standards by providing 0.80 of an acre (or 14%)of qualified open space consisting of the collector street buffer along W. Lost Rapids Dr. and linear open space areas at least 20' wide with an access at each end landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3G-3E, as depicted on the exhibit in Section VIII.C. The proposed amenities consisting of a clubhouse, swimming pool, fitness center and enclosed bike storage meet the minimum standards in UDC 11-3G-3C;however,the on-site storage does not qualify as Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 83 of 266 an amenity because it's not available to all residents, only those who pay extra for a storage bay, and the dog park does not qualify because it doesn't comply with the standards listed in UDC I I- 3G-3C.1h. Additional qualified amenities are required per the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27C as detailed below. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan was submitted showing how the site is proposed to be landscaped(see Section VII.B).A 20' foot wide street buffer is required along W. Lost Rapids Dr. landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; trees are proposed but no shrubs are depicted—shrubs should be provided along with trees within the buffer per UDC 11-3B-7C.3a.Parking lot landscaping is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C; a tree and planter area should be added at the end of the row of parking on the southeast side of the clubhouse. Street buffers are required to be constructed with the subdivision improvements; however, if this site develops prior to the plat recording and the subdivision improvements being completed,the buffer should be installed with development of this site. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed to be provided from one(1) access via W. Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street, which runs along the southern boundary of the site in alignment with N. Calcutta Ave. on the south side of the street. Staff recommends the northern east/west driveway between Buildings H and I connect to the abutting north/south driveway so that residents can access the commercial portion of the development without having to access the collector street and for secondary emergency access as required by the Fire Department. Parking(UDC 11-3C-6): Per UDC Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family developments,the minimum number of off-street parking spaces are required to be provided: 1-bedroom units require 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit with at least one of those in a covered carport or garage;and 2-and 3- bedroom units require 2 spaces per unit with at least one in a covered carport or garage. For non- residential uses(i.e.the clubhouse), a minimum of one(1) space for every 500 square feet(s.f.)of gross floor area is required. A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space is required per every 25 proposed vehicle spaces per UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C- 5C. Based on(30) 1-bedroom units and(72)2-and 3-bedroom units,a minimum of 102 covered carport or garage spaces and 87 uncovered parking spaces should be provided; and based on 2,494 s.f. for the clubhouse, a minimum of 4 spaces should be provided for an overall total of 193 spaces. A total of 107 carport spaces and 93 open/surface spaces are proposed for a total of 200 spaces,which exceeds the minimum standard by 7 spaces. Although extra spaces are proposed, the Fire Department is concerned that overflow parking will block fire lanes and recommends additional parking is provided for visitors and families with multiple cars. Based on 200 proposed vehicle spaces, a minimum of 8 bicycle parking spaces are required; a total of 8 spaces are proposed in 4 locations on the site in accord with UDC standards. For convenience and better proximity to each building,Staff recommends (3) additional bicycle racks are added as follows: (1)between Buildings C &D,(1)between Buildings D & E, and (1)for Building I. Sidewalk/Pathways(UDC 11-3A-17): A minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required along W. Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street, as proposed, in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. Because of the close proximity of these units to services to the north, Staff recommends a minimum 5-foot wide pathway/sidewalk is provided along the east boundary of the site Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 84 of 266 adjacent to the north/south driveway and along either side of the entry driveway from W. Lost Rapids Dr.between Buildings B and C as noted on the site plan in Section VIILA. Waterways: The Harrell Lateral runs along the southern boundary of the eastern portion of the site and is depicted on the Landscape plan in a 25' wide easement and is proposed to be piped; the Irrigation District does not allow trees within the easement. Fencing: A 6-foot tall wood fence is proposed along the north,west,east and western portion of the south boundary of the site as depicted on the landscape plan. Staff recommends the fence along the east boundary adjacent to the north/south driveway is relocated a minimum of 5 feet to the west from the back of the recommended sidewalk with a landscaped parkway in between the fence and sidewalk. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed 2-and 3-story garden-style and 2-story townhome-style multi-family structures, storage structures and clubhouse(see Section VIII.D). Building materials consist primarily of horizontal and board&batten siding with stucco and brick accents. Final design is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. The building elevations submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications should be consistent with those standards and with the elevations submitted with the subject application. Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: Prior to submittal for building permits, a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. Plans submitted with those applications should comply with the conditions of approval in Section VIII of this report. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27,Multi-Family Development. Staff s analysis of the proj ect's consistency with those standards is included below. 11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios,and how they impact adjacent properties. The proposed project complies with this standard. 2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures that are not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. The sizes ofprivate areas vary by unit but all are a minimum of 80 sf. in accord with this standard as depicted on the floor plans. Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 85 of 266 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate,designated and screened area. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.Proposed parking exceeds UDC standards by 6 spaces. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office.Proposed within the clubhouse b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access.Proposed within the clubhouse d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) A maintenance storage area and directory& map of the development should be depicted on the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred (500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.Based on 81 units, a total of 20,250 s.f of common open space is required. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. Based on 21 units, a total of 7,350 s f of common open space is required. At a minimum, a total of 27,600 sf. (or 0.63 of acre) of outdoor common open space is required to be provided in the proposed development in accord with the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27C.A total of 0.69 of an acre (or 12%of the site) is proposed to be provided consisting of areas at least 20'x 20'in size as shown on the exhibit in Section VIII.0 in excess of the minimum standards; 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area,and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). The common open space proposed toward this standard complies with these dimensions. 3. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. This project is proposed to be developed in one (1)phase. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4') in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff.retroactive to 2-4- Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 86 of 266 2009) The buffer along W. Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street, qualifies toward the open space standards in UDC 11-3G-3 and is not counted toward the open space standard in UDC 11-4-3-27. There is a berm with a fence on top that separates Buildings C-F from the collector street;Staff recommends a break in the berm/fence and a pathway is provided between Buildings D &E to allow for pedestrian connectivity from the internal sidewalk to the sidewalk along W.Lost Rapids Dr. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2) Fitness facilities. (3) Enclosed bike storage. (4) Public art such as a statue. b. Open space: (1) Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100)in size. (2) Community garden. (3) Ponds or water features. (4) Plaza. c. Recreation: (1) Pool. (2) Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2)amenities shall be provided from two(2)separate categories. b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy five(75)units,three (3) amenities shall be provided,with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy five(75)units or more, four(4) amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, ef£ 9-15-2005) Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 87 of 266 Based on 102 proposed units in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D.2d,Staff recommends a minimum of 5 amenities be provided with at least one from each of the above-listed categories in addition to the(1) amenity required by UDC 11-3G-3C noted above totaling 6 amenities for the development. Proposed amenities consist of a clubhouse, swimming pool,fitness center, enclosed bike storage, a dog park and on-site storage. The on-site storage doesn't qualify as an amenity as it's not available to all residents, only those who pay extra for a storage bay, and the dog park doesn't qualify either as it doesn't comply with the standards in UDC 11-3G-3C.lh as it isn't at least 50'x 100'in size. The clubhouse,fitness facility and enclosed bike storage qualms as Quality of Life amenities and the swimming pool qualifies as a Recreation amenity.At least two(2) additional qualified site amenities are needed to comply with the minimum standards. Staff recommends children's play equipment is provided which qualifies as a Recreation amenity,and an amenity from the Open Space category such as a picnic area with a shelter,picnic tables and BBQ or a community garden,ponds or water features, or a plaza (or other comparable amenity)per the standards in UDC 11-4-3- 27D. The decision making body is authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under UDC 11-4-3-27D provided that the improvement(s)provide a similar level of amenity. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide. b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty four inches(24")shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The landscape plan should be revised to include landscaping as required. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development,including,but not limited to, structures,parking,common areas,and other development features.(Ord. 16-1672,2- 16-2016) The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. VII.DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section IX of this report. Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 88 of 266 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(dated: 10/15/2019) &Pedestrian Plan LOST RAPIDS OVERALL GENERAL SITE NOTES .•r. —_ - SCALE:....... ... ............ ZONING 1E10STING]:...... ... ... R•S 1HEAIEHIIE[ISHFFEF� •+ u . .•• ZONING(PROPOSED): .......R-15�R•40 � ,•••.w .. .•. m�..,v....,. rws1 an m . .m TOTAL AREA:.................5.72 AORES .. •. a .,A DENSITY PROPOSER: ........1 7.8 D.O.AORE SITE NOTES: NUMBER OF APARTMENT BUILCINGS:............9 NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS:...............192 I 30.1-BED.I-BATH UNITS(29%1 51.3-BED.-2-BATH UNITS[50%, 21.S-BED.2 BATH UNITS{21%I TOTAL PARKING REQUMEO-PROPOSED:....194,200 OPEN SPACES:.. ... ...............95 CARPORT SPACES:.................107 PARKING RATIO:1.90'UNIT -:..-- -- COVERED SPACES REQUIRED PRO►OSED:....1OZ107 LOST RAPIDS BICYCLE PARKING SPACES PROPOSED(1:25[:...6 APARTMENTS AND �W%/�;r �J/�• w,w.�� i • �_ r i i " Tom HUME9 �.o "UiL �_�" FFa i COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIRED:. .,27.EOO S,F. Y Si D.O. 250 S F�6.0.=YO 2500 S.F. MERIDIAN.IQAHi7 /"C7-� vfl • i LJ' tw B 21:.U.�350 S.F�D.O.= 7.350 S.P. 7 COMMON OPEN SPACE PROPOSED:.....29A DO S F. `,,. .�.j.. • I ! _ MAX.BID.HT PROPOSED......... ... .... ..0' TOP OF SLOPED ROOF] SITE DEVELOPMENT AMEN ES PRO POSED: { / � ! A. CLUBHOUSE ��'• 'r.A B. FfffIESS CENTER(WITHIN CLUBHOUSE) C. POOL i�awe una D. OOG PARK _ E ON BETE STORAGE[14 STORAGE GAAAG FS� #n— Staff DEVELOPER: BFIMERIDEkNINNESTMEMTS II74 EAST 500 SOUTH.STE.Y0.1 BCU NTI FUL UT 94010 recommended III sidewalks YFCINITY MAP ARCHITECT, PLANNER: SITE P1d11 ` -FA '9 At,0 1.�.._�. m PRCI«STE O9Hc�, THEAIN!": ;i r Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 89 of 266 I I ■ FINISH FLOOR ELEV:2557.00 I tr iC— Mom„ o■�r1u kwwlak � wl�awox I Io c I 1_ -ti'lu Uj 11 � - _ I ■ pnEe IIR. • W IHI■9 o ClYIX0u3F a. i u1■rIT ■31YI■iI In 0 100 200 300 Plan Scale: 1"=100' E N G I N E E R I N G 9233 WEST STATE STREET BOISE,IPAHO 33724 /'/'�[' �^/''� PHONE(208F 639-6939 COSTCO kmeFgIIp—M MERIDIAN, ID GATE: 2�13J3A PROJECT: 17-SA4 SHEET: SITE LAYOUT 1 ❑1 1 Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 90 of 266 i 1 . 1' • . 1 '1 � � i • 1" f ;r I _ WPM Mr. SfACKROCK GRb.0 F' OOL•f ,rc C. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 3/13/2020) 0005, ----- -------- -----------= ---- ss ------------- JBRFMBvvv BBIEBBXIB i __ � r i nnr�n.uxs r CLBBNBBCE NIBERR _ BBBBIBBB '' CENTER AMB Bin STBRYE \\\ I m *QUALIFIED OPE DPEN SPACE EXHIBIT \ II O w� Z e e....wM..nm...m � O BRIIBIBFB � I Q PRELIMINARY SRE C4LCLLATIONS Y '� � BBBBMB r rrn�enEe �— n u 4 I z t i cwnnn cax swce rm sso rr-ss � .___-_ ' _wrnm va v.sevom.._._,yr _-____ _ vnxe Hans. PRELMINARYNOT kin w:wn aec mue LL• n EX1.0 Page 15 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 92 of 266 D. Building Elevations (dated: 9/13/2019), Typical Floor Plans &Renderings g� TAO "'"•""� -- - -- ���«.� INEAIOIIKISIFFI�II -4 u m..... ». FRONT ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 1 LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHO ti i { REAR ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 1 A5.0 LEFT ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 1 RIGHT ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 1 - '""-': """-"' EY.IEPIOP�EF�ill]NS I A' Type 1 o LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTSAND -- TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHO FRF- L ®\ O J s a 0{ `ytT pP\oa oa BUILDING WE 1 i mIDIR FLUOR PIAN A2.0 Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 93 of 266 ® TA Ow m m 1 FRONT ELEVATION-BR11011G TNPE2 3LEFT ELEVATION-BUILDING TPPE2 LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS ANO TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IBAHO m ax REAR ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 2 RIGHT ELEVATION-BUILDING TTPE 2 A5.1 Type 2 F�-REF,4n,�. LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS AND �a TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHO } BUILDING TYPE L u TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN A2.1 BULnwe rnE z DODRPLNS Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 94 of 266 TAD _*s7aa RIGHT EIE11Allp1-BUILDING 7TPE 3 REAR ELEVATION-BUILDING TYPE 3 �LDST RAPIDS APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHD _p FF ]0 ❑ ® 31EFT E"ATION-BUILDING TTPE 3 Y A FRONT ELEVATION-BUILDING TTPE 3 + f E]RERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE A5.2 �EVRB,aSUNS -� ✓ IiE�AI[NlrtpSi�fi61�R LOST RAPIDS D e APARTMENTS AND E '__� - TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHO BUILDING TYPE a 1 GROUND FLOOR PLAN .,.®— I I I I I I A _ l D E — T BUILDING TYPE R UPPER FLOOR PLAN A2.2 RUIMINGTWE3 RDDR PLWIS Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 95 of 266 ® r - ❑ LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS AND TDWNHUMES MERIDIAN.IDAHD 1 FLOOR RAN �NR 1v1.11v1.1 211 PLAN UNR-lxT.3 0 a e L Boa Floor Plans A3.0 FLDDRFLOOR P . orn'r`OeNc r0 A =. u - n. 'fll-tALq�gS IT"1'- I L rL li v i LEIi. LDsr RAPIDS -- APARTMENTS AND TDWNHUMES MERIDIAN.IDAHD FLOOR FUN UNET 312-1 FLDDR PLLM OMIT 312.E i17- � l cebo F FLOOR PLAN UNLTTH2v2.1 URR 1M 4f2.3E FLOOR PLANUNITTH312.3 A .J co uNT Funs Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 96 of 266 TA®r- SOVM ELEVATION-CLUBHOUSE EAST ELEVATION-CLUBHOUSE LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES -4�= M MERIDIAN,IDAHO 3NOORTH ELEVATION-CLUBHOUSE A WEST ELEVATION-CLUBHOUSE e Clubhouse A5.2 TAD ............ Vli'AEUA�CISdF1ffA r-------- ------------------------------------------------ ❑ 1 LUST RAPIDS I •y i APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES I II ❑, Mr510LAN.IDAHO O7- Cl - — I vl% - . � 0 I -X., o a I ®� 0---------------- ---------------------- 'CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN A3.2 Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 97 of 266 > PLAN AND SECTION KOM OTIS TAD-- ---- ----- ---- ------ ----- ----- --------- ------- RKRAGE BUILDING PUKHAIWIFEWANCE BUILDIN a PLAN I.my ff0RAmE BULGING PLAIN 2 6 DAY ......... LOST RAPIDS 61 APARTMENTS AND m m TOWNIHOMER 4-4- Fq ELEVATION KEYNOTER MERIDIAN.IDMO 11 ELEVATION 3 I-GAY FRO"r"AT"' 4—RAT- HAUB 5 5—NA`BEAR ELEVATION 66 RAT BEAR ELEVATION =W.7 Iq AG2.0 A TYPICAL GARAGE SEETION BTYPICAL GARAGE SECTION CGARAGE DOORJAMB DETAIL > 1> .7----- ---- ------ TA 1 4-H-T.CARPORT PUN 2 5`71 R 20"1 P ^II3—a-mr-c AN P ON T P u I -7�771 LOST RAPIDS 4—4-a-Ay CARPOIFFELIEVATION 5—6-B-Ay Our CARPORT ELEVATION CARPORTCARPORTELEVATION APARTM E WTSAND - TCWNHOMES pad > MERIIIAI,11W ---- ------- ---- ---- -----i i L 7 cAnmffF—mm 812-BAY CARPORT PLAN VVI IF- I IISS 10-DAY CARPORT ELEVATION 1 011-IAI CARPORT ELEVATION KEYNOTES Z 7 1' ,w7 _7�� GENERAL NOTES AT—Tp--CARPORT END ELEVATION TYPICAL CARPORT SECTION AG2.1 Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 98 of 266 yr - r TAO:- k �7 wxm,wi -E 1 TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEV. )TRASH ENCLOSURE OATE ELEV. TRASH ENCLOSURE SECTION LOST RAPIDS L APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOMES MERIDIAN,IDAHO sww A I I I�eaw. A� Pw.• � I ENLARGED TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN AG2.2 TRASH ENCLOSURE PI dNS ANI1 CFf.T1f1NC Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 99 of 266 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS A. Planning Division 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the provisions in the Development Agreement(H-2018-0004 Inst. #2018-079970)and the conditions contained herein. 2. The Developer/Owner shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 27,Multi-Family Development. 3. The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E as follows: 1)the landscaped area shall be at least three feet(3)wide; 2) for every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty four inches(24") shall be planted; and 3)ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. b. Depict a maintenance storage area and a directory&map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. c. Shrubs shall be provided along with trees within the street buffer along W. Lost Rapids Dr. per UDC 11-313-7C.3a. d. A pedestrian pathway shall be provided to the north in alignment with that planned to the subject property for pedestrian interconnectivity in accord with UDC 11-3A- 1913.2a and shall connect to an internal walkway as depicted on the pedestrian plan in Section VIII.A. e. Include a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the north/south driveway. £ Depict a break in the berm/fence and a pathway between Buildings D&E to allow for pedestrian connectivity from the internal walkway to the sidewalk along W. Lost Rapids Drive. g. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk on either side of the driveway from W. Lost Rapids Dr. and along the entire east boundary of the site adjacent to the curb/driveway. h. Depict a tree and planter area at the end of the row of parking on the southeast side of the clubhouse. i. Extend the access driveway between Buildings H and I to the east boundary of the site for access to the north/south driveway planned to abut the site for secondary emergency access for the Fire Department and access and interconnectivity with the commercial portion of the development. j. Provide additional bicycle racks between Buildings C&D and D&E and for Building I. k. Depict all site amenities on the plan. At least two(2)qualified site amenities are required in addition to the proposed clubhouse, swimming pool, fitness facility and enclosed bike storage per the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D, as follows: children's play equipment; and an amenity from the Open Space category such as a Page 23 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 100 of 266 picnic area with a shelter,picnic tables and BBQ or a community garden, or ponds or water features,or a plaza(or other comparable amenity)per the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27D. Details of such amenities shall be included. The Applicant should address at or before the public hearing which amenities they propose to provide to satisfy this requirement. 1. Relocate the fence along the east boundary of the site a minimum of 5 feet from the back side of the sidewalk required above and landscape the area. m. Shift Building G to the east consistent with the qualified open space exhibit. 4. Qualified open space shall be provided within the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C and 11-4-3-27D as shown in the qualified open space exhibit in Section VIII.C. 5. All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F. A recorded copy of said documents shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permits on this site, a property boundary adjustment application shall be approved and a Record of Survey recorded for the reconfiguration of existing parcels to coincide with the boundary of the preliminary plat per requirement of the Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-079970); or, the final plat shall be recorded that depicts the proposed configuration of the site. 7. The proposed structures shall comply with the setback standards listed in UDC Table 1I- 2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district and the Building Code separation requirements; to ensure compliance with setback standards,the plat should be recorded prior to submittal of these applications. 8. Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within this development,the street buffer landscaping and detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway/sidewalk within a 14- foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be completed along the entire frontage of SH 20-26/Chinden Blvd.; and the street buffer landscaping and 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Road shall be completed for the overall Lost Rapids development per requirement of the Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-079970). 8. Street buffers are required to be constructed with the subdivision improvements; however, if this site develops prior to the plat recording and the subdivision improvements being completed,the buffer shall be installed with development of this site. 9. All structures on the site shall be designed to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application(s)is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications. B. Public Works Department 1. Given the private drive nature of this development a public street light plan is not required. Streetlights have been installed on public roads. Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 101 of 266 2. 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. 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 8 %"x 11" map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 3. All irrigation ditches, canals,laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being developed shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 4. Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 5. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 6. Street signs are to be in place,water system shall be approved and activated, and at a minimum, a compacted gravel road base shall be in place prior to applying for building permits. 7. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 8. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 11. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 12. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. Page 25 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 102 of 266 13. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 14. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 15. At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 16. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. Meridian Fire Department https://weblink.meridianci , .org,/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=l81346&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity D. West Ada School District hllps://weblink.meridianci. .org,/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183063&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity E. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ): https://weblink.meridianciiy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=181373&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity F. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182195&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity G. Central District Health Department https://weblink.meridiancity.org[WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=l 81357&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity H. Ada County Highway District(ACHD): No comments have been received on this application;previous comments on H-2018-0004 apply. Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 103 of 266 X. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 district(see Analysis, Section V for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed multi-family development is consistent with the Commercial FLUM in the Comprehensive Plan and is allowed as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Staff finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 104 of 266 i i Lost Rapids Townhomes and Apartments (H-2019-0146) Applicant's Proposed Modifications to Staff's Recommended Conditions in Section IX.A i 3.e.— remove recommendation to include 5'sidewalk along east boundary. remove recommendation to add a break in the berm and fence on southern boundary. 3.g.— keep recommendation to provide sidewalk along either side of entrance from Lost Rapids; remove portion requiring construction of sidewalk along east boundary. 3.1.— remove recommendation to construct a drive aisle to the east between Buildings H & I. 3.j.— remove recommendation to provide additional bicycle parking spaces. 3.k.— remove recommendation to add children's play structure. 3.1.— remove recommendation to relocate fence on eastern boundary. E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 B Item Title: Public Hearing for Delano Subdivision (H-2019-0027) Meeting Notes: CONTINUED TO APRIL 16, 2020 CiWEI�� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.13. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: Title of Item - Public Hearing for Delano Subdivision (H-2019-0027) by Boll Cook Investments, LLC, Located at 14120 W. Jasmine Ln. and 2800 E. Jasmine Ln. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/17/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 105 of 266 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING March 19,2020 Legend DATE: � Project Location hq hb TO: Planning&Zoning Commission IM® FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner - 208-884-5533 v Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 mr € SUBJECT: H-2019-0027 Delano Subdivision �rt� 1 T 1 ®iL LOCATION: 2800& 14120 W.Jasmine Ln. History: This project was originally heard by the Commission on May 2, and July 18,2019; at the hearing on July 18",the Commission voted to recommend denial of the project to City Council. The City Council heard the project on November 12,2019; at that hearing, Council voted to remand the project back to the Commission to address the density issue of the proposed development and for Commission's review of a revised plat with changes to lots proposed along the northern boundary of the subdivision that front on E. Della Street(e.g. single-story, detached units,lose a lot(s)). (See pg. 16 for more information) Update: The Applicant submitted revised plans for the Commission hearing based on discussion at the City Council hearing and meetings with the neighbors,included in Section VII. The revisions include a reduction in the number of buildable lots from 85 to 66; a change to the proposed zoning(the portion of the site along the north&west boundaries previously proposed to be zoned R-15 is now proposed to be zoned R-8); and a change to the conceptual building elevations. Staff has updated the subject staff report based on the revised plans—original text that is no longer applicable is shown in strike-out and new text is shown in underline format. The conditions of approval in Section VIII are not in strike-out/underline format as there were no conditions that went forward to Council because the Commission recommended denial of the project;new conditions are included in accord with the revised plans based on those originally recommended by Staff to the Commission for the May 2,2019 hearing. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION designation;Comprehensive Plan m"ameadmen4 to inelude 4.10 aer-es of land etwently in Boise's Area of Q�, impaet a-ad planning area in Mer-idia-a's planning area with a N&ied Use Regional Fulidf L An-di Z�sj e Map Note: The Comprehensive Plan Map amendment application is no longer needed as the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) was amended with the new Comprehenisve Plan to include an MU-R FL UM designation for this property. Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 106 of 266 Annexation&zoning of 15.22 acres of land with R-8 (3.31 acres R-15 (11.57 8.12 acres)and R-40 (344 3.79 acres)zoning districts; and, Preliminary plat consisting of 83 66 single-family residential building lots, 1 building lot for a 96-unit multi-family development.-and42 88 common lots and 2 other(common driveway)lots on 15.22 acres of land in the R-8,R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT 1. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 15.22 Future Land Use Designation MDR(Medium Density Residential)i City of Mer-:d:^^ & Mixed Use-Re ig'onal(MU-R)4n C4 4F Ba� Existing Land Use 2 existing homes&accessory structures Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential(SFR), ^**^^had r_deta hed`and conceptual multi-family residential(MFR) Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8,R-15 &R-40 Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 85 66 SFR building/4- common/1 MFR building and 2 other Phasing plan(#of phases) Yes;23 phases Number of Residential Units(type 444 66 SFR detached units(18 ^µ^^had 67 do.^ had SF ,and of units) 96 MFR apartments) Density(gross&net) 7-.35 5_7(SFR,R-8&R-15)&27(MFR,R-40)gross units/acre; 1 1.9(SFR,n 15) Q.27(N4FR,a nm e+8.12 units/acre(SFR)(net) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ See Analysis, Section V.3 buffer/qualified) Amenities Shade^.,.uet. ,,.o (2)play^....,,.tffe^ benehe pedestrian walk-waysSee Analysis, Section V.3 Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of February 25,2019;92 attendees attendees: Applicant met with the Alpine Pointe HOA Board on December 16'and 231,2019;the revised plan was presented to the HOA Board on February 18',2020-30+/-people attended(an official neighborhood meeting was not held as it wasn't required). History(previous approvals) None 1 2. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report NO Yes (yes/no) Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 107 of 266 • Requires ACHD Yes(tentatively sche „'oa+^'be heard on May 22,2019) Commission This project is being heard by the ACHD Commission because of Action(yes/no) objections from neighbors pertaining to the extension ofDashwood Pl. and connectivity to Centrepointe Way Fire Service • Distance to Fire 1.24 miles from Fire Station#3 (can meet the response time requirements) Station • Fire Response 3 minutes under ideal conditions Time • Resource 82%from Fire Station#3—does meet the target goal of 9580%or Reliability greater • Risk 21 (SFRFe&iden4a4)and 4(MFR)—current resources would not be Identification adequate to supply service to the proposed project;(see comments in Section VIILC) • Accessibility Meets requirements;FD is eoneerned as there is no visitoF par-king in the development resulting in people par-king in areas that may bleek aecess to esi es. See additional comments in Section VIII.C. • Special/resource Deesnit-The MFR portion of the project will require an aerial device(see needs comments in Section VIII.C) • Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 1 hour(may be less if building is sprinklered) • Other Resources NA Police Service • Distance to 5 miles Police Station • Police Response 4:30 minutes Time • Calls for Service 0904 in RD `M724' • Accessibility PD has no issues with proposed access • Specialty/resourc No additional resources are needed;MPD already services this area. e needs • Crimes 0119 • Crashes 026 West Ada School District • Distance(elem, Discovery Elementary—2.93 miles;Heritage Middle School—3.4-6 miles; ms,hs) Rocky Mountain High School—5-56.2 miles • Capacity of Discovery Elementary 650;Heritage Middle School 1,000;Rocky Schools Mountain High School 1,800 • #of Students Discovery Elementary�5511;Heritage Middle School 1-,2-541, 446;Rocky Enrolled Mountain High School 2,4482, 669 • Anticipated 68 schoolaged children generated by this development Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 108 of 266 Wastewater • Distance to 0-feet _ Sewer Services • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated 181 Project Sewer ERU's • WRRF 13.66 MGD Declining Balance • Project Yes Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts& The following proposed manholes have less than 3'of cover:A-3,A-4,A- Concerns 5,C-1 and D-5.Public Works has previously discussed with the applicant the possibility of using grinder pumps in these shallow areas,but the plans do not note the use of them. If the parcel to the north of the multi-family is to be served by Meridian,applicant must stub sewer at minimum slope in N. Centrepointe Way to the north boundary line. Water • Distance to 0-feet Water Services • Pressure Zone 3 • Estimated See application information Project Water ERU's • Water Quality None • Project Yes Consistent with Water Master Plan • Impacts& Public Works has met with SUEZ Water and agreed that water service to Concerns the north for the multi-family portion of the development will be provided according to how annexation proceeds. Meridian will provide water in Meridian,and SUEZ will provide water in Boise. Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 109 of 266 I 1 •1. 1 1 ION 11■1111■1� -1 - .... C .1�■I Mid - - . - • -f ,1g .: .... ., •S • ■■1 '�•1111{l�111 IINIn I - • - • • • I -M•1a ■■1■1 11 i■1111- _•111111�:{I111111111 1 ' !!1!!! !!!{ 11�I I uuu1N 1111111111 - _ - ■ 1pl ill, uu unuuw/p�m - -.III■-■■ 9111111111111 • Z 9..��[[ � � ' �1MINNIEV S Rad ■., i■ z: ■ T 7■111r_ 1111111111: ill■lu}ui u _ lJq; ,C• ..7.-1 _III„- .�• I': E.::J � Ib_. R DII n1{11111q ' 1 ■■ - • - • D►un■■■■■ram � - • - • •rp unnm►� -} !1♦t1 ■Ii: 11■1■!1��n nl■■ �iR7C7�i Q� �� 1'_�iNl 1 r`�� �ih1`!Iu.� nuw-�nnuun �� iyi r�iu: �1n n■: a ru!� I�� Ir� I► ►•4uuu- umn:nnuun �� �ri i��i,Unm.1 •umu_� !{II!lurlll 11017��' � ; ti.±n1 ui� GuwaiLnuum �I��I r►+♦i Qpinuu 7I 'umu•: 1� , - 1IIIII ,, *a �I■ - .�:1; ■O■I� IIm11►\► ♦♦ \ �. ■ • 1111111�:--• ' • -• '• ♦ ci:c7���. IIIIIIIIII Illlu \�, ■ ■ills=_ ! ►�!7__ \�as■ ■ I,l�I■ II�IIuI::G ' ,��1+�����..-■ =un er r iumi::� � M�'a o:�rwu'r ' r .1.11111111■. � �=� � •d A r 1■■1■ ♦♦ ♦ . �•InIl111I, , \ aaa■�a■ Iinnn �� ,■�:.�=� :�1#,>.1!M 1111 1Miss :r..._elm • m �I�1�IJiw. ' �� _�■a :114�It�!'t ' ml�sm r �r vim►■...n :=i Ir�In�i it i�:- r:::.'�.� -- , r 7 t�Inn1n•-• :n �� Asl! I i■n■'�_.....►r{� ��.�� ■`I- j1�-■ ��III■a • W Iw i%Qs�pin uu��IIIIIIII��nr■uu�,.1�i=i' �� ::�_11{■�,.unu J� �/n {■■><���II�:■i�iiii:'nnll■uu:�i_i:��I I{1t• .-.� �■, r��u��r is. Inn► _� :: w {!l1��Q��■iiiiii:�,�anuwlry` W .N. {i11ii%iwi�►��r��:■III■ul•, _��_�■��:J�■�. �1�■!.■I1 -' IE111EI= :■11 \{ ����■1111/■:',�III �_■ '�,��� 111 1{ •�II��F■n ME., un .:r►boom_ i 101.r► ,.,••,.••,•�*�>t rWl■ E IIIIII II.....I......I.IpJ6J ......fl __ a IIIIII_II':11 ii liili iiiiii- �i11ifl � 1 1 , ■ , B. Owner: Norm Cook— 14120 W. Jasmine Ln.,Boise,ID 83713 Eddy Bollinger—2800 E.Jasmine Ln.,Meridian, ID 83646 C. Representative: ;men Bailey,Devoe Developmentl 1=C; 4824 E. Favie��e., Boise, 1P 83 Hethe Clark, Clark Wardle—251 E. Front St.,Boise,ID 83701 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date 4/12/2019; 6/28/2019; Newspaper Notification 2/25/2020 Radius notification mailed to 4/9/2019; 6/25/2019; properties within 300 feet 2/25/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 4/22/2019; 7/8/2019;March on site 4, 2020 Nextdoor posting 4/9/2019; 6/25/2019; 2/25/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS 1. f''l1T,PREiiE Since the hearing at City Council on November 12, 2019, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan, which included an amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM that assigned an MU- R designation to the majority of the property that lies east of Centrepointee Way. Therefore, the application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is no longer required; Staffhas deleted this section from the report. 2. ANNEXATION&ZONING The applicant requests annexation and zoning of the 11.5 7 11.43 acres west of N. Centrepointe Way with an the R-8 (3.31 acres) and R-15 (11.57 8.12 acres)zoning districts; and the 5 acres east of N. Centrepointe Way with an R-40 zoning district(3-.64 3.79 acres)consistent with the MDR and proposed MU-R FLUM designations.Note: There is a small portion of the Cook parcel(east side of Centrepointe Wax) that on the FL UM does not have a designation. This was a mapping error and the entire Cook parcel is effectively designated MU-R. Comprehensive Plan(https:llwww.meridiancity.or /�compplan): The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designation for the portion of this site west of the extension of N. Centrepointe Way is Medium Density Residential(MDR)it the City f Mar-id ;the portion of the site east of the extension of N. Centrepointe Way is eufFent4y was previously located in the City of Boise's Area of City Impactboundary and iswas designated General Mixed Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 111 of 266 Use. On October 29,2019,the Boise City Council approved and adopted the resolution(RES- 521-19)to amend the land use map of Blueprint Boise to transfer this area from the City of Boise Area of City Impact(AOCI)to the City of Meridian AOCI. The recent amendment to the City of Meridian's FLUM included this property with a Mixed-RegionalMU-R)future land use designation.As noted in the previous eeti n the n....i:eant proposes t amend the F UM designation. 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 units per acre. The MU-R designation allows high density multi-family developments as supporting uses for higher intense commercial uses such as those to the south and east of this site along a major transportation corridor(i.e. Eagle Rd./SH-55)and near arterial intersections (i.e. McMillan/Eagle Rds. &Ustick/Eagle Rds.). Land Use: The proposed land use for this site is single-family residential (SFR)and a future multi-family residential(MFR)development(i.e. apartments). A total of 5566 (19 attae e a-E 67 detached) SFR units at a gross density of 7-465_7 units per acre, and a net density of 44-8 8.12 units per acre are proposed; and 96 apartment units are planned to develop in the future at a gross and net density of 27 units per acre. The proposed density is consistent with that desired in the MDR and MU-R designations respectively. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed single-family dwellings(a**a�detached)are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts; and the multi-family development is listed as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Multi-family developments are subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27; compliance with these standards will be evaluated in the future through the conditional use permit process. Concept Plan: The Applicant submitted a concept development plan for the property to the north(Parcel# R4582530100) at Staff s request to demonstrate how the property could possibly redevelop with the extension of N. Centrepointe Way to the north as planned on the MSM(see Section VII.E). Transportation: The Master Street Map(MSM) depicts a planned north/south commercial collector street through this site from the south boundary to the north boundary eventually connecting to E. Wainwright Dr. for access via N. Eagle Rd./SH-55. The portion of Centrepointe W4Y proposed to be constructed with this development is consistent with the MSM. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan): Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Provide for a wide diversity of housing types(single-family, modular,mobile homes and multi-family arrangements)and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development." (3.07.03B) A mix of SFR a;*��detached homes and MFR apartment units are proposed within this development which will provide ownership and rental options for various income groups in this area. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 112 of 266 • "Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers."(3.07.02D) The proposed development will provide housing options in close proximity to the employment and shopping center uses along the Eagle Rd. corridor. • "Locate high-density development,where possible,near open space corridors or other permanent major open space and park facilities,Old Town, and near major access thoroughfares."(3.07.02L) The density proposed in the multi family portion of the development falls within the high density category. The site is located wiMin approximate lX a mile of rom Kleiner Memorial Park, a 60-acre City Park, and is in close proximity to N. Eagle Rd./SH-55, a major access thoroughfare. • "Consider ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM)in all land use decisions."(3.03.04K) The MSM depicts a north/south collector street through this site; the proposed plan depicts a collector street in accord with the MSM. • "Require open space areas within all development."(6.01.01A) Qualified open space in accord with the minimum standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 is required. • "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) The proposed development is contiguous to the City and urban services can be provided to this development. • "Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets."(3.06.02D) One(1) access is proposed on the west side off. Centrepointe Way, a collector street, to the SFR portion of the development; and one (1) access is proposed on the east side off. Centrepointe Way for the MFR portion of the development. Sta,ff recommends local street access (or a driveway with a cross-access easement) is provided to the property (#R4582530202) abutting the R-40 zoned portion of the site as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.3, as the property currently only has access via Eagle Rd./SH--55. • "Coordinate with transportation agencies to ensure provision of services and transit development." (6.02.02H) This site is not currently served by public transportation. However, ValleyConnect 2.0 proposes bus service on Eagle Rd.from the Boise Research Center to downtown Kuna with 20 minute frequencies in the peak hour. The Closest bus stop would be less than %mile from this site when that route is operational. • "Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system."(3.03.0313) There are no pathway connections to this development from adjacent developments to the north and south other than sidewalks adjacent to public streets. Staff recommends the Applicant coordinate with the Developer of the property to the south (Brickyard Apartments)to incorporate pedestrian connections between the two developments i.e. the single-family and the mulit-family developments) on each side of N. Centrepointe Way. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed Use areas,per the Comprehensive Plan (pgs.23-24): (Staffs analysis in italics) • "Residential densities should be a minimum of six dwellings/acre." The gross density of the proposed MFR development is 27 units per acre which falls within the range desired in mixed use designated areas. Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 113 of 266 • "Where feasible,higher density and/or multi-family residential development will be encouraged, especially for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69." The proposed development incorporates a MFR component along with the SFR development and is in close proximity(i.e. 460) to N. Eagle Rd./SH-55. The proposed development will provide housing options for nearby employment centers. • "A conceptual site plan for the entire mixed-use area should be included in the application." A concept plan was included on the landscape plan for the future MFR development in conjunction with the SFR development currently proposed. • "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed(not residential),the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space." This development does not include commercial/office buildings. • "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development." The proposed single-family armed an detached units with var;ying lot sizes and setbacks will provide a transition in density and lot sizes between larger single-family residential lots to the north and the townhomes/multi family lots to the south. This development does not include any commercial uses; however, the proposed multi family development on the eastern portion of the site will provide a transition between the proposed single-family attached and detached units and future commercial/mixed uses along Eagle Rd. • "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses [i.e. commercial (includes retail,restaurants, etc.), office,residential, civic (includes public open space,parks, entertainment venues, etc.),and industrial]. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis." The proposed development plan only includes one land use type (i.e. residential); however, tlrreetwo different types of residential units are proposed(i.e. single-family detached, nand multi family apartment units). Within the overall mixed use designated area, which incorporates land on both sides of Eagle Rd./SH55 to the south to Fairview Ave., there are a mix of uses as desired consisting of commercial(retail, restaurants, etc), office and residential uses. • "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals,churches, schools,parks, daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments." This is a relatively small portion of the overall mixed use designated area; none of these types of uses are proposed on this site nor have they been developed on the adjacent mixed use designated area to the south. • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas,open space, libraries,and schools are expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count." The proposed plan does not incorporate public and/or quasi public spaces and places; the common area proposed in the residential development is owned by the Homeowner's Association and does not satisfy this requirement. These types of public spaces have been provided in the adjacent mixed use designated area to the south. • "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians." Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 114 of 266 The proposed development plan shows interconnectivity with the residential neighborhood to the north providing accessibility to the commercial development to the south via N. Centrepointe Way. • "Street sections consistent with the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map are required within the Unified Development Code." The proposed development plan includes a north/south collector street(i.e. N. Centrepointe Way) consistent with the Master Street Map. • "Because of the existing small lots within Old Town, development is not subject to the Mixed-Use standards listed herein." The proposed development is not within Old Town; therefore, this provision is not applicable. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.30): • "Development should comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed-Use areas." See analysis above. • "Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre." The proposed residential uses comprise 100%of the site. Densities of the SFR and MFR developments are in accord with this guideline. • "Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area." No retail commercial uses are proposed with this development; however, the MU-R designated land to the south incorporates a large amount of retail commercial uses. • "There is neither a minimum nor a maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as office, clean industry, or entertainment uses." No commercial uses are proposed with this development. Zoning: Based on the analysis above, Staff is of the opinion the requested annexation with the R-8,R-15 and R-40 zoning districts and proposed development is generally consistent with the MDR and prepesed-MU-R FLUM designations and is appropriate for this site. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property to the north and south;the R-8 and R-15 area is within the Area of City Impact Boundary(AOCI)and the R-40 area is outside of the AOCI boundary. 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. 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are two(2)existing homes and 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. Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 115 of 266 Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-6 for the R-8, 11-2A-7 for the R-15 and 11- 2A-8 for the R-40 zoning districts (so ). The proposed plat complies with these standards. 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 23 phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VIILC. The first phase will include the extension of N. Dashwood Pl. from the north through the site to N. Centrepointe Way. Staff recommends the phasing plan is revised to include construction of the street buffer on the east side of N. Centrepointe Way in the first phase so that the street buffer and detached sidewalk is constructed and the buffer landscaped with the first phase of development. Access(UDC 11-3A-3,11-3H- /Streets: Jasmine Lane, a 50-foot wide private street,currently provides access to the lots in Jasmine Acres Subdivision,including the subject properties.The private street is depicted on the Jasmine Acres subdivision plat. Staff is unaware if a separate recorded easement exists for the private street.Where the easement crosses the subject property it should be relinquished; proof of relinquishment shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat. One access is proposed on either side of N. Centrepointe Way, a collector street; and an emergency only/pedestrian access is proposed from the extension of N. Dashwood Pl. at the north boundary of the site.A stub street(E. Jasmine St.)is proposed to the parcel to the west for access and future extension. Public streets are proposed within the SFR portion of the development with 27-foot wide street sections; private drive aisles will be provided within the MFR portion of the development. In accord with UDC 11-3A-3,which limits access points to collector streets to improve safety and requires access to be taken from a local street if available,Staff recommends N.Dashwood Pl.is extended as a full access street into the site with the first phase of development.Note:ACHD approved the connection of Dashwood Ave. to the existing stub street to the north (Dashwood Pl.) as a temporary emergency access/pedestrian connection until Centrepointe Way is extended to Wainwright Dr., or within 10 years, whichever occurs first. When Centrepointe Way is extended to Wainwright Dr., Dashwood Pl. will be reconstructed as a public street for vehicular connectivitv to Wainwri hg t Dr. UDC 11-3A-3A.3 requires all subdivisions to provide local street access to any use that currently takes direct access from an arterial or collector street.The parcel to the east of the property proposed to be zoned R-40 on the east side of Centrepointe Way(Parcel #R4582530202),currently takes direct access via N.Eagle Rd./SH-69, an arterial street and a State Highway; therefore, Staff recommends local street access(or a driveway with a cross-access easement)is provided to the property to the east as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 3A.3. The Applicant should coordinate with the developer of that property on a location for the access street/driveway. Staff recommends N. Centrepointe Way is extended/constructed with the first phase of development from the southern to the northern boundary of the site so that if re- development of the property to the north Won occurs before the multi-family portion of Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 116 of 266 this site,the connection to Wainwright Dr. can be made and services can be extended-as -per• Traffic: A Traffic Impact Study was not required by ACHD for the proposed development; however,the Applicant did include an informal traffic analysis in their application narrative based on ACHD's Policy Manual that takes into consideration existing traffic volumes in relation to anticipated traffic volumes from the proposed development and the resulting impacts to Wainwright Dr. &Dashwood Pl. The analysis shows the total trips per day on Wainwright at 41%of total capacity; and on Dashwood at 44% of total capacity resulting in 56-59%under total capacity for these streets,which should not overburden existing roadways systems if these calculations are correct. See application narrative for more information. Many letters of testimony have been received from adjacent residential property owners to the north regarding the amount of traffic that will be generated from the proposed development and routed through their neighborhood.For this reason,it's imperative that the Centrepointe Way connection to Wainwright occur as soon as possible; thus,the reason for Staffs recommendation for the pr-opeFty to the noFth to be ineluded in the amendm to the Fr UM and for the construction of Centrepointe to the northern boundary of the annexation area to occur with the first phase of development. Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3 All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. TlweeTwo(32)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 Lot 435,Block l et 7,� and Lot 479,Block 34 for emergency wayfinding purposes as requested by the Fire Department. Transition: There are 68 single-story structures with 10 8 dwelling„rits4ffopeft es proposed along the west boundary of this site adjacent to the 8.2 acre rural residential property to the west, which is currently in Ada County and designated as MDR(3-8 units/acre) on the FLUM. There are-5-.5 6 existing single-story residential properties to the north that abut this site that are 0.31-0.38 of an acre in size;4-012 single-family structures with 15 12 „fits/ .,.,....el4ies are proposed along the north boundary of the site. n a4ive of the appliea4iea tha4 demeastmtes the proposed struettifes and lots in relation to existing home shops par-king areas and• ards. See aerial map below. Because the homes proposed along the north and west boundaries will all be a single-story in height, Staff believes they will have a lesser impact on adjacent neighbors than 2-story homes would have; therefore,Staff is not recommending a greater transition in lot sizes Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 117 of 266 isthan proposed.However,the Commission and City Council should consider any public testimony provided in determining if fewer lots/structures should be provided along these boundaries as a better transition to existing residential properties. 4 TI E � 1 Ir _-AW r f i ---'-r- -- ----- `-` --�--- rl y { Parking(UDC 11-3C): Parking for single-family dwellings is required based on the number of bedrooms per unit.For 1- bedroom units, a minimum of 2 spaces per unit are required with at least one of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad. For 2-3 bedroom units, a minimum of 4 spaces per unit are required with at least 2 of those spaces in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pads. Because of the proposed reduced 27-foot wide street sections,parking is restricted to one side of the street only resulting in fewer available on-street parking spaces for guests and households with cars that can't be parked on private property than is typical with a full street section which allows parkins;on both sides of the street. Off-street parkin is s required to be provided on each lot in accord with the aforementioned UDC standards. Beeause of the w lots ( ftent of these lots for-guest pafk4ag a-ad in some afeas par-king is a ways away. Wher-e at4aeh heraes are proposed,there is r-eefn for-appr-eximately one spaee per-evefy 2 lots for-On Stfee On-street parking(6658 spaces)is also available adjacent to common lots and along one side of the street within 200' f e any home• ,ithi the deve opme-a+(see Exhibit H in Section VII). 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)in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 12C. Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 118 of 266 Beeause inter-eonneetivity is important and espeeialty so in mixed use developments, St reeommends the Applicant coordinate with the Developer of the property to the south (Brickyard Apartments)to iHeffper-ate pedestrian eonneetions between the developments on eaeh side of N. Centr-epointe Way-. Sidewalks(UDC I1-3A-17): Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. Minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalks are required along all collector and after-ial streets; and minimum 5-foot wide attached(or detached) sidewalks are required along 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. Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed along the collector streets and along internal local street abutting common areas in accord with UDC standards. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Per UDC Tables 11-2A-7 and 11-2A-8, a 20-foot wide buffer is required adjacent to N. Centrepointe Way, a collector street. Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided within common lots in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; trees and shrubs should be depicted within the street buffers on either side of N. Centrepointee Way in accord with these standards. The Landscape Calculations table should include the linear feet of street buffers and the required vs.proposed number of trees demonstrating compliance with the aforementioned standard. Landscapin is s required to be provided in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-G-3E;the proposed landscaping exceeds the minimum standards. Landscaping is required within parkways as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17E and 11-3B-7C; the Landscape Calculations table should include the linear feet of parkways and the required vs.proposed number of trees demonstrating compliance with the aforementioned standard. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3G): Based on the overall development area which consists of 15.21 acres of land, a minimum of 10% (1.52 acres)qualified open space is required to be provided within the development per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. Because the site is bisected by a collector street and the portion of the site proposed to develop with apartments is not beingdped at this time, Staff recommends the 10%open space is provided on each property; the R-8 and R-15 propertX totaling 11.3+/-acres should provide a minimum of 1.13 acres and the R-40 property totaling 3.6+/-acres should provide a minimum of 0.36 of an acre(in addition to the open space required in UDC 11-4-3-27C for multi-family developments). A revised qualified open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.F that depicts 4431.23 acres(or 44—.510.8%)of open space for the SFR portion of the development consisting of a 10.69 of an acre park with amenities,parkways, , and linear open space that is at least 20' wide and has an access at each end and is landscaped, and a collector street buffer and a lees' street buffer. The linear open space on Lot 17,Block 4 doesn't qualify as it's not accessible at the west end as required by UDC 11-3G-3B.1e,however the rest of the area meets the minimum standard at 1.17 acres. stFeeVland use buffer-along the southefa boundafy of the site toward the qualified open spa eats(see Seeti.n^ below for-more infamiationy The open space on the R-40 property will be evaluated for compliance with UDC 11-3G-3B at the time of submittal of a conditional use permit. Page 14 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 119 of 266 are that does not qualify(i.e. the perimeter-' — I g1he east boundary)and is below the The"alified open spaee Em the 44-FR pat4ioa of the site east side of Get+4epoipAe Way ifielud develop at this time and is eeneeptttal in aatidr-e and likely to ehange, Stag reeefflffiends a DA required of the total land area(i.e. 5 aeres). Because that portion of the site is not planned to qualified open spaee is provided a4 the time of development th-at m-e-e-ts the standards in UPC 11 3G 3B. This requirement is in addition to th ieqir-e�' i rc�xr vDG 11 4-3 27C�vr-MF-Rueye efAs-. 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 overall development(i.e. 15.21 acres). The Applicant proposes a shade structure, children's play structure, children's climbing dome, children's climbing boulders, seating benches,public art and a pathway as amenities,which exceed UDC standards. The pathway does not count as a qualified amenity as it doesn't meet the standards in UDC 11-3G-3C.3; however,the other amenities proposed do qualify and exceed the minimum standards. Existing Trees: There are many existing trees on this site the Applicant states are being removed by the residential property owner for firewood. Include mitigation information on the plan for any existing trees that are not removed by the property owner in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-10C.5. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The Nourse Lateral runs along the northern boundary of this site and is piped. An easement should be depicted on the plat for the waterway.If the easement is 10 feet or greater,it should be located within a common lot that is a minimum 20-feet wide and outside of a fenced area unless modified by City Council as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6D. 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. The existing fencing along the north and southwest boundaries of the site is proposed to remain. A 6-foot tall solid vinyl privacy fence is proposed along the west, south and east boundaries of the SFR portion of the site as well as along the nofth, oast and south boundaries of the N4F p^.tion of th ^ t^ in accord with UDC standards. A 4-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed around the perimeter of the children's play area on Lot 1,Block-32. 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. Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 120 of 266 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 a**a�. detached units and multi-family apartment structures as shown in Section VII.F. Building materials for the single-family homes consist of a mix of siding(horizontal and vertical lap siding and board&batten) and stucco with stone veneer accents. The multi-family 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 and north perimeter boundaries of the development will be restricted to a single-story in height as proposed b, t�pplicant. Because the rear and/or side of 2-story structures on Lots 14-1812-8,Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 25 that face N. Centrepointe Way will be highly visible, Staff recommends those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses,step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches, balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines.Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. Public Testimony:Many letters of testimony have been received on the original plan submitted with this application,primarily from residential neighbors to the north in Alpine Pointe Subdivision(aka Zebulon Heights). The primary concerns are the intensity of the development (i.e. density is too high); not enough transition in lot sizes to lower larger lots to the north; extension of N. Dashwood Pl. and Centrepointe Way and resulting traffic generated from this development and from the developments to the south that will be routed through their subdivision until Centrepointe can be extended to the north to Wainwright in a more direct fashion; and safety concerns for children pertaining to traffic. The neighbors have suggested several alternate development plans that would result in less traffic through their neighborhood. See public testimony in the project file for more information. Additional public testimony has been received on the revised plan that can be accessed at: httgs://weblink.meridianciby.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=166928&&dbid=0&&repo=Meridian C 4. A T T-ER T A TT;1T C+l mP1 T A NGE A local street buffer is no longer proposed; Staff has removed this section as it is no longer applicable. spaee for-the development. The"alified open spaee peFtaining to street bugar-s listed in UPC 11 36 3B allOws the full are 5B 5,to be allowed to eeui4 the area of a leeal stfeet buffer-toward the fninifRUM EtUalified Opffi of the SFR peAien of the site with dense!aadseapiag along E. jasmine ., a leeal stfeet, to b Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 121 of 266 alter-native provides an equal or superior-means of meeting the intent and purpose of the regulation(see T7;,,,]ings i Seet .,,-. IX ill inteaded pur-pose of UDC-14 3G-3 has been met. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed!`,...,..rehe..siye Plan",rap Amendment ment if- the p eel to the aei4h(R4592530100) is also ineloded,the Annexation&Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications with the conditions included in Section VIII.A per the Findings in Section IX. if the par-eel to the aeAh(R4592530100) is not ineltided in the map amendment, Staff recommends denial of annexation and zoning r-eqLtest for the eastern par-eel(i.e. R 4 0 zone). B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on May 2 and July 18, 2019. At the public hearingon n July 18t'',the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject CPAM, AZ and PP requests to City Council. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Jim Conger; b. In opposition: Malissa Bernard(representing many neighbors on Dashwood Place to the north in Alpoint Point Sub.);Frank Marcos(Alpine Point Sub. HOA President); Kenneth Clifford; Sherry Garey, Greg Walker;Patricia Pitzer; Joy Cameron; Sandi King; Laura Trairatnobhas c. Commenting?: Connie Thompson; d. Written testimony: Many(47+/-)letters of testimony were received(see public record). e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Ke. ids)of public testimony a. Consensus that proposed density of development is too high; b. Not enough transition in lot sizes is proposed to larger lots to the north; c. Concern pertaining to the extension of Dashwood Pl. and Centrepointe Way and resulting traffic generated from the proposed development and from the commercial and multi-family residential developments to the south that will be routed through the subdivision to the north if Jasmine is connected to Centrepointe before Centrepointe can be extended to the north to Wainwright; d. Safety concerns for children pertaining to traffic; e. The proposed development is premature and that infrastructure (i.e. the extension of Centrepointe to Wainwright) should be in place prior to the development goingin,n,not after the fact; f. There has been no negotiation with neighbors by the Developer as directed by the Commission; 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The desire for the City of Boise to take action on a request to exclude the eastern portion of the site from their Area of City Impact boundga prior to the City making a decision on this application; b. The possibili , of only an emergency access via Dashwood Pl.; Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 122 of 266 C. Concern pertainingtquacy of parking for the development; d. Preference for R-8 vs. R-15 zoning for the single-family portion and R-15 vs. R-40 zoning for the multi-family portion of the site as a transition to adjacent zoning; e. Density should be reduced due to Heritage Middle School and Rock Mountain High School already being over capacity f. Desire for the Applicant to work with neighbors to address issues that were brought 0 at the hearjn& 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. The Commission recommended denial of the proposed CPAM,AZ and PP applications to the City Council based on their desire for the Applicant to obtain approval from the City of Boise for the adjustment to the Area of City Impact boundary; and opinion the applicant did not sufficiently work with the neighbors on their concerns pertaining to the proposed development. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None C. City Council: The City Council heard this project on November 12,2019 and moved to remand the project back to the Commission to address the density issue of the proposed development and for their review of a revised site plan with changes to lots proposed along the northern boundary of the subdivision that front on E.Della Street. VII, EXHIBITS A. Removed as an amendment to the FL UM is no longer necessary. Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 123 of 266 B. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map REVISED Sawtooth Land Surveying, LLC A2'%' kk- P030 5. W.Ashmc3ton Ave. I=mmett, 11) 63617 rI f C r T f r: ;208) 39a-a 104 r: (2oe) 3q6-6,o5 Delano Zoning R-8 Description BASIS OF BEARING for this description is South 89°39'12"West, between the illegible brass cap marking the E1/4 Corner of Section 32 and the 518"rebar PLS 4431 marking the C1/4 Corner of Section 32, both in T.4 N., R. i E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho. A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 3, Block 1 of Jasmine Acres, as shown in Book 59 of Plats, at Page 5829,Ada County Records, and a portion of the 5E1/4 of Section 32, T. 4 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the illegible brass cap marking the E1/4 Corner of said Section 32; Thence South 89039'12"West, Coincident with the north line of said 5F1/4 of Section 32, a distance of 1026.20 feet to the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of said Jasmine Acres and the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 0°20'48"East, coincident with the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 125.59 feet; Thence South 89"42'00"West, parallel with the south line of said Lot 3, a distance of 121.45 feet; Thence South 49130'18"West, 20.50 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left; Thence 43.46 feet along the arc of said curve,with a radius of 50,00 feet, a central angle of 49148'18", subtended by a chord bearing North 6512351"West, 42.11 feet; Thence South 891142'00"West, parallel with said south line of Lot 3, a distance of 382.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; Thence 78.54 feet along the arc of said curve,with a radius of 50,00 feet, a central angle of 90100'00", subtended by a chord bearing South 44°42'00"West, 70.71 feet; Thence South 00°18'00"East, 372.09 feet; Thence South 89142'00"West, parallel with said south line of Lot 3, a distance of 109.27 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence 14,35 feet along the arc of said curve, with a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 16,12624", subtended by a chord bearing North 82104'48"West, 14.30 feet; Thence North 73151'36"West, 18,22 feet to the westerly line of said Lot 3; Thence North 16108'24"East, coincident with the common line of said Lots 3 and 4, Black 1, Jasmine Acres, 25.45 feet to the northernmost common corner of said Lots 3 and 4; P:12018118094-DELANO SUBDIVISION-CMGISurveylDrawingsloescriptions418094 zoning r-8 desc.docx I1 Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 124 of 266 Thence North 1010'44"East,coincident with the east boundary line of said Lot 4, a distance of 511.15 to the northeast corner of said Lot 4, which is an said north line of the 5E114; Thence North 891139'12"East, coincident with said north line of the 5E1f4, a distance of 727,70 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 3.31 acres, more or less. 11574 �Ie OF EAG�- RQ018118094-DELANO SUBDIVISION-CMGlSurvey%Drawing$%Descriptions118094 zoning r-8 desc.docx IZ Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 125 of 266 MUS OF BEARAG N 8'39'u'E 7,7-70' POW OF BEGWNG 5Sg-"17'W — — ^ — 1026.20, WC32 SEC 32 5903-04' ZLWWNG R-8 12557 E 114 CORNEA C 1f4 CORMS a 13I AC3 500°2046'E "1 1 CV I iOTL HLOOC i 14—qgiNEACRE5 x �+ LINE TAKE m LOT 4,Njxx1 mr s -- 1 LS N i6'Q8'24'E 2i4' ICll VE TAME e LLRVE ARC LOQGTH RAMS OELTAAN � 1 4346 4 z3 i- 42.11' s49'u2w 9 � �a LOT 3,aiocxt u Lnr4BLOMI FAaGfEVEIN —— — 5E QO 32ER 5L u IV7 q r,► pRaX:Cf• O WNERIVEVaGPER: DV k 5 7 BOLL COOK za3n s, WA 71T, D R3617 Ave. G 18094-EX DEiANO ZONING!?� INVESTMENTS,LLC p 1(208)390 8104 PRWEL70 4T� BOUNDARY Of,��� T.4 N. R.I E. 8.10., `5 JWT T- R(208)398-8105 18094 HE ADA COUNTY,II)AHD hare: L�� 1 SHEET �! �7LLG WWW.S4WTOOTHL-,COM I OFI Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 126 of 266 5awtooth Land 5urveylncj, LLC " 2430 5-wa5mngton Ave, 1 044 Northwest DIvj_,Ste-G 141 1"Avcnue[a5t Emmett,IV 836 17 Coeur d'Atcne,ID 8381 4 Jerome,1053335 J I P= (206)398.5104 P:(206)714-4544 P; (208)329.5303 r=(208)395-$r05 f.(206)292-4453 P:(20$)324-3a21 R-15 Re-Zone Description BASIS OF BEARING for this description is South 89"39'12"West,from the illegible brass tap marking the E1/4 Corner of Section 32 and the 5/8"rebar PLS 4431 marking the C1/4 Corner of Section 32, both in T.4 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho. A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 3, Block 1 of 3asmine Acres, as shown in Book 59 of Plats, at Page 5829, Ada County Records,and a portion of the N1/2 of the 5112 of Section 32, T.4 N., R. 1 E., B.M.,Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the illegible brass cap marking the E1f4 Corner of said Section 32; Thence South 89"39'12"West, coincident with the center of Section line of said Section 32, a distance of 1026.20 feet to the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of said Jasmine Acres; Thence South 0"2048"East, coincident with the west boundary line of said Lot 1, a distance of 125.59 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing South 0°20'48"East, coincident with the west boundary line of said Lot 1, a distance of 221.24 feet to the northwest corner cf said Lot 3; North 89"42'00"East, coincident with the north boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 43.10 feet; Thence South 0018'UO"East, 316.85 feet to the south boundary line of said Lot 3, Thence South 89"42'00"West, coincident with the south boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 684.43 feet; Thence North 481111'00"West, coincident with the south boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 154.02 feet to the southernmost common corner of Lots 3 and 4 of said Jasmine Acres; Thence North 16"08'24"East, coincident with the common boundary line of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1, Jasmine Acres, 25.45 feet; Thence South 73°51'36"East, 18.21 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; Thence 14.35 feet along the arc of said curve, with a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 1611126'24", subtended by a chord bearing South 82"04'48"East, 14.30 feet; Thence North 89042'00"East, parallel with said south boundary line, 109.27 feet; Thence North 01118'00"west, 372.09 feet to the beginning of a tangent cure to the right; P:12018110094-DELANO SUBDIVISION-CMGISurveylDrawingslDescripticns118094 R-15 RE-ZONE DESCRIPTION.docx - 11 Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 127 of 266 Thence 78.54 feet along the arc of said curve, with a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 90000"00", subtended by a chard bearing North 441142'00"East, 70.71 feet; Thence North 89142'00"East, parallel with said south boundary line, 382,00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; Thence 43.46 feet along the arc of said curve, with a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 49148'18", subtended by a chord bearing South 65023'51"East, 42.11 feet; Thence North 49030'18"East, 20,50 feet; Thence North 89°42'00" East, parallel with said south boundary line, 121.45 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 8.12 acres, more or less, ND CGS Q � 11574 SEA :1-M18118094-❑ELAND SUBDIVISION-CMGISurveylDrawingslDescripti❑ns118094 R-15 RE-ZONE 7ESCRIPTION.docx 12 Page 23 - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 128 of 266 MWIF BEARM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - s 83.3VI2'w 2OX94.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NBD"MWE 72770' _ 5fi9mJYt'w SEC 32 903.PF' J 101G20' f JA cawa 889°47="E-Won, w o 15 POINT OF WlGL IIHG !DT l�BLOCK 1 em, w -AWNS AME9 a � R-15L, &12 ACC IA LOT 31 ILOGCS ! 1�5 t L f { lOT$BOCK 1 E lA'.AIfHE 1H } 599°4280"W m69L4 gg7aFRR SEC 32 LWE TAW.E NT5 o cuavE TnBE Lu Nays a cva A 5EAR➢ffi O*)RD LENi:FN I 'E 25.I5, 9 50.IXI' I6°Zfi'2k fa L3 5 °]' "E i. Q ,5q N49 -E Hdl 4 E 189 f.f6' ia.08' f 1 1 W a7.it LS II 4- 1 /1 E 121. PROJECT.' OWNEWDEVELOPER: DWG# 2030 S. WASNINGTCITV AVF. aELANO ZONING f2-}5 BOLL COOK EMMETT,ID 83617 18a94-IX INVESTMENTS.LLC P:(208 398-9104 PRO BOUNDARY )eCrA F.-(208j 398-810518094 T.4 N.,R. i 0�l` SHEff AL?A COUNTY,,IAAHANO �-V Hare: 312020 �^x1 7 r WWW.SAWTOOTHL5.COM 10F1 Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 129 of 266 Sawtooth Land Surveying, LLC 2030 5. Washington Ave. �0,44 Northwest Blvd.,Ste. G 14 1 1"Avenue East Emmett, V 83C 17 Gaeur d'Alene, ID 83814 Jerome, ID 63338 e rd��iure . P: (208)398.81 04 F: (208)714.4544 F:(205)3 29-5303 ' F: (208)398-5105 Pr(208)292-4453 Fr(208)324-382 I R-40 Re-Zone Description BASIS OF BEARING for this description is South 89139'12"West, from the illegible brass cap marking the E114 Corner of Section 32 and the 518"rebar PLS 4431 marking the 0/4 Corner of Section 32, both in T. 4 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho. A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 3, Block 1 of 3asmine Acres, as shown in Book 59 of Plats, at Page 5829, Ada County Records, located in the NE1/4 of the SE114 of Section 32, T. 4 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the illegible brass cap marking the E1/4 Corner of said Section 32; Thence South 89039'12"West, coincident with the north line of said SE114 of Section 32, a distance of 1026.70 feet to the northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of said Jasmine Acres; Thence South 0"20'48"East, coincident with the west boundary line of said Lot 1, a distance of 346.83 feet to the northwest comer of said Lot 3; Thence North 891,42'00" East, coincident with the north boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 43.10 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing, North 89042'00" East, coincident with said north boundary line of Lot 3, a distance of 521.16 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 3; Thence South 0001'00"East, coincident with the east boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 316.85 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 3; Thence South 89042'00"West, coincident with the south boundary line of said Lot 3, a distance of 519.60 feet; Thence North 00018'00"West, 316.85 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, The above described parcel contains 3.79 acres, more or less. b is 5 7 4 � ,a SEAC+� R=18118094-13ELANO SUBDIVISION-CMG1SurveylDrawingslDescrlptions118094 R40 RE-ZONE ❑ESCRIPTION.docx • � 1 Page 25 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 130 of 266 a4S7SOF .5 89.39'12'W 2M94.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N 8T39W'a 727.70' S 89-3911r w _ — — 102&2v SEC3Z SEC 32 I E I/4 CORI1gt C 1/4 LaYMER O 1 I WTL NA"I 4 ,y JASPRNE ACRES Z 9.00C 1 N NNN LINE TA91E 11 N89M WE 521.16' PRIM LINE BEARING D O 1 11 Nffil"1 0'f 1 .Itl z d 3I LOT 3,BLOM I R-40 I w l I 3.79 AC+ o LOT%max I EIASMZNEIV I I 5 89°42'BO"W 519,fid SF CORNER SEC 32 NT5 L a 1 1 5 7.d f s PROJECT: OWNEW EVELO ER: 2030 S. WASHINGTON AVE, DWG x �f BOLL COOK Sj 18094-EX DELANO ZONING R-40 EMMETT,ID-8104 INVESTMENTS,LLC 9$of SOP BOUNDARY �. P.(208 398 8104 a80949r d F:(208 398-8103 I8094 FFF8EA�4 T.4 C.,R.1 , B.M., 5.�M07- S„� AOA COUNTY IDAHO DATE: ���1 3/2020 �` n7 WWW.SAW rOOTHLS.COM 1 OF 1 Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 131 of 266 C. Preliminary Plat(date: 2/ 4�n 3/12/2020)&Phasing Plan REVISED PREL MINMY PLAT FOR E,ELANO SUBDIVISION Sw .u..• AM 20io .Ho i w..�. .w-.�. �—� W �Wy ud oc �o Q --------------- i --- - --- --� - Yj a o L-------- w 16'COufttm six[[ iY�w1 Jett � Fe is '§ 1 p o 3 _ a W I � o PP1.1 Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 132 of 266 11IMMINARY PLAT FOR LaeLo - D"NOSUBDIVISION - LOr a ewee�,ywuxcuxesaxo 3 w+umovnrteos �acalrn iu rulx iizor rxes lnsEcnox sz 'z1�. -� - -.,. =omswv.ucam wzwol uss,eza. — L - ^��--. non caunr,ionxo �7 y Ze -- — — mores umL ocwLn 000 --- ------------ Elm n 3. YM[ isme.m.aumtirr rww Z g NOW III '_ I I MwK I I I I MEU SERA 36'COLLFLTM 5�4FFr XClIMii�'. IS LOGIL SAFFr YCipN PP1.0 Page 28 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 133 of 266 D. Landscape Plan(date: 2/'�T3/14/2020) REVISED NOTES PLANT PALETTE r....r. ,...,. ..,., Ou� �,r�,K.�... q �,..,..,....,. ..,,.�...em .�....a,..... .�.... ft ! I ..vim. '�' � ��/ �� � rv.,•.a,K........,,����.a,R.,.. ��.. r.,..,. i:.; P .e u. _ '� ,gem.n rma r.neea•st.Q2,mm_ v JENSENBELTi =7DEVELOPMENT DATA wn Q TREE GLANTiN6i5TAKCNS Q PLANTER cur eEv EvsE F'�N: 0 IL „ �. FEB J _ Z LANDSCAPE GALGULATIONS -- LU�CBCAP! Li y`TES PLANT PALETTE S..f.. un+�rc wrs�e:,xw O 5i N2itl RAN;INV M��� w..,xi w � • 1" H it 11E DEVELOPMENT DATA Oj TREE PLANTWG TPKINb 5 Ow _ Q AWL PFN/,GY+ZE r O5 WR T IFPN FENCE Z qLLI T - I LAI.PSGAPC Q • _ W GALGLLA*lo\_ rc W.- .. LANDSCAPE i -..... PLAN it • e w t r Page 29 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 134 of 266 NOTES PLANT PALETTE It im u ,..0 rumic m�.w.renn,ur mff moo.®. - w JENSEN66LT4 DEVELOPMENT DATA O ipPE PL4NiIN6/STAKINS O PLaNTEa ane.�.�.amv.nx ease cr�werrun.,x uu � mc.w wmwm•re...,,,., x O w W a ❑ z a 9'V N PaIVAC FENCE O y(aWbHi�rz�.n FENCE Z �• Q a -_ LRNDSGRPE ❑ W 6ALGULA710N5 p� a QQ �uNoecAPE PLAN � roM�M m L1 Page 30 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 135 of 266 E. Possible Conceptual Development Plan for Parcel to the North ' � 1 - 4 Passible Future Development Pattern - r A rr S� 14, I I Page 31 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 136 of 266 F. Qualified Open Space Exhibit& Site Amenities REVISED N W w o x goo I I ' 1 T3857 SF 1 ffl 1 I I I _ I I � I 3786 SF I— 378a SF 1 7372 SF I I I 1.17 acres of qualified open DELANO ACE EXHI OPEN SPACE IXIMT space without crossed out area RESIDENTIAL AREA=111 43 ACRES QUALIFYING OPEN SPACE—Yl.23 ACRES(10.890 Note: The crossed out area does not count toward the minimum qualified open space standards because it isn't accessible at the west end,per UDC 11-3G-3B.le. Page 32 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 137 of 266 PROJECT AMENITIES As the developer we have researched and interviewed potential homeowners and followed the city ordinance to plan the most productive amenities for this area and this development. The amenity package exceeds the requirement of Meridian City Code. Meridian City Code requires that the application provide one amenity for projects up to 20 acres.We are proposing five additional amenities for a total of six, including a neighborhood park with a shade structure, a play structure,seating area, climbing boulders,climbing dome and a pedestrian pathway.We are proposing a second open space lot on the southwest corner of the development. This lot will help to buffer the existing home in the Champion Park Subdivision and will include several amenities including public art and a seating area. Proposed Amenities: Large 2/3-Acre Neighborhood Park-The large park will contain the following recreation facilities: Shade Structure Play structure Seating areas with benches Climbing Dame Climbing Boulders Public Art I I. L!4qN(,f'i R' ♦ I � W'v Y d -2 t GLINHIN BC(ADER5, I.pe e0 i! GNIG TM ;J 10 ' Page 33 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 138 of 266 G. Conceptual Building Elevations(Single-Family^Detached and Multi-Family Apartments)REVISED PROPOSED HOME ELEVATIONS AND HOUSING STYLES t 1 M J Page 34 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 139 of 266 y� i G Page 35 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 140 of 266 .'. _ . r+ - now---- Page • Meridian • • Agenda March 19,2020 •- 141 of r, N+ � r Page 37 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 142 of 266 H. Parking Exhibit REVISED 0 58 parking spaces z Z a o O w ---- — -- — (n a 0 a" •a»ce � m J ® Q 6 W f o ❑- -----}— --� I - 1— -� a LANOBCAPE ease c«o ee.oi PLAN Li Page 38 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 143 of 266 I. Site Plan ° , ------------ _ - - - __________ _ L2 . t- �4 N W DELANO SUBEIIASION SITE LAYOUT �J 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. Page 39 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 144 of 266 b. A Conditional Use Permit is required to be submitted and approved for the multi-family development prior to application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review. c. All multi-family structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. An application for Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be submitted and approved for all multi-family structures prior to submittal of building permit applications. d. Single-family homes along the west and north perimeter boundaries of the development shall be restricted to a single-story in height as proposed by the Developer. e. The rear and/or side of 2-story structures on Lots 8-12, Block 1 and Lot 2,Block 5 that face N. Centrepointe Way shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays, banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. f. The construction of N. Centrepointe Way from the southern boundary to the northern boundary of the annexation area(stub to Wong parcel#R4582530100) shall occur with the first phase of development. g. The R-8 and R-15 zoned property totaling 11.3+/-acres shall provide a minimum of 1.13 acres and the R-40 zoned property totaling 3.6+/-acres shall provide a minimum of 0.36 of an acre (in addition to the open space required in UDC 11-4-3-27C for multi-family developments). i. Provide vehicular connection to the property to the east(Parcel#R4582530202)through the R-40 zoned property via a local street or a driveway as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.3. If a driveway is provided,provide a cross-access/ingress-egress easement to that property; submit a recorded copy of the easement to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. j. No building permits shall be issued on this site until the underlying property is recorded in a final plat. 2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B,shall be revised at least 10 days prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Depict an easement for the Nourse Lateral along the north boundary of the site. If the easement is 10 feet or greater, it shall be located within a common lot that is a minimum 20-feet wide and outside of a fenced area unless modified by City Council as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6D.If the lateral is located completely off-site and an easement does not encroach on this site, submit written confirmation of such from the Irrigation District. b. The street buffer and minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk on the east side of N. Centrepointe Way shall be included in the first phase(instead of the third phase) of development;the phase boundary shall be adjusted accordingly. Page 40 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 145 of 266 3. The landscape plan included in Section VILC shall be revised at least 10 days prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Include mitigation information on the plan for any existing trees on the site that are not removed by the residential property owner for fire wood in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5. b. Include the linear feet of parkways and the required vs. proposed number of trees in the Landscape Calculations table demonstrating compliance with the standards in UDC I I- 3A-17 and 11-3B-7C. c. Include the linear feet of street buffers and the required vs.proposed number of trees in the Landscape Calculations table demonstrating compliance with the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. d. Depict trees and shrubs in the minimum 20-foot wide street buffers along N. Centrepointee Way in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. 4. The 50-foot wide private street easement(i.e. Jasmine Lane) shall be relinquished where it crosses the subject property. Proof of relinquishment shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 5. North Dashwood Pl. shall be extended as a full access street into the site with the first phase of development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. 6. Local street access (or a driveway with a cross-access easement) shall be provided to the property to the east of the R-40 zoned property(Parcel#R4582530202) as set forth in UDC I I-3A-3A.3. The Applicant should coordinate with the developer of that property on a location for the access. If a driveway is provided, a recorded copy of the cross-access easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer for the phase in which it is located(third phase). 7. 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. 8. Provide address signage for homes accessed by the common driveways on Lot 5,Block I and 9,Block 4 for emergency wayfinding purposes. 9. 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 shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 10. All existing structures on the site shall be removed prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat phase in which they are located. 11. Parking is restricted to only one side of the 27-foot wide street sections; signage shall be installed prohibiting parking on one side of the street to ensure emergency access can be provided. Page 41 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 146 of 266 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.meridianciN.oMIpublic_works.aspx?id=272 1.2 The following proposed manholes have less than 3'of cover: A-3,A-4,A-5, C-1 and D-5. Public Works has previously discussed with the applicant the possibility of using grinder pumps in these shallow areas,but the plans do not note the use of them. If the parcel to the north of the multi-family is to be served by Meridian, applicant must stub sewer at minimum slope in N. Centrepointe Way to the north boundary line. 1.3 Each phase must be modeled to ensure adequate fire flow. 1.4 Public Works has met with SUEZ Water and agreed that water service to the north for the multi-family portion of the development will be provided according to how annexation proceeds. Meridian will provide water in Meridian, and SUEZ will provide water in Boise. If the area being considered for inclusion is to be served by the City of Meridian, the Public Works Department would like to have a completed water main loop north to the existing water main in E. Wainwright Drive. The purpose of this loop is not for flow and pressure reasons,it is to create redundancy and for mitigation of water quality concerns created by dead end mainlines. 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 Page 42 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 147 of 266 single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing,landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer,an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 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 Page 43 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 148 of 266 district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancioy.or /WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=184561&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=184570&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) hgg://weblink.meridiancity.oLy/web link8/0/doc/165379/Pa e�spx F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT http://weblink.meridiancily.org wweblink8/0/doc/16523IlPagel.aspx G. SETTLER'S IRRIGATION DISTRICT http://weblink.meridianciV.or lweblink8/0/docll64812IPa eg 1.aspx H. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT http://weblink.meridianciV.or lWebLink8lDocView.aspx?id=165010&dbid=0 Page 44 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 149 of 266 I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) http://weblink.meridianciV.or8/weblink8/0/docll 64959IPagel.aspx J. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=179144&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.orzlWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=184481&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit Y L. CITY OF BOISE https://weblink.meridiancity.ory/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=184571&&dbid=0&&repo=Meridian Ci IX. FINDINGS AUpon feeommendation from the. COMPFehensive Plan Alap Amendment Commission, shall,and a4 the Develepment the Comprehensive Plan4, he 6oeuneefll sh-all make the following findings: Code.1. The proposed amendment is eensistepA with the other-elements of the Compr-ehensive Plan. 2. The proposed amendment provides an impfeved guide to fbtufe growth and development Of the eity. the Gempr-eh-nsive Plan. The C-omfflissien find-s that the Igi-opesed amendment is eons-Went with the Goa&, Objeeh' 4. The proposed amendment is eensisteal with the Unified Development Code, 5. The amendment will be eempatible with existing and-planned sUFFOURding land Uses. Page 45 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 150 of 266 The Commi7gigienfinds that the proposed amendment will not buFdefi existing andplanne senke eapabilities in this Portion of the eity. Sewer and water serviees are available to be extended te this.site. the area. and suffieient area to nii6gate, any development inipaets to adjaeent properties. 9. The proposedamendment; in the lost ipAerest f the City,.4'Meridian. B. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposal to annex and develop the subject property with R-8. R-15 and R-40 zoning consistent with the MDR and AMU--R FLUM designations. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The r'.,mmis Sta ands the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The r'..nmi:....ie Sta finds the proposed map amendment and subsequent development wou could be detrimental to the public safety and welfare due to the high volume of traffic from the proposed development and commercial development to the south that would be funneled through Alpine Point Subdivision with the extension off. Dashwood Place to E. Wainwright Dr. in the absence of a connection to Wainwright Dr. via Centrepointe Wad 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 !'..,..,.,..,.& Sta ands that 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 below capacity for the elementary school and over Page 46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 151 of 266 capacity for the middle school and high school; Me G H mis- i Stafffinds the proposed map amendment would result in an adverse impact on the school district. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. The G..mmis, Sta ands the proposed annexation is ne#in the best interest of the City at this time due to the G m mis-,;eH; a -iF o z.i+. having obtained approval from the City of Boise aet on a r ,u tfi „e,.ce!,•.,;,, &f'to exclude the eastern portion of the subject property from their Area of City Impact boundary. Fut4h r Me G m n ; .ien find-s ''e pp e nt di C. 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 /"'..,,.,.,,fi Sta ands 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 and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The G..mm:..gie n Sta ands public services can be made available to the subject property and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The G.,mm:..gie n Sta ands 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 G..mm is-sie n Sta ands 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 G.,,,,.mis. Sta ands the proposed development would could be detrimental to the public safety and general welfare due to the proposed extension off. Dashwood Pl. to Wainwright Dr. and the resulting high volume of traffic that would be routed through a residential neighborhood(Alpine Point Sub); extension of N. Centrpoint Way, a collector street, to E. Wainwright Dr. should take place first. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8- 30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The G.,mm is-sie n Sta is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that would need to be preserved with this development. shall detennine the fellowin&- feasible. Page 47 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 152 of 266 2. The altefaa4ive eemplia-nee provides a*e"al or- for-meeting requirements; a meeting Me requirements in bDG 41 3G-3-. 3. The altemative means will not be matefially detfimental to the p4lie welfafe or-impair-the intended uses and ehafaeter-of suffounding properties-. Staff-fiHd7y the alter-native means ef eenT4,ing with &DG 11 3G 3 will ne�be mater4a!4 properWes and will aetually be a benefit to the pubhe web��by,providing a buffer beAveen Page 48 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 153 of 266 E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 C Item Title: Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm North (H-2019-0134) Meeting Notes: RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL CiWEI�� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.C. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: Title of Item - Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm North (H-2019-0134) by Martin L. Hill, Hill & Hill Properties, Located at the Southeast Corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/19/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 154 of 266 3/19/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 3/19/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-C Project Name: Hill's Century Farm North Project No.: H-2019-0134 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/SignInForm Dash Details?id=408 1/1 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING March 19,2020 Legend DATE: f � Continued from:March 5, 2020 I Ppc t D=f�or 0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission I LJ _ ' FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ffil 1 Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0134 Hill's Century Farm North - LOCATION: Southeast corner of S. Eagle Rd. and E. -- Amity Rd., in the SW '/4 of Section 33, i T.3N.,R.IE " I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant requests approval of the following applications: • Modification to the existing development agreement for Hill's Century Farm Commercial(H- 2018-0127, Inst. #2019-033207)to update the conceptual development plan and certain provisions of the agreement to allow for the development of a self-service storage facility and retail/professional office uses where single-family residential uses are currently approved; • Rezone of a total of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N(4.9 acres), C-C (4.35 acres),and R-15 (30.65 acres)zoning districts; • Preliminary plat consisting of 147 building lots and 18 common lots on 43.02 acres of land in the R-8,R-15, C-N and C-C zoning districts; • Planned unit development for an age-restricted 55 and older gated community with deviations from certain development standards; • Conditional use permit for a 73,730 square foot 443-unit self-service storage facility on 3.89 acres of land in the C-C zoning district; • Private streets for access to single-family attached and detached units in a gated development; and, • Alternative compliance to UDC 11-3F-4A.4b to allow 124 units accessed off private gated streets; and to 11-3F-4A.6 to allow 2 common driveways off private streets. Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 155 of 266 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 43 Existing/Proposed Zoning R-8(Medium-Density Residential)and C-N (Neighborhood Business) Future Land Use Designation MU-N(Mixed Use—Neighborhood) Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/agricultural land,(2)single-family homes and a cell tower Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential,self-service storage facility and retail/office Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 147 buildable lots/18 common lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) 4 phases(2 residential&2 commercial) Number of Residential Units(type 137 single-family attached and detached of units) Density(gross&net) 4.07 units/acre(gross);7.28 units/acre(net) Open Space(acres,total 5.55 acres(16.4%) [%]/buffer/qualified) Amenities 2 amenities required;a clubhouse,swimming pool, segment of the multi-use pathway system,and outdoor activity complex(specific amenities in this area are to be determined at CZC review o the clubhouse)are proposed Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of November 14,2019; 5 attendees(see sign-in sheet attendees: included in application) History(previous approvals) CPAM-15-001,AZ-15-004(DA#2015-061375);H-2016- 0092(MDA#2016-119080);H-2018-0087(CUP for cell tower);H-2018-0127(MDA-2"d Addendum to DA #2019-033207) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes(a Traffic Impact Study was not required) • Requires ACHD No Commission Action (yes/no) Access Access is proposed from the west via S.Eagle Rd. (W.Rockhampton (Arterial/Collectors/State St.)and from the north via E.Amity Rd. (S. Tavistock Ave.),both Hwy/Local)(Existing and arterial streets; from the south via S.Wayland Ave.,a local street;and Proposed) from the east via Hill Park St. Traffic Level of Service Better than"E"(Acceptable level of service for a 2-lane principal/minor arterial is"B") Stub Stub streets are proposed to be extended into this site from the south Street/Interconnectivity/Cros boundary(S.Wayland Ave.)and from the east boundary(Hill Park St.— s Access _ approved but not yet constructed) Existing Road Network None Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None Buffers Proposed Road Amity Rd.:Widen pavement to 17' from centerline&construct 5' Improvements detached sidewalk 36' from centerline Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 156 of 266 Description Details Page Eagle Rd.:Widen pavement to 17' from centerline&construct 5' detached sidewalk 41' from centerline Distance to nearest City Park Hillsdale City Park is in the development process at the project's east (+size) boundary Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.8 miles • Fire Response Time 3:00 minutes(under ideal conditions)from Station#4 • Resource Reliability 78%-does not meet the target goal of 80%or greater • Risk Identification 1 and 3—current resources would be adequate to supply service the proposed project • Accessibility Meets all required access,road widths&turnarounds • Special/resource needs Aerial device not required • Water Supply Residential requires 1,000 gallons/minute for one hour; Storage requires 1, ons/minute for two hours Police Service • Distance to Police 4 miles Station • Police Response Time Priority 3 3:48 Priority 1 7:09 Priority I 10:42 • Calls for Service 257(in RD `M779') • %of calls for service %of P3 US 0.78% split by priority %of P2 US 51.75% %of PI CFS 37.74% %of PO US 9.73% • Crimes 14(in RD `M779') • Crashes 6(in RD `M779') West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) Enrollment capacity i es Dew,to schoo • Capacity of Schools **Silver Sage Elementary" 307 405 4.6 miles • #of Students Enrolled Lake Hazel Middle School 1085 1000 1.9 miles Mountain View High School 2262 2400 4.1 miles Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent to site Services • Sewer Shed South Black Cat trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining 13.82 Balance • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impact/Concerns Manholes cannot be located in landscaped areas unless they are located within an access road per City standards provided. Water • Distance to Water Directly adjacent to site Services • Pressure Zone 4 Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 157 of 266 Description Details Page • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality None • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns A portion of the proposed 8"water main will need to be upsized to 12". The reason for the 12" size is for future abandonment of the existing 12" in Eagle Road due to avoiding utilities crossing the roundabout at the Amity intersection. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend � Leg-end i 0 Pro"ec- Lxa-or lei Project Lacafon AWUiurn Densely - ideRtlal uLJ W id till udfliu+� LdV iden ial Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend RU! R 0 Legend Pro"ea Lcca=or ,ys.R.;- RU letProjevTLflca�iar +_i City Limit - 3R-- 78 —iilw. — Planned Pnime s R- RUT R HE -C � RS, T RUT RUT RUT R= R- � I � RUT RUTrR R . _R- ..AFAR RUT a Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 158 of 266 Note: The subject property also includes a 172'x 709'+1-remnant piece of R-8 zoned land on the northern portion of the east side of the site(not included in the selected area on the above maps)that was left out of the preliminary plat for Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision to the east(see zoning map above with arrow pointed toward referenced area). This area was allowed to be included in a future plat with the property to the west(i.e. the subject property). III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Martin L. Hill,Hill& Hill Properties—3625 E. Amity Rd., Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Michael D. Wardle,Brighton Corporation—2929 W.Navigator Dr.,Meridian,ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 2/14/2020 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 2/11/2020 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 3/8/2020 Nextdoor posting 2/11/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan) (Note: This project was submitted prior to the new Comprehensive Plan being adopted; therefore, this project will be reviewed under the previous Plan) The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use—Neighborhood(MU-N). The purpose of the Commercial designation is to assign areas where neighborhood-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to avoid predominantly single- use developments by incorporating a variety of uses.Land uses in these areas should be primarily residential with supporting non-residential services.Non-residential uses in these areas tend to be smaller scale and provide a good or service that people do not travel far for(approximately one mile) and need regularly. Employment opportunities for those living in the neighborhood are encouraged. Connectivity and access between non-residential and residential land uses is particularly critical in MU-N areas. Tree-lined,narrow streets are encouraged. Developments are also encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-N plan depicted in Figure 3-1 in the Comprehensive Plan. Residential densities should comprise a minimum of 40% of the development area at densities ranging from 6 to 12 units/acre. The majority of the site(more than the minimum 40%) is proposed to development with single-family residential attached and detached homes at a gross density of 4.07 units/acre;the remainder of the site is proposed to develop with non-residential services consisting of a self-service storage facility and commercial retail/office uses. Although multi-family or duplexes aren't proposed as a transition Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 159 of 266 between single-family homes and the commercial uses as depicted on the conceptual MU-N plan in the Comprehensive Plan, attached dwellings on smaller lots are proposed along the northern shared boundary. Although Staff would prefer more of a transition in uses in this area,the required 25' wide landscaped buffer on the commercial property and the 6' tall cedar fence proposed along the residential boundary will assist in buffering the residential from the commercial uses. The north phase of the residential area will have narrow(i.e. 29')tree-lined streets. The storage facility will provide a needed service for area residents and the commercial uses should provide employment opportunities and services for residents in the area. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "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 single family attached and detached homes with standard and age qualified (SS+) options will contribute to the variety of housing types available in the City. • "Provide housing options close to employment and shopping centers."(3.07.02D) The proposed development will provide housing options in close proximity to office and commercial uses planned to develop in this area. • "Require open space areas within all development."(6.01.01A) An open space exhibit is included in Section VIII.G that complies with the minimum UDC standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3. • "Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City."(3.01.0117) The proposed development is currently within the City and urban services can be provided to this development. • "Restrict private curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets."(3.06.02D) One(1)public street access (W. Rockhampton St) is proposed via S. Eagle Rd. and one (1) public street access (S. Tavistock Ave) is proposed via E.Amity Rd. Staff is of the opinion the proposed accesses shown in Section HITE are acceptable unless otherwise restricted by the City Council and/or ACHD. • "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) Detached sidewalks are proposed throughout the development along internal local streets and adjacent to abutting arterial streets (i.e. Eagle Rd. &Amity Rd.). There are no pathway connections to this development from the south except for the sidewalk along the stub street to this property.A pathway stub is proposed to the commercial portion of the development to the north for interconnectivity.A micro path connection is also proposed mid-block at the west boundary of the site connecting to the sidewalk along S. Eagle Rd. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed Use areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pgs.23-24): (Staffs analysis in italics) • "Residential densities should be a minimum of six dwellings/acre." The gross density for the overall residential portion of the development is 4.07 units per acre with a net density of 7.28 units per acre, which is consistent with the density range in the Development Agreement of 4 to 8 units/acre (net)previously approved for this project. Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 160 of 266 • "Where feasible,higher density and/or multi-family residential development will be encouraged, especially for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69." Medium density single-family residential uses are proposed; this project is not adjacent to a State Highway although it is within a mile of E. Lake Hazel Rd., a mobility corridor. • "A conceptual site plan for the entire mixed-use area should be included in the application." A conceptual development plan was submitted for the proposed mixed use development, included in Section VIII.C. • "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed(not residential),the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space." Staff recommends the future buildings in the retail/professional office area are arranged in accord with this provision. To ensure future consistency with this provision,Staff recommends a concept plan for that overall area is submitted prior to the City Council hearing that demonstrates how this will be accomplished. • "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development." There are no existing residential uses, only proposed residential uses, adjacent to the commercial portion of the development; a minimum 25'wide dense landscape buffer landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-9C will be required on the commercial property with development. • "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses [i.e. commercial(includes retail,restaurants, etc.), office,residential, civic(includes public open space,parks,entertainment venues, etc.), and industrial]. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis." The proposed development will include a mix of residential, commercial retail, office, and industrial(storage units) uses as desired. • "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals,churches, schools,parks, daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments." Medical offices (St. Luke's), a City Park(Hillsdale), the YMCA and an elementary school (Hillsdale) all exist within % mile to the east of this site. • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas,open space, libraries, and schools are expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count." A City Park abuts the east boundary of this site and an elementary school, YMCA and small library is on the east side of the park.A site plan is not included for the retail/office portion of the development. The Applicant should design this area with buildings arranged to create some form of common, usable area,such as a plaza or green space in accord with this provision. • "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians." The commercial portion of the development will be accessible to the residential neighborhood by vehicles via a local public street; a pedestrian connection is proposed at the north boundary of the residential area to the commercial area. • "Street sections consistent with the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map are required within the Unified Development Code." The Master Street Map does not depict any streets across this property. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 161 of 266 • "Because of the existing small lots within Old Town,development is not subject to the Mixed- Use standards listed herein." The proposed development is not within Old Town; therefore, this provision is not applicable. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-N areas, per the Comprehensive Plan(pg. 25): (Staffs analysis in italics) • "Development should comply with the items listed for development in all Mixed Use areas." See previous section and associated analysis. • "Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 40%of the development area at densities ranging from six to 12 units/acre." With the 26 independent living units planned to the east of the single-family portion of the development, the overall gross density of the residential area is 4.4 units/acre(7.35 units/acre net), which is below the desired target range of the MU-N designation but within the range listed in the DA of 4 to 8 units/acre (net). • "Non-residential buildings should be proportional to and blend in with residential buildings." Concept elevations submitted for the storage facility while somewhat proportional in height, do not "blend"with the residential buildings in color,materials or design;concept elevations were not submitted for the commercial retaiUoffice or independent living portions of the development. To ensure consistency with this provision in the future,Staff recommends the Applicant make changes to the storage facility elevations to comply with this provision and submit concept elevations for the commercial buildings and independent living units that demonstrate a cohesive design that is proportional to and blends with the single-family residential buildings prior to the City Council hearing. In the alternative, design guidelines may be submitted for the overall development that demonstrate consistency with this provision. • "Unless a structure contains a mix of both residential and office, or residential and commercial land uses,maximum building size should be limited to a 20,000 square-foot building footprint. For the development of public school sites,the maximum building size does not apply." Residential uses are not proposed with the commercial retail and office uses. None of the structures within the storage facility exceed the 20,000 square foot(sf.) building footprint. Future commercial retail/office buildings(without residential uses)should not exceed 20,000 sf. • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places such as parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area. Outdoor seating at restaurants do not count towards this requirement." A City Park, YMCA, and elementary school exist to the east of this site and comprise over 10%of the MU-N designated area. • "Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development above the minimum 10%,the developer may be eligible for additional residential densities and/or an increase to the maximum building footprint." Public and quasi public uses have already been developed or are in the development process directly to the east of this site exceeding the minimum 10%. No such increases to density or building footprint are requested. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS(UDC) A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) A modification to the existing Amended Development Agreement(H-2018-0127,Instrument #2019-033207)is proposed consisting of an update to the conceptual development plan for the Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 162 of 266 site and text changes to some of the provisions in Section#5.1 of the agreement as noted in Section VIII.A of this report. The existing approved concept plan depicts a bubble plan for medium density residential, a proposed cell tower,commercial(C-N zoned), elementary school,YMCA, City Park, library, and health center complex uses on the site. The proposed plan still includes these uses but amends the northern portion of the residential area to also include self-service storage and retail/professional office uses; and amends the southern portion of the commercial (C-N zoned)area to also include independent living, and assisted living(see Section VIII.A). The northern portion of the site proposed for storage and commercial uses is proposed to be rezoned from R-8 to C-N and C-C and the portion proposed for independent living is proposed to be rezoned from C-N to R-15 to accommodate the proposed uses. Because the proposed uses are all listed as allowed uses in the applicable zoning districts per UDC Tables 11-2A-2 and 11-2B-2 and are uses that are desired within the MU-N FLUM designation, Staff is supportive of the proposed MDA. The proposed changes to the text of the agreement are noted in strike-out/underline format; Staff's comments in response to the proposed changes are noted in italic text. Staff is supportive of the proposed MDA request. B. REZONE(RZ) A rezone of a total of 39.9 acres of land from the R-8 zoning district to the C-N(4.9 acres), C-C (4.35 acres),and R-15 (30.65 acres)zoning districts is proposed, as depicted on the legal descriptions and associated exhibit maps in Section VIII.B. The proposed rezone and uses in these districts are consistent with the MU-N FLUM designation as discussed above in Section V; the C-C zoning district is requested for the storage facility as such uses are prohibited in the C-N district. The City may require a Development Agreement(DA) in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure future development as proposed with this application is consistent with the associated design elements of the Mixed Use FLUM designation, staff recommends new DA provisions are added to the proposed amended DA provisions included in Section VIII.A. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP)-SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITY A CUP is proposed for a 73,730 square foot(s.f.)443-unit self-service storage facility consisting of 8 structures ranging in size from 7,075 to 13,709 square feet on 3.89 acres of land in the C-C zoning district in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-2. Development of the facility should be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-213-3 for the C-C zoning district. A variety of storage unit sizes are proposed ranging from 5' x 5' to 14' x 35' as shown on the schematic site plan in Section VIII.D. One hundred thirty two (132)of the storage units are proposed to be climate controlled. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff comments in italics) UDC 11-4-3-34, Self-Service Storage Facility,as follows: Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 163 of 266 A. Storage units and/or areas shall not be used as dwellings or as a commercial or industrial place of business. The manufacture or sale of any item by a tenant from or at a self-service storage facility is specifically prohibited. The Applicant shall comply. B. On site auctions of unclaimed items by the storage facility owners shall be allowed as a temporary use in accord with chapter 3, article E, "Temporary Use Requirements",of this title. The Applicant shall comply. C. The distance between structures shall be a minimum of twenty five feet(25'). The proposed site plan complies. D. The storage facility shall be completely fenced,walled, or enclosed and screened from public view. Where abutting a residential district or public road,chainlink shall not be allowed as fencing material. The perimeter buildings and a 6'tall fence (where no buildings are proposed)will screen the site from public view. E. If abutting a residential district,the facility hours of public operation shall be limited to six o'clock(6:00)A.M.to eleven o'clock(11:00)P.M. The site abuts planned residential uses along the south boundary; the Applicant shall comply. F.A minimum twenty five foot(25')wide landscape buffer shall be provided where the facility abuts a residential use,unless a greater buffer width is otherwise required by this title. Landscaping shall be provided as set forth in subsection 11-313-9C of this title.A 25'wide landscape buffer is proposed along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to planned residential uses; the buffer should be planted with a mix of materials(i.e. evergreen and deciduous trees,shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover) that results in a barrier that allows trees to touch at maturity—more trees/shrubs should be added to achieve the desired barrier. To prevent incidences of crime in this area that isn't visible from a public street, Staff recommends the area is fenced off from public access in accord with CPTED(Crime Prevention through Environmental Design)guidelines. G. If the use is unattended,the standards in accord with section 11-3A-16, "Self-Service Uses", of this title shall also apply. See standards below. H. The facility shall have a second means of access for emergency purposes.A secondary emergency only access is proposed at the west end of the site via E.Amity Rd. as depicted on the site plan. 1. All outdoor storage of material shall be maintained in an orderly manner so as not to create a public nuisance. Materials shall not be stored within the required yards. Stored items shall not block sidewalks or parking areas and may not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. The Applicant shall comply. J. The site shall not be used as a"vehicle wrecking or junk yard" as herein defined. The Applicant shall comply. K. For any use requiring the storage of fuel or hazardous material,the use shall be located a minimum of one thousand feet(1,000) from a hospital.No fuel or hazardous material will be stored on the site. UDC 11-3A-16, Self-Service Uses, as follows: Any unattended, self-service uses, including,but not limited to,laundromats, automatic teller machines(ATMs),vehicle washing facilities, fuel sales facilities, and storage facilities, shall comply with the following requirements. The Meridian Police Chief or designee may approve Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 164 of 266 alternative standards where it is determined that a similar or greater level of security is provided. A. Entrance or view of the self-service facility shall be open to the public street or to adjoining businesses and shall have low impact security lighting. B. Financial transaction areas shall be oriented to and visible from an area that receives a high volume of traffic, such as a collector or arterial street. C. Landscape shrubbery shall be limited to no more than three feet(Y) in height between entrances and financial transaction areas and the public street. Staff has reviewed these standards and found the proposed plan to be in general compliance with these standards with the recommended conditions. Access: Access to the facility is proposed via a driveway from E. Amity Rd. on the east side of the site;the entry to the facility faces future commercial uses to the east. An emergency only access is proposed via E.Amity Rd. as depicted on the site plan. Common Driveways(UDC 11-6C-3): All common driveways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. Two(2)common driveways are proposed that comply with UDC standards. 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 19 and 54,Block 1 for emergency wayfinding purposes as requested by the Fire Department. Parking: Off-street parking for the office associated with the storage facility is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6. Based on 800 square feet for the proposed office, a minimum of one(1) space is required; a total of 4 spaces are proposed in excess of the minimum required. Landscaping: A 25' wide street buffer is required along E.Amity Rd. as set forth in UDC Table 11-2B-3, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; the proposed buffer complies with UDC standards. Landscaping is proposed in accord with UDC standards. A 25' buffer to residential uses is also required as discussed above. Sidewalk/Pathway: A detached sidewalk is required along E. Amity Rd., an arterial street,per UDC 11-3A-17C. The Park's Department requests a 10'wide detached multi-use pathway is provided instead of a 5'wide sidewalk. Hours of Operation: Business hours of operation in the C-C district are limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district per UDC 11-2B-3B consistent with UDC 11-4-3-34E. Building size: As discussed above in Section V,the Comprehensive Plan states,building size should be limited to a 20,000 s.£building footprint if the structure doesn't have a residential Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 165 of 266 component with the office or commercial use;this applies to all fixture commercial retail/office on the site. The Applicant requested a deviation from this standard for the storage facility; however, none of the individual structures exceed 20,000 square feet,therefore, a deviation from this provision is not necessary. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the storage facility structures, included in Section VIILL Building materials consist of vertical reveal metal panels with stucco finish, fiber cement panels with metal channel reveals, and typical fascia with stone wall accents. Structures have step-backs for modulation along E. Amity Rd. As discussed above in Section V,the proposed elevations do not demonstrate a cohesive design that is proportion to and blends with the residential buildings within the development as desired in the MU-N FLUM designation. Therefore,the proposed concept elevations are not approved.Revised concept elevations(or design guidelines) should be submitted accordingly prior to the City Council hearing.Final design is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Certificate of Zoning Compliance/Design Review: A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications for the site. Prior to submittal of these applications the property is required to be subdivided. D. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat consists of a total of 147 buildable lots (137 residential and 10 commercial)and 18 common lots on 43 acres of land in the R-8,R-15, C-N and C-C zoning districts. A phasing plan is depicted on the plat that reflects four(4)phases of development(see Section VIII.E); however,the residential phase is anticipated to develop in one phase. The storage facility is proposed to develop first. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and accessory structures at the northeast corner of the site that are proposed to be removed with development;these structures should be removed prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for the phase in which they are located.There is also an existing home and accessory structure that is proposed to remain on Lot 150,Block 1, which complies with the dimensional standards(i.e. setbacks)of the R-8 district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): All development should comply with the dimensional standards for the applicable district as follows: UDC Tables 11-2A-6(R-8 district); 11-2A-7(R-15 district); and 11-2B-2 (C-N and C-C districts). Design: All subdivisions are required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3C(i.e. streets,alleys, common driveways,block face, etc.). An exception to UDC 11-6C-3A.1,which prohibits through properties is requested through the PUD (see analysis below). Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed on the plat as follows: One(1)public street access(W.Rockhampton St.)via S. Eagle Rd.; one (1)public street access(S. Tavistock Ave.)via E.Amity Rd.; and one shared driveway access for the proposed storage facility and commercial retail/office development via E. Amity Rd. Staff believes the proposed access is consistent with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-3. Page 12 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 166 of 266 Private streets are proposed for internal access within the North Phase of the development(see analysis below); two(2)common driveways are also proposed off private streets. Private Streets: Private streets are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Private streets are not intended for single-family developments other than those that create a common mew through the site design or that propose a limited gated residential development. Private streets are proposed within the North Phase of the development for access to proposed attached and detached units; two(2)gated entries and mews with alley accessed homes are proposed in the central portion of the development. The private street standards restrict development to no more than 50 dwelling units and don't allow common driveways off of a private street. The Applicant requests alternative compliance to UDC 11-3F-4A.4b to allow 124 units accessed off private gated streets; and to 11-3F-4A.6 to allow 2 common driveways off private streets. Requests for alternative compliance are only allowed when one or more of the conditions in UDC 11-5B-5B.2 exist. The Applicant's justification is,"The proposed design includes innovative design features based on"new urbanism,""neotraditional design,"or other architectural and/or site designs that promote walkable and mixed use neighborhoods."The Applicant believes the unique site design of gated,private streets, alleys, and common driveways; and common areas and pathways in combination with the character and diversity of the proposed dwellings achieves the aforementioned objective. Further,the Applicant believes approval of the alternative compliance request will provide a superior means of meeting the requirements of the UDC as is the intent for requests for Alternative Compliance.For these reasons, the Director has approved the Applicant's request for private streets and alternative compliance as it meets the requirements for such a request; see associated Findings in Section X.E and F. The Applicant or Owner shall have one year to complete the tasks listed in UDC I1-3F-3B for final approval of the private streets proposed within the development. No building permit shall be issued for any structure using a private street for access to a public street until the private street has been approved. The Applicant should coordinate with Terri Ricks and Fire Dept.for addressing lots accessed by alleys without frontage on a public street.Address signage for wayfinding purposes should be provided in these areas as well as at the private street for homes accessed by common driveways. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): The Park's Dept.requests a 10' wide multi-use pathway is provided within the street buffers in place of sidewalks along S.Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd.within a 14'wide public use easement.The pathway should be depicted on a revised plan submitted with the final plat application. A pathway stub is proposed to the sidewalk along S. Eagle Rd. and to the commercial development to the north,which will extend along the east side of the service driveway adjacent to the commercial retail/office pads to the sidewalk along E. Amity Rd. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 : Sidewalks are required to be provided along all streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. Five foot wide detached sidewalks with 8' wide parkways are proposed throughout the development in accord with UDC standards. As noted above, Staff recommends a 10'wide detached multi-use pathway is provided instead of a typical 5' wide sidewalk along S.Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd.,as requested by the Park's Dept. Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 167 of 266 Parkways (UDC 11-3A-1 : Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E. Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed with Class II trees adjacent to all streets within the development in accord with UDC standards. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd.,both arterial streets, per UDC Tables 11-2A-7 and 11-2B-3, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C as proposed. If the unimproved right-of-way is 10' or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk or property line,the developer shall maintain a 10' compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative ground cover as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.5; this appears to apply along E.Amity Rd. Parkways are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3B-7C as proposed. Open space areas are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E as proposed. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum 5'wide landscaped buffer per UDC 11-6C-3D.5.If applicable,depict landscaping in accord with this standard on a revised landscape plan. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3 : A minimum of 10%qualified open space is required to be provided for the residential development as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3B. Based on a total of 33.64 acres for the residential area, a minimum of 3.36 acres is required to be provided; a total of 5.5 acres(or 16.4%)is proposed,which exceeds the minimum standards. This calculation does not include 8' wide parkways along internal streets which also qualify toward the qualified open space standards. Qualified Site Amenities(UDC 11-3 : Based on 33.64 acres for the residential area, a minimum of two(2)qualified site amenities required; a clubhouse, swimming pool, segments of the multi-use pathway system, and outdoor activity complex(specific amenities in this area are to be determined at CZC)are proposed in excess of the minimum standards. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): There are no significant waterways that cross this site other than possibly user ditches.All irrigation ditches crossing the site are required to be piped with development. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6,11-3A- • All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Six-foot tall solid stained cedar fencing is proposed(or exists) along the perimeter boundary of the subdivision. Open vision wrought iron fencing and some closed vision fencing is proposed adjacent to internal common areas; fences abutting pathways and common open space that aren't entirely visible from a public street such as on the east side of Lot 107,Block 1,shall be revised to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7.A detail of the open vision wrought iron fence that complies with the standards listed in should be included on a revised landscape plan. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Utilities shall be installed with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 21. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the single-story, single- family attached and detached dwellings in"Cadence",the age restricted 55 and older portion of Page 14 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 168 of 266 the development,included in Section VIII.I. Building materials consist of a variety of materials including vertical,horizontal and shake siding and stucco with stone/brick accents. Conceptual elevations were not submitted for the estate lots in the R-8 district along the southern boundary of the development. Final design of the attached structures is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications for the single-family attached units; all attached structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for the clubhouse and swimming pool area and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. The Applicant requests approval for this area to be constructed prior to subdivision of the property; Staff is amenable to this request. E. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD) A Planned Unit Development is proposed to enable the provision of a mix of attached and detached age-qualified 55+dwelling units that incorporate a variety of housing types and setbacks unique to unit and site design. The development is proposed to be gated for security purposes and have private streets, alleys and a common driveway for access to the units within the development. Setbacks: Deviations to the typical R-15 building setback requirements are proposed as noted below; and to UDC 11-6C-3B.5,which requires alleys to be designed so that the entire length is visible from a public street.Although not visible from a public street as public streets aren't proposed within the PUD area,the entire length of the alleys are visible from internal private streets. " R;W rfPW FRONT: GARAGE: 51M14 *MET SIMI RIARi FAT I0-FRrNT GARAGE iEMY BRA•' -'47 E743' 7ZA' STAhIRM0-FRON'rCMAPE i5'4Y W4Y 5-' 16-V C ATTAQH91D HQN%- 6ETSW�AS&M-AME NSW:- .0 FRM GMG{-rF fa6E rmw No deviations to the setbacks are requested or approved to the setbacks along the periphery of the planned development in accord with UDC 11-7-4A.1. Through Properties: The UDC(11-6C-3A.1)prohibits through properties except where it is shown that unusual topography or other conditions make it impossible to meet this requirement; through properties shall be limited to one street access on one frontage, designated by a note on the final plat. Lot 150,Block 1,where the existing home is proposed to remain,is a considered a"through"lot as it has frontage on two streets (E.Hill Park Ln.&W. Rockhampton Ct.).As part of the PUD request,the Applicant requests Council approval of an exception to this standard due to the unusual 2.57 acre size of the proposed lot,the northerly orientation and location of the residential structure, and its separation from the Page 15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 169 of 266 detached shop structure 150' to the south to allow access to be provided from both streets (E.Hill Park Ln.for the home and W.Rockhampton Ct.for the shop). Parking(UDC 11-3C-6) Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for residential uses,which requires parking pads to be provided in addition to garage parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms per unit(i.e. 1-2 bedroom units require 2 spaces per unit with at least one of those being in an enclosed garage,the other space may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad; 3-4 bedroom units require 4 spaces per unit with at least two of those being in an enclosed garage,the other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10' x 20' parking pad). The standard—front garage and patio—front garage units allow for 20' parking pads but the traditional—alley garage and traditional—alley park side lots do not. An application for alternative compliance to the off-street parking standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings shall be submitted and approved by the Director prior to the City Council hearing. Because 29' wide private streets are proposed within the development, parking is only allowed on one side of the street and should be provided on the street side adjacent to the alley accessed units rather than the patio homes with front accessed garages to allow for more spaces that aren't encumbered by driveways.An extra 30 parking spaces are proposed in the central portion of the development next to the community center which can accommodate guest parking in addition to on-street parking. Analysis of Compliance with PUD Standards (UDC 11-7-4): The proposed uses within the PUD area are interconnected through a system ofprivate streets and pathways through common areas. Buildings are clustered to enable larger, more usable areas for common use and enjoyment. A minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space is required to be provided for each unit; this requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks and enclosed yards as set forth in UDC 11-7-4B. A variety of housing types are proposed consisting of conventional single-family detached homes on estate lots, single-family attached patio homes, traditional detached alley-loaded homes and traditional detached alley park side homes. The residential gross density of the north phase (i.e. age restricted portion) of the development is 4.66 units/acre with a net density of 9.03 units/acre, which is consistent with the Development Agreement provisions for desired density. VII. DECISION A. Staff. Staff recommends approval of the proposed DA modification,RZ,PP, CUP and PUD applications; the Director approved the request for ALT and tentatively approved the PS request. Page 16 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 170 of 266 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Existing&Proposed Conceptual Development Plans and Text Changes to Development Agreement Inst.#2019-033207 for Proposed Development Agreement Modification Existing Concept Plan: Pwpesv RFVISEO Vpdafed Plan(dated: 1•'122Q0;9 1211IV201 )Apayk'vd b) t A3 Hill Properties DA Modification .ems. • •'�' CFNTEiRIr FARMCOMMERCIALWsuftIVSI014 iMFOIUM QEMWTV RFOGWkTIAL jj 1.3E"IVF; H.S ✓v'cF - i 1 1 r -HEALTHY LIVING I � sutvsxlsla� ' WESTAVAILEVEMTARTSCM01- }�,�, I INCALCJTY PAR..LIERART. IS._f 1 HEALTH CENTER COMPLFi7 ---------------------------------- FMIR'S CIPMRV FARM S0180PASIC]Ff ,,....�.._�.�..,«. Proposed Concept/Bubble Plan: r.<. HILL'S C ftRT--' �j RET ILJPROFESSION L COMMERC SELF-SERVICE STORAGE -- .7 LSU� (VISION OFF(E - � INOEPENOEFJT LNIfr +; M1 VERANDA ASSI5TED -� CA DEN E LIVING m - _ ESTATE A ,�_'—.' II_ a _ r _ LOTS CD L Hillsdale 49 City Park'Z .F LONVE Vk"AL LCTS sda1. le 2 NI 1SI N � , i .m "! A Q HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH r i' M DdL.b-30,2019 C6NCEP7UAL-SU8JECTT0CHANGE Page 17 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 171 of 266 Proposed Changes to the Text [pgs. 1-3 of Second Amendment to Development Agreement Inst. #2019-033207(H-2018-0127): (Staffs comments in italics—not to be included in final DA) 1. OWNER/DEVELOPER shall be bound by the terms of the original Development Agreement, except as specifically amended as follows: 5. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.1. Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions: a. impr-eve S.Hillsdale Avenue as a ptiblie stfeet adjaeent to the east boundafy of this site as FeEttiir- No longer applicable (street has been constructed). b. Business hours of operation in the C-N district shall be limited from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3A.4,except for the YMCA which is allowed to operate from 5:00 am to 10:00 pm. The residential care facility use does not violate the limitation on the hours of operation. c. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the amended concept plans dated Deee.v be. ,4 2n i Q October 30,2019 included in the Staff Report attached to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law from the modification to Development Agreement(14 20iz-�v 1 9 01 7H-2019- 0134) attached hereto as Exhibit"A". (Updated per MDA request) d. Future development of this site should include a pedestrian pathway network that links the mixed use area with the residential and the elementary school/YMCA site as well as adjacent off-site properties. Vehicular connections should also be provided for interconnectivity within the site. e. The existing home in the R-8 zoning district that is proposed to remain at the south boundary of the annexation area midway between S. Eagle Road and S. Hevffy Lane Hillsdale Ave. shall be required to hook up to City water and sewer service within 60 days of services becoming available from the development of the adjacent R-8 zoned property,per MCC 9-1-4A;the existing home that fronts on E. Amity Road that is proposed to be removed with redevelopment of the site and the existing home that fronts on S. Hewfy Lane Hillsdale Ave. that is proposed to remain in the C-N district as long as the Hill's reside there are not required to hook up to City services. (Street name changed) f. The rear or sides of homes on lots that face S. Eagle Road and E. Amity Re shall incorporate articulation through changes in materials,color,modulation,and architectural elements(horizontal and vertical)to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines. (No longer applicable—no homes are proposed along Amity Rd.) g. To ensure future development is consistent with the objectives and vision of the MU-N designation the following items will be considered in reviewing development applications: i. Community serving facilities (i.e. a school,park,YMCA, library,hospitals, churches, daycares,civic buildings, or public safety facilities) should be provided; > , ° ;No longer applicable—these areas have been provided with development of the City Park, YMCA and library and elementary school at approximately 20% of the overall development area. iii. Street sections consistent with the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map are required; Page 18 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 172 of 266 iv. Neighborhood serving uses and dwellings should be integrated; V. Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 40%of the development area with net densities ranging from 4 to 8 units per acre with supporting non-residential services. Non-residential uses should be smaller scale and provide a good or service that people typically don't travel more than a mile for and need regularly; vi. Non-residential buildings should be proportional to and blend in with residential buildings; To ensure consistency with this provision in the future, Staff recommends the Applicant make changes to the storage facility elevations to comply with this provision and submit concept elevations for the commercial buildings and independent living units that demonstrate a cohesive design that is proportional to and blends with the single-family residential buildings prior to the City Council hearing. In the alternative, design guidelines may be submitted and included in the DA for the overall development that demonstrate consistency with this provision. vii. Employment opportunities for those living in the neighborhood are encouraged; viii. The mixed use project should be directly assessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians; ix. Planning of the C-N property north of the park and YMCA shall consider appropriate visibility,parking and emergency access to the future neighborhood park. X. Sample uses appropriate in the MU-N area would include: townhouses, multi-family developments, neighborhood grocer, drug stores, coffee/sandwich/ice-cream shops, vertically integrated buildings, live-work spaces, dry cleaner/laundromat, salons/spas, daycares, neighborhood-scale professional offices, medical/dental clinics, gift shops, schools,parks,churches, clubhouses,public uses,and other appropriate neighborhood uses. h. A !andseape buffer- to r-esideotial uses is not required adjaeefft to the 1441 home at the southe The City Park is in the development process and the YMCA and school is already constructed; no buffer was required to the Hill property and this provision is no longer applicable. i. The annexation area shall be subdivided prior to issuance of any building permits beyond those required for the development of the school, YMCA and park site, and a wireless communication facility, the assisted livingfacility,acility, medical clinic, and the Hill's Century Farm North community center complex on common Lot 101 as shown on the revised conceptual development plan dated October 2-2 30,2018 2019; the assisted living f4eility and medieal elinie shown on the detaile site plan appr-evedwith 14 2016 0092 Note: See Staffs recommended new DA provisions included in Section IX.A.1 that should be added to the existing/proposed DA provisions in this section as a provision of the subject Rezone request. Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 173 of 266 B. Legal Descriptions& Exhibit Maps for Rezone Overall Zoning Exhibit: J) 71 AMITY ROA + • mod, � � . � .__ � , R-=S R-ts - rI. J � VIP - .r y '1 +- t 4 CitlSPark 11, C r 1 I sdal !e � - r HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH ZONING EXISTING/ PROPOSED - Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 174 of 266 km 9233 WEST STATE STREET I BOISE,ID 83714 209.639.6939 FAX 208.639.6930 June�,3,2t}19 Project No.:18.137 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DMRIP71ON FOR REZONE TO C-N A parcel of land being a poitlon of the North 2/2 of the northwest 114 of Section 33,Township 3 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a found aluminum cap marking the Northwest corner of said Section 33,which bears N8915'22"VVa distance of2,66041feotfrom a found brass cap marking the North 1/4 corner of said Section 3�; Thence following the northerly line of the NW 1/4 of 5ecti❑n 93,589'15'22"E a distance of 892.60 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence followingsaid northerly line,589'15'22"E a distance of 609,12 feet to a paint; Thence leaving said northerly line,S00'16'11"W a distance of 350.17 feet to a point; Thence IN99"15'22"W a distance of612-02 feet to a point; Thence NOD'44'39"E a distance of 350316 feet tothe POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains4.909 acres,more or less,and Is subject to all existing easementsand{ordghts-of-way-of recofd urimpiied- Attached is EXHIBIT and by this reference made a part of. w 12459 Pd,p r' OF � q L. 'ap"o I 7101119 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS wwwv.krnengllp.com Page 21 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 175 of 266 POLN I a COMMENCEMENT raw COR SECTION 33 E.AmItV Road POINT OF IRASI5 OF 13EARING3 BEGINNING 1469`15'22W 2660.93' NORTH I GDR SECTION 33 592.60' SLi9'15'22"f fi09.i2' -o ---R/NLd — A ° Total Rezone:4.90$± —b�.a � o APN: 51133223[31O ua $t 51 W212403 (POR.) � i " CURRI NT TONING: R-B g PROPOSED ZONING; C-N Ul Hill's Century Farm Ll, N69'I5'22V 612.02' Commercial Sub. No. 1 UNPLATTED UNPLATTEO R f4V- R/41- R�hV Healthy Living Subdivision � I! I N LEGEND _.._. 0 BRASS CAP ALUMINUM CAP CALCULATED POINT REZONE BOUNDARY — —SECTION LJNE 0 150 300 500 -EVW—RIGHT--OF-WAY LINE 1"=300' ENMNFERS.SURVEYORS.PLANNERT 923}WEST STATESTAEEf BUI55,i WhF-0D 53714 PHOHEjtpOI 638-843'9 FAX(20M 639-69P EXH I BIT B - REZONE TO C-N CENTURY FARM NORTH DATE fr13.1U19 PROJEL"r, 18-137 PUK E- A PORTION OF THE N 1/2 NW 1/4 1 OF 1 SECTION 33,T. 3 N., Ft. 1 E., B.M.,ADA COUNTY, ID Page 22 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 176 of 266 '1 9233 WEST STATE STREET I BOISE,0 83714 1 Z08.639$M 1 FAX MSS 639.6530 June 13,2019 Project Na:18-137 EXHIBIT A tl GAL DESCRIPTION FOR REZONE TO C-C A parcel of land being a portion of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33,Township 3 North, Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly described as hollows; Commencing at found aluminum cap marking the Northwest corner of said Section 33,which bears h184°15'22"W a distance of 2,660.61 feet from a found brass cap marking the North 1/4 cornerof said Sertlon 33; Thence following the northerly line of the NW 1/4 of Section 33,S89'15'22`E a distance of 350.16 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence following said northerly line,SS9'15'22"E a distance of 542.44 feettn a point, Thence leaving said northerly line,SOWV38"W a distance of 350.16 foot to a point; Thence N89"15'22"W a distancevf 539,24feet to a point; Thence N40°13'13"E a distance of 350.17 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. said parcel contains 4.348 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of record or Implied. Attached is EKHIBtT B and by this reference made a part of. 1245f) OF ENC,I SEERS j SURVIVORS PLANNERS www.kmengllp.cam Page 23 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 177 of 266 l POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NW COR SECTION 33 E.Amity Road BASS OF 9EARINGS `J:,K TH 'f 4 C[H N89'15'22"W 2650,61" 350.16' S89'15'22'E 542A4' _ �R/W �i/41' — RfH' R/41�R�yH .... iV 00,13,13,E Total Rezone:4,34$± 500'44'36"W 360.17' APH: 3113M23410 (POR.) 350-1V CURRENT ZONING: R-•8 PROP05ED ZONNIM C-C 4 dJ N89182 YP 539.24' w UNPLATTEU CIO i UNPLATTE❑ f Healthy Living j Subdivision LEGEND BRASS CAP ALUIVINlJhi CAP CALCULATED PRINT REZONE BOUNDARY -- — —SECTION LINE 0 150 300 50L Rlti~' RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE F 1"=300' ENGINEERS.SwFtiuOkS.PLANNERS 9733 w8r 1TATf MEE! BOISE,IPAHB 83714 PHONE 120BI 639-W39 FAIL;2G6y ra4£93tl EXHBIT B - REZONE TO C-C CENTURY FARM NORTH DATE: SHEET: A PORTION OFTHE NW 1/4 NW 1/4 1 OF 1 SECTION 33, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., 5,M., ADA COUNTY, ID Page 24 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 178 of 266 km 9233 WESTSTATE STREET I BOISE, ID 83714 1 208.639.6939 1 FAX 208.639.5930 December 24,2019 Project No,-184137 EXH113IT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR REZONE TO R-15 A parcel of land being a portion of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33,Township 3 North, Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being mare particularly described as follows: Commencing at found aluminumn cap markingthe Northwest corner of said Section 33,which bears NOO"13'13"E a distance of 2,677.50 feet from a found aluminum cap marking the West 1/4 corner of said Section 33; Thence following the westerly line of the Northwest 114 of Section 33,SOb`13'13"W a distance of 350.17 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence leaving said westerly fine,S99'15'22"E a distance of 1,874.00feetto the subdivision boundaryof Hill's Century Farm Commercial Subdivision No.1(Book 115 of Plats at Pages 17,131through 17,134,retards of Ada County,Idaho); 'thence following said subdivision boundary the following six(6)courses: 1. S00'4438"W a distance of 27.68 feet 2, 589`46'03"E a distance of 134.85 feet; 3, S00°44'38"W a distance of 297.56 feet; 4. S57°16'19"W a distance of 13,%feet, 5. N89°46'03"W a distance of 16.60 feet; 6, S0013'57"W a distance of 31.50 feet; Thence leaving said subdivision boundary,N89°46'03"W a distance of 175.29 feet; Thence 231.25 feet along the arc of a circular curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 500.00 feet,a delta angle of 26'29'58",a chord bearing of N76'31'04"W and a chord distance of 229.20 feet; Thence N63°16'OS"W a distance of 105.11 feet; Thence 194.36 feet along the arc of a circular curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 170.50 feet a delta angle of 61'57'08",a chord bearing of S59"33'30"W and a chord distance of 175.51 feet; Thence N89°27'52"W a distance of 52.53 feet; Thence S0012'08"W a distance of 397.94 feet; Thence 560'37'07"1N a distance of 157.72 feet; Thence N89°27'52"W a distance of 583.30 feet; Thence 72.41 feetalong the arcof a curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 190.00 feet,a delta angle of 23°02'55",a chord bearing of N77°5624"IN and a chord distance of 7132 feet; Thence N66"24'57"W a distance of 40.65 feet; Thence 215.16 feet along the arcof a curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 200.54 feet,a delta angle of 61°29'O8",a chord bearing of 559°4734"W and a chord distance of 204.99 feet; Thence N89'27'52"W a distance of 273.35 feet to a point on the said westerly fine of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33; Thence fallowing said westerly line,NOC°13'13"E a distance of 913.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS I PLANNERS www.kmenglip.com Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 179 of 266 Said parcel contains 30.65 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of record or implied. Attached is EXHIBIT Band by this reference made apart of. �145 ' °v L. 8 Page 26 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 180 of 266 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT AW COR SECTON 33 E. Amity Raab NORTHEcn4 COR — — N5W15'22"44 2680.61' _ r! R RJw- -R/w�RfW RfW R/W RA LL O SD4'13'13"W ` 350.17' U nplatted44 a Aft S1 1 3322301 0 (POR.) 1Jflp B Ed AM S1133212403 (POR.) v: � 7 Ln S6W15'22"E 1574,00' L2= POINT OF L1 L BEGINNING � E N63'15'05'W " O i. N89'27'52 W 105.11' L4 L5 _ Total Rezone: 30.65 AC t 52.53' Cl LS vim APN. 51133223D1U (POR.) _ w APN: 51 1332 1 2403 (POR) 1V89'46'D3 1 CM CURRENT ZONING: R—B 175. 8' m M PROPOSED ZONING: R-15 8 p, ii LW�1•Y y C G N66 24'57"W 2 z 40.65' J Ln Ln C N89'27'52'W +s—, N89'27'S2"YI Unpiatked 57.725732' 583.3D' 1 '07 tiY )L*J 273.35' APN: S1133223010 (POR.) Hill's Century Farm Hill's Century Farm Subdivision Phase 1 Subdivision Phase 2 CURVETABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA CHORD 9RG CHORD LINE TABLE C1 500.00' 231.25' 2529'58" N7V31'D4"W 229.20' LINE# LENGTH DIRECTION C2 170.50' 104.36' 61'57'08" S59'33'30'W 175.51' L1 27.68 50'44'38-W C3 180.00' 72.41' 23'02'55" N77 56'24W 71.92' L2 _ 134,a5 S59'46103"E C4 200.50' I 215.16' 61'29.08- S59'47'34-Vi 2D4.99' 0 2.97.56 S0'44'36"W WEST 1/4 COR SECnoN 33 LE a L4 13.96 ssr 16'19"VP L5 16.60 N89'46'03"W 0 BRASS CAP L6 31.50 SO'13'57"W ALUMINUM CAP CALCULATED POINT kin REZONE BOUNDARY — — — — —SECTION LINE 0 150 304 60C, EN GI NEERS,SURVMRS.PLANNERS R/4! RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE 9233 WEST STATES; ET PARCEL LAVE 1"R£ -3oo, 90M.ID,W0 93714 P g FAX{zw;6 96930 EXHIBIT B - REZONE TO R-15 CE14TLJRY FARM NORTH DATE: IM4-2019 PROJECT: 28-237 SHEET: A PORTION OF THE IN 1/2 NW 1/4 1 OF 1 5ECTJON 33,T. 3 N., R. 1 E., R.M.,ADA COUNTY, ID Page 27 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 181 of 266 C. Overall Site Plan (date: 10/30/2019) � JJ won AMITY ROA HILL'S CA _ • 5E11-SERVICE STORAGE RETAIL/PRflFESS1oN L COMMERGI L SU IVISI N r' i DFFI�E �y}yI • �'�`-'Ijy'INDEPENDENT LIVfTJG VERANDA ASSISTED M CA LIVING - DENCE ' 7 AGE Q{,I LIFIED D '+ ' G)� � » r , L ESTATE ,l LOTS -7. ; J Hillsdale City Park,1 ' I 1�`f C 4.. �S CONVENTIUPJALLDTS fi � r -` Ilisdal U -- He _ ---w ` ILL'S ZU�Y- _m ISION -V. D HILL'S CENTuRY FARM NORTH r �'f m r— October 36,2019 CONCEPTUAL-SUBJECT TO CHANGE ' Page 28 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 182 of 266 A Site Plan&Landscape Plan for Storage Facility(dated: October 8 and 18,2019 respectively) °❑`PP _ ------------- — ❑...,. E.AMITY ROAD ——- -— --- ----- TR� r n l - - li 7 CENTURY FARM SELF STORAGE 16 SCNEMAIIC SIZE PLAN ON III !__-A'----- � 'T• 6�-»-� roa �. i _ f III CONDITIONAL USE PERMITSITE PLAN o 0 km■ ci o Page 29 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 183 of 266 , I 1 o --------------- ------ ----- ------------- ---- ---- axs(I—E/sLF) --- _ -------- ------- � w --------- -- „w ll �9eo WI-I OF PARKING 1-P-MI-11—CAPE-KIP CANDITIDNA.L.USE PERMIT LANDSCAPE PLAN a-wz-'; — A�.�a...a� o; uo Page 30 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 184 of 266 E. Preliminary Plat(date: 11/18/2019) HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH PRELIMINARY PLAT I�>F- A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE NW 114 OF SECTION 33,TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST,BOISE MERIDIAN,CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADACOUNTY,IDAHO d MAP- 0 0 0 0 UGERP xo- 0 0 � O O O O O O O O o 0 0 OD O O O 0 0 0 I m" vsI"d mvHwsq 0 0 o © o ® ®®®eeg WMMON—RHSIRESIRFHMLSO-P—A ® ®Y� Q Q HILL'S CENTURY nmw"CENTURY FARM NORTH _ a nuum near 'w. .m '$ 1 owe w ,�...1 I I I I 1 � I \ h I I I I I I \ I � 3 ( ( wn HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH (ssyp l �\ I ; C""M�E�iDIatI.IONp"S _ _- ion _I Page 31 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 185 of 266 � „`off •wo � .., ... ., «, «° wa m .Y $ r©©: �$ �➢ .°a � ®Y ©° e_oj.®$®€o@ o? o° of ®$ o; ©�_©'s aE o3®, © © ,o �' 3 0 8~ •o $ .$ a �o wa � - ®s p ' $ 9 $ y® ? VRE�MINARV FIAT NOTES ®$ a ai aa. a. ae • ...em."�n si��' �H ILL SpCENTURYFARMNORTH w.yia - ©° w, B o $tl®, 3 ®. km © o Ro r �aPP2016 Page 32 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 186 of 266 F. Landscape Plan for Subdivision (date: 10/24/2019) RT ------ ---------- — ---- —m--��&g ---- ---- .—.� _._a—. 0� ,; ,�.ti, .....,..,.� .., ..... axn�UTF�Flssolc SO ,•,••� :: :: '. inEE cuivlanoxs eanFwar HRmH � � •® O n O C' '�7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o xwsEll�nEE�®oosq nO ==d,,,,.. ^� V "O OO B ® .� 1N:E fALLL1Al10H61E510EHRAL EWIH-E II 1RE j-SFI ® ® ® ® ® wnmoxu+ n xxm ev a a STREETTREEfA JLATIONS(ITREEf35 LH O TMx snwx«x�:rc: Vmm=WWWZw_ TOTALT% IANDSCAPE COVERSHEET HILL`S CENTURY FARM NORTH o�°ViM IPH�SCAPE[OVERSHEET �1w' � w.nra4x-w ^� NENHUW,IFIWq PPL1.D Page 33 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 187 of 266 T - --------------------- == -- ----- -------- ------F- - - - rO � o o � � O O O © O O ° O • ! t - ® o ? �e s S 0� m�am o HI LL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH LANDSCAPE PLAN s'^" km ® o —m o �PPL2.0� a o o c —� ----. . ..------------------ ----------------------- ----- LANDSCAPE PLAN .... .�.. �.m m er.� •,max. .--,.c,—.�.,.. ,: ,sn ...•�.:.,�, .�..a,.. �� � ,ems..�.,,�m.�.m..,s•.a..a.., �,�, xexr HI LL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH o � — PPL3.0 Page 34 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 188 of 266 N(i AS.CED1R wsr•mraEAs �i6 AE.CM* c 7Ma s1f[El 9iL71a DYIRa IWULW Pam SECAa115[rfP.] 1W RS®AA iw cmm p AS, PoB1 Cf BRIGHTON o�8 lP•J STANDARD V" S CEDAR FENCING .�a> .Y. rro, iMn ks Door es1 AT`Ipl 11pP pNl BaiWY iflY 111H(1$}lip C�{Y. III�r$IWIK NYM 8•-0' r r- S din BAu atwl�amtwm m��l liim Kns drr ���sa =. aY or¢m 6400T WODOEN FENCE Page 35 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 189 of 266 G. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 3/17/2020) HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT -�;� o 0 0 o maE smma „ov =s€ a��£ tea; „nn �° o ai ® o o o ® o0000000 ® o00 ® LEGEND ����o 0 0 0 -0000000000000 N o 0 0 t—IDENT �E) COMMON [COMMERCIAL F-E) I� oo ® o o . 0 R PRELLMI xeuv N HILL'SCENTU RY �1FARMNORTH OP SPACE EN IXHI81T o.w,�vas ovEI svncE Ex1H11 T Eia.o Page 36 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 190 of 266 H. Residential Setbacks for Cadence at Century Farm w W.-,;!-I<YMPLE LN. T7 1r, I ' 1\ - f JIC�pCm) E.HILL PARK LN O O'l low N 0 z a r 4 , O J � W f EXISTING RESIDENCE W,ROCKHAMPTON ST. AND OUTBUILDING Milo f 0 /.. HOME 1 LOT TYPES: FRONT- GARAGE: SIDE: STREET SIDE: REAR: I TRADITIONAL-ALLEY GARAGE ea s'-0 a'-o' 6'-0• 94r CADENCE TRADITIONAL-WIFY PARK 519E W-W G-0' a'-D" 6'-0' 6'-0' AT J PATID-FRONTGARAGE lvv sow a'-w 6'-0• 12'-0• CENTURY FARM STANDARD-FROM GARAGE 151-T 1c'-0• 6-7 1E-0• 'I5'-0" n ATTACHEDHOMES SE�6FGK8/uwE TO eg MgxSu>aEP caP.�B+c�[F 69E wa r, Page 37 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 191 of 266 I. Building Elevations (date: 10/14/2019) �._--------___- - A 8OM- • s 1' 4iw�mo.w.m«.��nox-mm�.,.�e« S1F.T.m...m . L�".°xmm.®.u<axA.pm- xEw�oeN CENTURY FARM SELF STORAGE SCH EMAIIC E%I—R EEV ONS .+nab umux sa s. s �xwm«'M.uruii mi�iiiulw em w.mo„xrnr.nrsfe so...>>amx xaav re sl de=�bi=om ED i — - TYPICAL PATIO HOME ELEVATION l ® — TYPICALALLEY HOME ELEVATION IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Rezone: 1. New development provisions shall be added to the proposed amended Development Agreement(DA)provisions in Section VIILA of this report as a provision of the Rezone. Prior to approval of the Rezone ordinance, an amended DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of rezone ordinance adoption, and the Page 38 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 192 of 266 developer. The amended DA shall be signed by the property owner and developer and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the rezone. The amended DA shall incorporate the following provisions: a. The buildings in the retail/professional office area shown on the conceptual development plan shall be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space as desired in Mixed Use designated areas as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan(see pg. 25). A concept site plan shall be submitted prior to the City Council hearing demonstrating compliance with this provision. b. Building sizes in the commercial retail/office portion of the development shall be limited to a 20,000 square foot building footprint as desired in MU-N designated areas in accord with the Comprehensive Plan(see pg. 25).If a structure contains a mix of both residential and office, or residential and commercial land uses, the maximum building size may exceed 20,000 square feet. c. Provide 10' wide detached multi-use pathways within the street buffers along S. Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd. in place of sidewalks as requested by the Park's Department. Conditional Use Permit(Storage Facility): 2. The site plan included in Section VIII.D, dated October 10, 2019, shall be revised as follows: a. The buffer area(and other areas as applicable)not visible from a public street or driveway behind the storage facility on the south side of the building shall be fenced off from public access to prevent incidences of crime in accord CPTED guidelines. b. Depict a 10' wide detached multi-use pathway within the street buffer along E. Amity Rd. as required by the Park's Department. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VIII.D, dated October 10,2019, shall be revised as follows: a. Depict additional evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs within the 25' wide buffer along the southern boundary of the site to result in a barrier that allows trees to touch at maturity in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-9C. b. To prevent incidences of crime in buffer areas that aren't isn't visible from a public street, Staff recommends the area is fenced off from public access in accord CPTED guidelines. c. Depict a 10' wide detached multi-use pathway within the street buffer along E. Amity Rd. as required by the Park's Department. d. Extend the 5' wide pathway at the north boundary through the 25' wide buffer into the commercial site. 4. Compliance with the standards for self-service storage facilities listed in UDC 11-4-3-34 is required. 5. The entrance or view of the facility shall be open to adjoining businesses and low impact security lighting shall be provided in accord with UDC 11-3A-16A. 6. If abutting a residential district,the facility hours of public operation shall be limited to six o'clock(6:00)A.M. to eleven o'clock(11:00)P.M. Page 39 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 193 of 266 7. The design of the storage structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 8. The property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review(DES) application for this use. A CZC and DES application shall be approved prior to submittal of building permit applications for the site. Preliminary Plat: 9. The preliminary plat included in Section VIII.E, dated November 18, 2019, is approved as submitted. 10. The landscape plan included in Section VULF,dated October 24,2019,shall be revised as follows prior to the City Council hearing: a. Depict a 10' wide detached multi-use pathway within the street buffers along S. Eagle Rd. and E.Amity Rd. in place of a sidewalk. b. If the unimproved right-of-way is 10' or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk or property line,the developer shall maintain a 10' compacted shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative ground cover as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.5. c. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum 5' wide landscaped buffer per UDC 11-6C-3D.5. If applicable, depict landscaping in accord with this standard. d. Fencing on the east side of Lot 107,Block 1, shall be revised to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7b. e. Include a detail for the open vision fence that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7. 11. The existing home and accessory structures at the northeast corner of the site shall be removed prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat for the phase in which they are located. 12. Submit a 14' wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway along E.Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd.to the Planning Division prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature as required by the Park's Department. 13. The Applicant or Owner shall have one year to complete the tasks listed in UDC 11-3F-3B for final approval of the private streets proposed within the development.No building permit shall be issued for any structure using a private street for access to a public street until the private street has been approved. 14. The Applicant shall coordinate with Terri Ricks,Land Development, and Joe Bongiorno, Fire Dept., for addressing lots accessed by alleys without frontage on a street. 15. An exhibit shall be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks, fencing, building envelope and orientation of the lots and structures accessed via common driveways. 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. 16. 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 Page 40 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 194 of 266 surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment.A copy of the easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to signature on the final plat. 17. Address signage shall be provided at the ends of the common driveways on Lots 19 and 54, Block 1; and for lots accessed by alleys that don't have frontage on a private street for emergency wayfinding purposes. 18. A minimum of 5.5 acres of qualified open space shall be provided in accord with the qualified open space exhibit in Section VIII.G; and qualified site amenities shall be provided consisting of a clubhouse, swimming pool, segments of the multi-use pathway system, and outdoor activity complex(specific amenities in this area are to be determined at CZC). 19. All common driveways shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 20. Parking is restricted to one side of the 29-foot wide streets and shall be provided on the street side adjacent to the alley accessed units rather than the patio homes with front accessed garages to allow for more spaces that aren't encumbered by driveways. Planned Unit Development(PUD): 21. Development of the R-15 zoned gated portion of the development(i.e. Cadence) shall be consistent with the Residential Setbacks exhibit in Section VIII.H and the conceptual building elevations included in Section V111.1. 22. Access to the through property on Lot 150,Block 1 is allowed via two access points—one via E. Hill Park Ln. for the house and one via W. Rockhampton Ct. for the shop associated with the house,unless otherwise approved by City Council. 23. All alleys shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5 with an allowance for the entire length to be visible from a private street rather than a public street. 24. A minimum of 80 square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each dwelling unit;this requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks and enclosed yards as set forth in UDC 11-74B. 25. An application for Alternative Compliance to the off-street parking standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings shall be submitted to the Planning Division and approved by the Director prior to the City Council hearing. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No civil utility plans were submitted for the sanitary sewer with this application,therefore no specific review or modeling has been completed. 1.2 A portion of the proposed 8" water main will need to be upsized to 12". The reason for the 12" size is for future abandonment of the existing 12" in Eagle Road due to avoiding utilities crossing the roundabout at the Amity intersection. Specifically from Eagle Road through the common area to Palatino,then down Dalrymple to the common area and then north to Amity Road. 1.3 Manholes cannot be located in landscaped areas unless they are located within an access road per City standards are provided. Page 41 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 195 of 266 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 42 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 196 of 266 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 43 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 197 of 266 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 https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WeUink/DocView.aspx?id=181966&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=182147&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=184769&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr=1 F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.org,/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=182235&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty G. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT https://weblink.meridiancio2.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=182768&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty H. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL https://weblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=182167&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty I. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=182158&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iu J. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=182145&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty K. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=18 3 173&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n C ky Page 44 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 198 of 266 L. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciN.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=183196&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv X. FINDINGS A. Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant a rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Stafffinds the proposed rezone and subsequent development plan is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan for the MU-NFL UM 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; Stafffinds 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; and with the purpose statement of the commercial districts in that it will provide for the retail and service needs of the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed medium density residential uses, storage facility and commercial retail and office uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential, commercial and public/quasi-public development. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds City services are available to be provided to this development. The school district submitted comments stating that the elementary and high schools are currently under enrollment capacity but that the middle school is over capacity. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. This finding is not applicable as the request is for a rezone, not annexation. B. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Stafffinds that the proposed plat with Staffs recommendations is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and Page 45 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 199 of 266 pedestrian connectivity. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds that public services will be provided to the subject property upon development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Stafffinds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Stafffinds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACHD, etc). (See Section Nfor more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. C. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Stafffinds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the C-C district(see Analysis, Section V for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Stafffinds that the proposed storage facility is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan FL UM designation of MU-N and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2B-2 in the C-C zoning district. Further, Stafffinds the proposed use of the site will provide a needed service within close proximity to residential uses. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Page 46 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 200 of 266 Stafffinds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed self-service storage facility should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Stafffinds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,water,and sewer. Stafffinds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. D. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(UDC 11-7-5): Upon recommendation from the Commission,the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant a planned development request,the Council shall make the following findings: l. The planned unit development demonstrates exceptional high quality in site design through the provision of cohesive, continuous,visually related and functionally linked patterns of development, street and pathway layout, and building design. Stafffinds the proposed PUD demonstrates a high quality of development and site design with amenities that provides unique housing options for those 55 and older in the community. 2. The planned unit development preserves the significant natural, scenic and/or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic and/or historic features that may exist on this site. 3. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not cause damage,hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. Stafffinds the proposed use and development of this property will not cause damage, hazard or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. 4. The internal street,bike and pedestrian circulation system is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles,bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions contained within the development,nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area. Stafffinds the internal private streets should provide for safe internal access to homes within the development and proposed pedestrian pathway will provide a safe bicycle and pedestrian route to the adjacent commercial development. 5. Community facilities, such as a park,recreational, and dedicated open space areas are functionally related and accessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways. Page 47 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 201 of 266 Stafffinds the proposed subdivision amenities (i.e. swimming pool, community center and outdoor activity area)are accessible to residents within the development via internal sidewalks. 6. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title. Stafffinds the proposed single-family residential use of the development is a principal permitted use in the R-8 and R-1 S zoning districts and falls within the density desired in this area. 7. The amenities provided are appropriate in number and scale to the proposed development. Stafffinds the proposed amenities are appropriate for this development and provide a variety of entertainment for residents. 8. The planned unit development is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. Stafffinds the proposed PUD is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. E. PRIVATE STREET(UDC 11 In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The Director finds design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4A except as approved through alternative compliance. See analysis in Section V for more information. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; and The Director finds the proposed private streets shouldn't cause any hazard, nuisance or other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity if they are designed as proposed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The Director finds the location of the private streets does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the regional transportation plan. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. The Director finds the proposed gated residential development includes mews. F. ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE(UDC 11-3A-19.2A) hi order to grant approval for alternative compliance,the director shall determine the following findings: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR While it's feasible for the applicant to comply with UDC standards pertaining to private streets, the Director finds the proposed development offers a unique design as proposed with the planned unit development. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Page 48 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 202 of 266 The Director finds the planned unit development proposed by the applicant as a whole provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements in that it contributes to the unique character and diversity in housing types available within the City. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. The Director finds that the proposed alternative means will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use%haracter of the surrounding properties and will actually contribute to the character and variety of housing types in this area of the City. Page 49 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 203 of 266 ` = 'MITYROA 7`7 ILL'S 4NTURY fARM SELF-SERVICE STORAGE RETAIL/PROFESSION#%L , COMMERCIA1 L SUBDIVISION r OFFI E ; % INDEPENDEW UVING ` • L CELL 'TOWER - - - VERANDA 5'3; _ _ • � � � ASSISTED I, LIVING A IbE Q lLIFl NO m - L -- ESTATE �- :t LOTS g ' a 41 Hillsdale City Parkor _ r Uuk 0 INVEPMAL.LOTt f L' il[sdal - Elem 17 _ -- iq C- f HILL'S CENTURY F 1M SUBDIVISION S F HILL's CENTuRy FARm NoRTH _ - M October 30, 2019 CONCEPTUAL—SUBJECT TO CHANGE JL d #+ _ AMITY ROA coc v CoN — V-. IL D -R- 1 5 #' Hillsdale _ City Park MC illsdal Elem r� p. HILL'S CENTURY NOR H ZONING EXITING / PROPOSED - f - -O M HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS —MERCIAL PHASE / �J}� • v a - — _ _ —m p_ m — — f.-t£tlW-1FlFL OPfx M wzEYR6E of Ou41FFL OPEN a—E RESIRENl1AL HORTI PHASE ( � �oeHas,a a• tOOz T Mu�LTU!h�hv. ���iaT� O l:l Q D Paw m[s 4R'SPQ£iiA�41ET�o'+F`�wv.£^.E •,i r['RES O yo= K RESIRENMLSOVIH PHASE 1Vff .A 1„f✓•L soffry SryasE ERG TW!t+£S +K�of e'fV,REc spxk+ PS,,LH:3 � meA,FROu,[� a4JeEPLUl ILH, OVERALL SHE E 11 n� H - 0 o c n � � LEGEND O a � rxk..-;o.wnm nl�fN xe.cE7 a �00000000000 � 0 - o a o COMMON LOTAREAS{RESIDENTIAL NORTH PHASE) ko o a 3 m oa E Q D 0 ® ® 1�o ze uuP P� o o 9pII COMMON LOTAREAS[RESIDENTIAL SOUTH PHASE} I � � attx f Lm 1 Lm.ram ISF1 °L�I�j � 6 [� COMMON LOTAREAS ICOMNIERCIAL�PHASE}'`'S' LCCN f LOT P L'R EA iSf] L pjtmisF7 CPc 7 1—Q ; 1,. ow 1 msos v.00 uf�lfE9 fapP F.TV,! � ;— '�— � ��— ——— — • 5 +i,.l� xao0 PN �Sk OF cc[a N trFWS�c 1 Jgpp QQl r 0' � 0 0 � HMREP srmP .,c o.0 _ w.Pocbwsrexsr. 88 Q ® ® —'2 9 I PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT HILL'S CENTURY FARM NORTH°�� � EOPEN SPACE EXHIBITMERIDIAN,IDAHO REVISICWSEw1Lkm43 I 4 fl N W W.DALRYMPLE LN. aQ 7T Z � o E.HILL ./ PARS LN. z ■ 0 0 _— r ¢ z a � d d O J (ry F�lrl EXISTING RESIDENGE - W.ROCKHAMPTON ST. AND OUTBUILDING w � J 7 W ROCfSHAMPTON ST. u; HOME 1 LOT TYPES: FROWr- GARAGE- SIDE- STREET SIDE: REAR: )_] TRADITIONAL-ALLEY GARAGE 6-0" 6'-4' 4'0- 61-0' 6-01 CADENCE El TRADITIONAL-ALLEY PARK SIDE s'-0" C-a' 4'-0- s-0' 0°0' AT LD PATIO-FRONT GARAGE 10'-0- 20'-0' 4'-0' S'-0' 12'-0" CENTURY FARM M STANDARD•FRONT GARAGE 15'-(r 20'-0' 5'-0' 0 ATTACHED HOMES SET3ACn ARE T6 BE MEASVRE FROM BACK OF&E WAUK MARTI DILL HOMESITE , ESTATE LOTS - 4 +! KI PARK ST, � r i f 4' _ Hillsdale ��:• ,'f - roc n��ron�cT �I City Pa rk 1�, TYPICAL PATIO HOME ELEVATION TYPICAL ALLEY HOME ELEVATION CADENCE AT CENTURY FARM 40- All of -- --------- - - - - - --- 1 I NORTH OVER&L ELEVATION -t r1amA ®' ��o-WA Z I Ensr oY�NL ELEVAnaN AN"! 4 - J, .4 a laow & 31 SO T OVERALL ELEVATION i� dim ANB:BROIIIE PMB HnH 4N000 PN6H _ WRK�LORFAMATlPI(:AL SfM1tlNG SEIM POLE >' BGM(xlOG PBfRCH!@R MEINLCIW18 a:yFAL P�'Ak1H MElIA ClIP1Y•!d SIdVEMYErt Y1N1 - RNBS C£MAl&IN9� 16'VWBGLLI✓EyFAL — MCIALSiIICCaPM�H 41=OVMALLELEVATON-➢UKLVM riFAILffMNNEMRY 1NOKHDVHWLaI ATION-4 MREAREAP NL CENTURY FARM SELF STORAGE 140MT1�ER2" SCHEMATIC EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 8.b..kEjj, Sd Lake Div S2 Emh W Plooe Sott Lobe City,IJT&9111 E01.531.1144 Bose 8W W.Mmn 53reet SVBe 990 Bosse,I➢B31U2 2 -4241US I bob000kde ..com ` = 'MITYROA 7`7 ILL'S 4NTURY fARM SELF-SERVICE STORAGE RETAIL/PROFESSION#%L , COMMERCIA1 L SUBDIVISION r OFFI E ; % INDEPENDEW UVING ` • L CELL 'TOWER - - - VERANDA 5'3; _ _ • � � � ASSISTED I, LIVING A IbE Q lLIFl NO m - L -- ESTATE �- :t LOTS g ' a 41 Hillsdale City Parkor _ r Uuk 0 INVEPMAL.LOTt f L' il[sdal - Elem 17 _ -- iq C- f HILL'S CENTURY F 1M SUBDIVISION S F HILL's CENTuRy FARm NoRTH _ - M October 30, 2019 CONCEPTUAL—SUBJECT TO CHANGE JL R'lYd'G u1R CCwr IINR�I£tB✓1l HRSPx CC.urvl ❑SXS NYIGkKaI _ S%Id IP%Itr � IdMIS IV ❑1PR1P 9 Ip M1S ❑,Px,s �. E.AMITY ROAD — S%Id T IpYld P 1PN9! �'-� Id M1i ❑1PRT' - — — — -___ �. ❑1_k33 _________ ________ "4 a � y Izxu �: �� ❑' Fl:E .IUMING 5LE J— Idx:tr bx1�rtG a HPE S%Id 1 I 31' II la'Y� I pxlp Ip%IS 31 BB1111LIIyIDINGI LyILtrkY�1 wf'ER bxlp 1 3011L]ING6 J ae n r; WLI1LG8 aee S%Id pYld ea — 1 I I �� - I I�L• BDIIL11HG7 aYrxllaumroa+r 9 urxwx CO�x1 if i BUILDING B J 4%5' H �R'JIi1 I 1 I 1IyIIITIIIf I11r IdMltr IC4 ClHli i IdMlb 8Y i IPxa 9G Rld Lvu BUILD ING2 dM� Izv� za la z I � I I BUILDING 3 i I I I C{pyi wlnNG.x• � e w o r- W W y a e_lulns. NORTH e.luln's: CENTURY FARM SELF STORAGE e.luln:,I. 1 9CFi8NMG SffE PWJ B CCTOPM 7D19 = SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN 8 3a6cakG,Fn SM Lnke Cily 52 Emtmage Pl—B.H Lake City,UT 84111 501.531.1144 1 111 800 W.Mon Street S-AI 94D Base,ID B3702 208.424.7675 1 bab...kdesiga.com E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 D Item Title: Public Hearing for TM Crossing - Ten Mile Academy Daycare (H-2020-0007) Meeting Notes: CiWEI�� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.D. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item - Public Hearing for TM Crossing -Ten Mile Academy Daycare (H-2020-0007) by BVA Development, Located at 1001 S. Sentinel Ln. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/13/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 204 of 266 3/19/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 3/19/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-D Project Name: TM Crossing - Ten Mile Academy Daycare Project No.: H-2020-0007 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/SignInForm Dash Details?id=444 1/1 STAFF REPORT C:�*%- W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/19/2020 Legend DATE: a- FE11Proiect Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission -� € FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 - SUBJECT: H-2020-0007 , TM Crossing Ten Mile Academy 77 -- • o Daycare LOCATION: 1001 S. Sentinel Lane I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant, BVA Development, requests conditional use permit approval to operate a daycare center(more than 12 children) on 0.883 acres of land in the C-G zoning district and within the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP). II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 0.883 acres Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) One(1)building lot Phasing Plan(#of phases) One(1)phase Neighborhood meeting date;#of January 16,2020;no attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) AZ-12-005 (Ord. 14-1588,DA#114002254);MDA(H- 2016-0054,amended DA#2016-062220);Lot 7,Blk.2, TM Crossing Sub.;A-2019-0348(PBA,ROS#12109);A- 2019-0386(CZC/DES). Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 205 of 266 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District — • Staff report(yes/no) No • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One access via S. Sentinel Lane,a local street Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Cross-access to adjacent parcels,also owned by BVA Dev. Access Existing Road Network Yes Distance to nearest City Park(+ 2.1 miles to Fuller Park(approximately 23 acres). size Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 2.4 miles from Fire Station 2 • Fire Response Time 5:00 minute response time from Station 2 • Resource Reliability 82% • Risk Identification Risk Factor 4(Commercial with hazards) • Accessibility This project does not meet all required access,road widths and turnarounds as shown.Please note:the parking lot with the drive aisle out to Excursion Drive shall be completed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy OR an approved fire department turn around shall be installed in the parking lot adjacent to the building. • Special/resource needs In the event of a structure fire an additional truck company will be required.This will require additional time delays as a second truck company is not available in the city. • Water Supply Water supply for this proposed development requires 1500 gallons per minute for two hours. Page 2 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 206 of 266 C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend MU-Corn Legend Y 0 Project Location Project Location P-5 Medium Density MU-Res Residential Civic Low-Density Residential Coma■ rcigl - ■ _ � I Employment MU:N Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend TN-C C-C_ 0 Legend Project Location R-40 Ea Project Location - TN-R !City limits TN-C R-4 Planned Parcels C-C C-G _ r-" R-8 RUT - H-E ■ R1 �• r BRUT M-E RUT ' Rol ° ' _ s R=2� JRUT 2— R_8 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: BVA Development—2775 W. Navigator Dr. #220, Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Tomlinson Family Trust,DWT Investments, SCS Investments—2929 W.Navigator Dr. #400, Meridian,ID 83642 C. Representative: Roberta Stewart,BVA Development-2775 W.Navigator Dr. #220,Meridian,ID 83642 Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020- Page 207 of 266 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/28/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 2/25/2020 Site Posting Date 3/5/2020 NextDoor posting 2/25/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciby.or /g comQplan) The future land use designation for this property is Commercial—this designation will provide a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and visitors. Desired uses may include retail, restaurants, personal and professional services, and office uses, as well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): • "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine, play, and work in close proximity, thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability" (3.06.02B).Adding a daycare introduces an additional use to the Ten Mile Specific Area, therefore promoting overall sustainability and the benefits of having a mix of uses in close proximity. • "Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas" (3.06.02C). The proposed daycare will be in the center of a high employment area. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The applicant has received approval for site improvements and landscaping through CZC and Design Review (A-2019-0386). The applicant is also close to receiving building permit approval for the commercial shell building (C-NEW-2020-0006). There were no existing structures on this site. D. Proposed Use Analysis: A Daycare Center use (more than 12 children) is listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as a conditional use in the C-G zoning district. (Note: The Applicant states a pre-school, which is classified in the UDC as a daycare, will also be apart of this business). See narrative included in the application for more specific details on the proposed use. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): A. General standards for all child daycare and adult care uses, including the classifications of daycare center; daycare, family; and daycare, group: 1. In determining the type of daycare facility, the total number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator's children, is the determining factor. The Applicant's narrative states the plan is to maintain 250 part-time and full-time students with a maximum of 180 children at any one time. The Applicant assumes the average will be Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 208 of 266 approximately 150 children. In addition, approximately 26 staff members will be employed here during maximum capacity. 2. On site vehicle pick up,parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. The Applicant has stated and shown in an exhibit the two main drop-off and pick-up locations: 1) within the parking lot around their building nd; 2) the loading zone adjacent to the building on S. Sentinel Lane. (See Exhibit C in Section VII). The parking area specifically for this lot is proposing 32 parking stalls and the drive aisles are 25 feet wide. According to the Applicant's narrative, there would never be a need for more than 26 employees and they would rarely, if ever, be working at the same time. Therefore, it can be assumed that there will always be some parking available for student drop-off and pick-up within the available parking stalls. In addition, the drive aisles are wide enough so that vehicles may stop shortly to drop-off/pick-up their child without stopping traffic in both directions. The Applicant's preferred drop-off/pick-up location is on S. Sentinel Ln. heading south, directly abutting the building. With the available information, Staff agrees with the applicant and finds the loading zone as the preferred location for safe and efficient student drop-off/pick-up. This area will create the least amount of traffic impediments and allow an easier in-and-outflow of traffic. Fire has not made any comments regarding the proposed locations. 3. The decision making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours of operation as conditions of approval. Staff recommends a maximum of 180 allowable clients at any one time; Staff has written a condition of approval for this recommendation (See Section V.III.A.2). 4. The applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code. Said proof shall be provided prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. The Applicant has agreed to comply with this requirement in their narrative. 5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence, the hours of operation shall be between six o'clock(6:00)A.M. and eleven o'clock(11:00) P.M. This standard may be modified through approval of a conditional use permit. The subject property does not adjoin any residential uses or zones. The Applicant has stated in their narrative that they intend to operate within these hours, with weekend hours on Saturdays only, 8 a.m. to 1Op.in. Staff has included a condition of approval related to business hours. 6. Prior to submittal of an application for an accessory daycare facility in a residential district, the applicant or owner shall hold a neighborhood meeting in accord with subsection 11-5A-4B of this title. Notice of the neighborhood meeting shall be provided to all property owners of record within one hundred feet(100') of the exterior boundary of the subject property.A neighborhood meeting was held for this application. Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 209 of 266 The applicant shall not exceed the maximum number of clients as stated in the approved permit or as stated in this title, whichever is more restrictive. B. Additional standards for daycare facilities that serve children: 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot(6')non- scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. There is a 6'tall wrought iron fence proposed along the north and south yards adjacent to the parking lot and around portions of the building. 2. Outdoor play equipment over six feet(6')high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. There is no play equipment being proposed at this time; Applicant will comply with this requirement if any equipment is ever proposed. 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk.Not applicable, C-G zoning district. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The daycare center will be in a new building that has already received CZC/DES approval and building permit approval for the commercial shell. All UDC dimensional standards have been met. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is provided via S. Sentinel Lane, an existing private street. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): The proposed building is approved at 7,564 square feet, requiring a minimum of 15 parking stalls. 32 parking stalls are provided and were approved with the CZC/DES. All parking and parking lot landscaping meet UDC standards. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): There is an existing five-foot(5) detached sidewalk along W. Navigator Dr. with existing street trees that will be connected to the seven-foot(7) attached sidewalk along S. Sentinel Ln. being built by the applicant. The applicant is also proposing 7' sidewalks along all parking areas that abut the building area. All sidewalks meet UDC Standards. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The project landscaping meets UDC standards; the approved landscape plan is included in Section VII.B K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): The applicant is proposing a six (6) foot high black wrought iron fence on the north and south sides of the building to enclose two grassy areas as safe play areas for the children. The proposed fencing meets all UDC standards. L. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): A copy of the approved building elevations and material board are included in Section VII.D Page 6 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 210 of 266 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 211 of 266 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(date: 1/8/2020) Hair Sao etli w`�iio �" �i'tla N011��J15N00 070 NVII)I}J3W I ciew�s'.hu��.n�;en n�eee t—F1 ao�iON LL AbtlNINII r tI `JNINHVM o = - _ 9N I69080 Wl ltl 1lW3Utl3tl 311W N31 i S}I�OZI2IOH 5 c NW 3 c „ a YY w x z cga W r� 6... N .. 3 S .•.... �° F ua W c�ie — < T ; - c V s� wa a �s �u O N s a � N N - �n O y .17 CC o Y ... 114e N rvi _ �' c e= wMP 9 - _ � s 3 rJ �.TCE4, — 1 x �� - : } E — - =NI❑30Il��NI 10N a*$- � ,q� /�, E _ o IaNI151X31 Page 8 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 212 of 266 B. Landscape Plan(date: 1/27/2020) ""MAD NDI530 ware Ir �CC m rn Oum8 hwopecy ueid edeospue-j CZC I� �JI.4 fuis3oaC eIIW uel uelp igiN;o A(!O t J N d � � w U C CA 3 .i g T - y i far I m 'W� :% Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 213 of 266 C. Child pick-up and drop-off(date: 1/8/2020) I a I W.Excursion Dr I I , s I NOT INCLUDED IN = I Go ; THIS PHASE i� JI1, ! d LLJ — f I IF I dye • p 148333k4444&3 _ Y I} . 1 � g yyF gg {Fgg 44 —_ c ` �,n tit• 1 ��iii#iiii8iiiiiiii8ii Q rl i'--R r_ .� Po � _. I� � t� � ;-w,cr_.• s _,_ _ , i � I �crbrai � II I I •�� � •,�, 18333g444483333i4444833 I a `i'a_ �; � ✓3'�'Eti''a�l � f � I5 h`•4 f` •,` .:339333 a > I /I�los I � 7-7 R �Vh I L4 S l i• INIFg g1g'P€ •.S'�:Ls'. r�F➢C LOCA1gN EE HTECfLF!� 1v � FAR Til�B.Cr.Id�=E lii ffy \v 0.ws5 PA➢IH8 -F g II r is drop-oif yn �r -Pickup areas l r CCYNECi lO d EE?EhR BErtNCE 4i• •�i r� Page 10 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 214 of 266 D. Building Elevations(date: 12/9/2019) INN � ) } � \ � � \ //� � ~�� } ! \ \ ( � _ . y \ � . . / , Ila I E A } \ m ; q \ _ � in Fri G m m Page I I Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 215 of 266 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy,the Applicant shall construct the parking lot and drive aisle out to Excursion Drive OR an approved fire department turnaround shall be installed in the parking lot adjacent to the building. 2. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 Daycare Facilities,including but not limited to the following: a. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot(6) non-scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. b. Outdoor play equipment over six feet(6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. c. On-site vehicle pick up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick-up of clients. 3. The maximum number of allowable clients (children) at the facility at one time shall be limited to one hundred and eighty(180). 4. The daycare/pre-school shall not operate between the hours of 11:00 pm and 6:00 am. These hours are in line with the approved hours of operation as if the subject property was in a residential district and as requested by the Applicant. 5. The Applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. B. Central District Health(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=183553&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty C. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=183620&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC LU D. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District(NMID) https://weblink.meridianciiy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184505&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCi iy E. Meridian Fire Department(MFD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=183224&dbid=O&roo=MeridianC iv Page 12 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 216 of 266 IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The site meets all the dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district for the proposed use and has already received Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review approval; therefore, Staff finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds the proposed daycare center will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that it will provide a much needed service for area employees within the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds the operation of the proposed daycare/pre-school should be compatible with the employment uses in the close vicinity and the existing and intended character of the TMISAP. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed daycare/pre-school complies with the conditions of approval in Section VII as required, Staff finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Because the site is already annexed into the City and these services are already being provided to the surrounding buildings, Staff finds the proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Page 13 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 217 of 266 Although traffic may increase slightly in this area due to the proposed use and clients dropping off and picking up children, the proposed use and effects was planned for when the TM Crossing Subdivision was originally approved; therefore, Staff finds the proposed daycare should not be detrimental to the general welfare. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30- 2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features in this area; however,finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 14 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 218 of 266 E IDIAN IDAHO 100row PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 E Item Title: Public Hearing for McMillan Independent Senior Living (H-2020- 0004) Meeting Notes: C-/WE I� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.E. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item- Public Hearing for McMillan Independent Senior Living (H-2020-0004)by Investcor Development, Located Approximately in the Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Rd. and W. McMillan Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/13/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 219 of 266 3/19/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 3/19/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-E Project Name: McMillan Independent Senior Living Project No.: H-2020-0004 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/SignInForm Dash Details?id=446 1/1 STAFF REPORT C:�*%_ W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/19/2020 ' Legend DATE: + tE Project Location TO: Planning &Zoning Commission ! t °� ® FROM: Joe Dodson, Associate Planner Fmlmj 208-884-5533 ® EEH5 ® So ffau Pr f Bruce Freckleton, Development ® ® Services Manager '- 208-887-2211 lip SUBJECT: H-2020-0004 McMillan Independent Senior Living LOCATION: Northeast corner of N. Ten Mile Road '__ ® ® & W. McMillan Road; R9010680071. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a conditional use permit for an age restricted multi-family project consisting of 162 units on 6.56 acres of land in the C-G zoning district,by Investcor. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 6.563 acres Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) One(1)existing building lot(285,884 square feet) Phasing Plan(#of phases) One Neighborhood meeting date;#of October 9,2019; six(6)attendees attendees: Amenities Proposed amenities: clubhouse;indoor pool;sports courts; See pg. 9 for outdoor dining areas;community garden;walking paths; analysis and dog park. History(previous approvals) AZ-03-005 (DA#103097612);MI-07-013 (amended DA #108059794,Verona Commercial);RZ-07-017(new DA #108059800,Verona Commercial);PP-07-022;FP-08- 010;A-2019-0290(PBA,ROS#12081);H-2019-0126 (MDA) Pagel Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 220 of 266 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District _ • Staff report(yes/no) Yes—Comment Letter • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via two(2)access points via existing Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) W.Milano Dr.&N. Cortona Way. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross A fire access stub is proposed to the other commercial Access properties to the south;a cross-access easement has been recorded for this access. Existing Road Network Yes Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station Approximately 1.9 miles from the project • Fire Response Time 4:00 minutes(under ideal conditions) • Resource Reliability Fire Station#2 current reliability is 8 1%(this meets the target goal of 80%) • Risk Identification Risk Factor 4(commercial with hazards) • Accessibility Access requirements are met • Special/resource needs This proposed project will require an aerial device.The closest truck company is 11 minutes travel time(under ideal conditions)to the proposed development,and therefore the Fire Department can meet this need in the required timeframe if a truck company is required. This fire station is approximately 5.4 miles from the project • Water Supply Water supply for this proposed development requires 7500 gallons per minute for two hours. The fire flow requirements may be less if the building is fully sprinklered. Water Distance to Water Services Zero(0)feet Pressure Zone 2 Estimated Project Water ERU's See application Water Quality Concerns None Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan Impacts/Concerns There are two 8"water stubs at the east property line near N. Cortona Way and Turin Court. The southern water stub is currently not being used per the submitted site plan.This water stub will need to be abandoned at the main if not used. Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services N/A Sewer Shed North Slough Trunkshed Estimated Project Sewer ERU's See application WRRF Declining Balance 13.88 Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan E Additional Comments Additional 2,364 gpd of Flows committed. The 8" Sanitary Sewer line coming from the east side of the property appears to have a bend in it;sewer lines need to be a straight between manholes with no bends. Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 221 of 266 1 1 1 I,Tdll IIn1111111R1y ■/� - � - • - • I unun■IIIIIIuuI -�'/1y1rJ■��; - • - • _ ,_���. - NO + `Onnl,l 11,1,�1111rIi111� No milli nom xx,■ r i i Ic a>s±:■*'rnldel5'� _.ilfl n + -- l mry r,n nn .n■■ +l ears, ----- .-,_- m ■ on nuui: �11111 _ ilili -�11■r -.. U ,IlionOR— .I JI iiiii:: - o - • ji nm L • 1•'y::nn1N--: x11rr11a ■nnn I■��uiin unllrr rllun nui� un'._�nunluq#loon■■■ �., ra.,,� _ -- •- - Iiiu W ■iiili L I CC s < polo F ull • _ sign er r `•■111 • 1tiilN1 W mud �L�I �1..I.ti1n111 lip MCMILLAN MCMILLAN Illlllgf� ••••;_,:, nnuur 11 1 ,. _ lryal '� , iiii li it �a}@ 1 WR '===IIIIIII p - ■,i . r - � � K' � 1 �# �. ■►unll� m �- •Q.- ems■ �f�-� ��, 11' � IRr ■ �' 1111111111■i 1' 1 .. ■11 � ..�1111 `O„1,1,1 I�1111111111 . rrrrn 1■rrrrrn W ■n ri■I� nn■inl� nnm. O J- uu• r� nun � � nun ■qx■ \I11111 n .■ilirn i n„n • -• '• - 1, u„�pllrn i mm iln �;.11 r, p■■■■li■ ■w Irrrr,■ 11 q-, p■■■,1■. ■�Ilrrr,■ ill's�-. -r�■lirrrr■ �.�R,„■■ 11�r - -u■Ilrrrrr �■�1,,,■■ ON■IIn� ■,,,,,,■R a�. ,,,1 11,��C ■,,,,,,■Rai.■,,,■� nm�: ' x1111■r nrr . m a���_ xLn■■ �w n,n �i Qnn1 .— nines 1 ■nn■■ ri mR .r lilnm 11 ■nn■■ W:.n,1r �.e-innnll Ir A■nun W•.mrrl' - nunnl Ir A.nun u Hillm - MINIM ■,n■ uni Ilr� illln �r■nrR■ �►.�— ���n■�:.0111, m nunu �, 1-1s■ m::p mnuu Inium ln■iIlul Lt'4:J,�ium►j mil ill p r III f WHO ■■. um►-,11111111 '� ���limil■ II I - - IN•I p Ilnli Ie ---- IAd 111111111 ''1 r■Il,■ pnn � / - • Inn - �■■.x. Z' � 1 1 - ilrli \ n 4/,u1 ,1•,11111 r W■ '� nl4 _ n t/llw nS 11g111 u IIIIIII F� ' __ _� n 11wn _ n■u' S MCM�IL-L-AN - — �° - -. nmx■R ill 11 IIII 11111111 �� nnunR -•===:' nni ll unum I w111- -•===-.� nnl I ll 11��� ilill � 11111,10 -����- � ►�II R �:Rj �llilil IIIIIIIII,L�.�� lrr � I,Illl,r _ IIII �IIIIIIIII,L■�^"lln \ rill .IIIIIII .- IIIIIII rrlll �rrl 1 IIII �— 111111,- l -=111111� �rrl kM lllil — 11 .���I'� lll ., leolo•1•lE.ltaFl.+��iaeee• ::r �rpirm ' • 11 It ' IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/28/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 2/25/2020 Site Posting Date 2/22/2020 NextDoor posting 2/25/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciby.or /g comQplan) The future land use designation for this property is Commercial—this designation will provide a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and visitors. Desired uses may include retail, restaurants, personal and professional services, and office uses, as well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses. Multi-family is not listed as a sample use in Commercial areas. However, multi-family projects have historically been envisioned and approved on commercially designated and zoned parcels. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): • "Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels, household sizes, and lifestyle preferences." (2.01.01). This age restricted multi family project provides a needed housing option for those who wish to live independently but also want to live within a close-knit smaller community. • "Support active-adult or independent senior living developments." (2.01.01 M). The proposed development is an independent senior living project that provides multiple amenities and open space that help facilitate active lifestyles and is in close proximity to existing and planned commercial, retail, and office uses in the area. • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents." (2.01.02D). Aging populations do not always own a detached single-family home and may not want to due to the general large sizes of that housing option. An independent senior living multi family development adds variety to the housing types available and will help meet the needs,preferences, and financial capabilities of present and future Meridian residents. • "Evaluate open space and amenity requirement and criteria for consistency with community needs and values." (2.01.01 B). The proposed project offers open space and amenities that exceed the minimum requirements of the UDC. From the indoor pool, wellness center, and bistro to the outdoor dog park and sports courts, the amenities add to the standard of living and provide a high level of support to the independent seniors living in this community. • "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services, including water, sewer, police, transportation, schools, fire and parks." Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 223 of 266 (3.02.01 G). The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a senior housing project. Public Works has allocated resources to serve the development, but additional modeling is required. Both Police and Fire have provided comments on the application and they have no major concerns with the proposed development. With the development of the site, walking paths will be extended to the existing collector street sidewalks and will enhance the City pathway network. The proposed demographics of the development should have limited impact on the area schools as well. Staff finds that the proposed development should have a minimal impact on the current LOS for public facilities. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening, transitional densities, and other best site design practices." (3.07.01A). Sometimes multi family development near detached single-family homes can create controversy. However, residential uses are generally compatible with one another, regardless of dwelling type. Further; this development is proposing to provide a buffer and is designed with compatible building materials to the existing single-family residences. The four-story south residential wing is closest to the existing homes and is proposed to be no closer than approximately 220'. Further, this site is separated from these residences by a residential collector roadway and existing street landscape buffers with several trees, as seen in Exhibit 'E"of Section VII. In addition, the buildings are proposed to be developed with a farmhouse style architecture and incorporate both lap siding and high grade stone to match that of the surrounding residential development. The lower, two-story clubhouse adds additional architectural features to the project and provides a welcome break the building fagade when looking from the residential development across N. Cortona Way. See Exhibit "C"of Section VII for the architectural elevations. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on this site. The street buffer and landscaping is existing and maintained by the adjacent homeowners association on the East side of N. Cortona Way. D. Proposed Use Analysis: Multi-family development is a conditional use in the C-G zoning district. A conditional use permit(CUP) is proposed for a multi-family development consisting of 162 units with an age-restriction of 55 years-and-up.A Development Agreement Modification (MDA) application (H-2019-0126) was approved recently, removing the previous restriction of multi family being allowed on this site and conceptually approved this use and project type. The MDA hearing application and associated conditions were approved by City Council on January 7, 2020; the development agreement has not yet been signed and recorded. A condition of approval regarding the signing of this document is in Section VIII of this report. Page 5 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 224 of 266 E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to specific use standards per UDC table 11-2B-2 and UDC 11-4. (Staff analysis/comments in italics) 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community, provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe, interesting outdoor spaces for residents. B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project complies with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts a screened trash enclosure; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section, the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. The applicant has not provided floor plans for the proposed project; the provided plan sets do not give staff enough information in relation to this requirement, therefore staff cannot determine compliance with this requirement at this time. Staff will be able to easily make this finding when Certificate of Zoning Compliance/Design Review is submitted. Applicant shall meet this requirement at the time of CZCIDR application submittal per conditions of approval in Section VIII of this report. 4. For the purposes of this section, vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 225 of 266 5. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area.Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. The minimum number of parking spaces are proposed. See additional staff analysis below. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail, that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773, 4-24-2018) The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict these items. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred (500) or less square feet of living area. 32 units contain less than 500 square feet; therefore, a total of 4,800 square feet of common open space is required for these units. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. 130 units are between 500 and 1,200 square feet; therefore, a total of 32,500 square feet (or.75 acres) of common open space is required for these units. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. Not applicable. Note: Open space standards found in UDC 11-3G do not apply to this project because it is a residential project in a commercial district. Instead, the open space requirements in these specific use standards for multi family developments apply. Staff analysis is below. At a minimum, a total of 37,300 square feet(or.86 acres) of outdoor common open space is required to be provided in the proposed development. Staff has calculated approximately 48,000 square feet, 1.1 acres (or 16.8% of the site), of proposed qualified open space to be provided, in excess of the minimum standards. The Applicant's application and open space exhibit(Section VUD) states a larger area than what staff has calculated but some of the area (i.e. street buffers along collector streets and parking lot landscaping) counted does Page 7 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 226 of 266 not qualify;Staff finds the area that does qualify exceeds the minimum standards. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area, and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20').All qualified common open space complies with this requirement. 3. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. This project is proposed to be developed in one (1)phase. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4) in height, with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff. retroactive to 2-4-2009)As mentioned above, the buffers along collector streets do not count toward the qualified open space required for the development. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2) Fitness facilities. (3) Enclosed bike storage. (4) Public art such as a statue. b. Open space: (1) Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100) in size. (2) Community garden. (3) Ponds or water features. (4) Plaza. c. Recreation: (1) Pool. (2) Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units, two (2) amenities shall be provided from two (2) separate categories. Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 227 of 266 b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy five (75) units, three (3) amenities shall be provided, with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy five (75)units or more, four(4) amenities shall be provided, with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units, the decision making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D, provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Based on 162 proposed units, a minimum of four(4) amenities are required; however, the decision making body is authorized to consider other amenities in addition to those provided. The following amenities are proposed from the quality of life, open space and recreation categories: a clubhouse with a bistro, lounge, indoor pool with sauna and steam rooms,full kitchen,fitness center, wellness center, art room, multi- purpose room, library, and 20-seat theater; outdoor dining areas;plaza spaces; outdoor sports courts to include: bocce ball and pickle ball courts, a putting green, shuffleboard, and outdoor checkers;fire pits; a community garden; and a dog park for residents. The project also proposes circuitous walking paths that connect to the existing collector roadway sidewalks providing for plenty of walking paths. Staff believes the proposed amenities exceed the minimum UDC requirements and is appropriate for a project of this size. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y) wide. b. For every three (3) linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty four inches (24") shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The landscape plan provided meets the specific use standard requirements. (See section VIIB) F. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features. (Ord. 16-1672, 2- 16-2016) The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 228 of 266 F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed project is made up of two residential wings that interconnect with the clubhouse. Both residential wings are 4-stories and 57 feet at their highest point and the Clubhouse is a two-story structure with a maximum height of 37 feet—the residential wings and the clubhouse meet the 65' height UDC standard for the C-G zoning district. The building is generally centered in the buildable lot with its main common space areas behind the buildings and away from the collector roadways; its closest setback to any property line is approximately 76 feet, therefore exceeding the minimum ten(10) foot setback for multi-family development in any zoning district. All UDC dimensional standards are met as proposed. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): There are two main access points to this site off of the existing residential collector roadways, W. Milano Drive and N. Cortona Way. There is a fire access gate at the southwest corner of the property for future interconnectivity with the other commercial properties to the south and west as required by the approved MDA. The applicant is also proposing a fire lane from the drive aisle into the center open space area for additional fire safety. All fire accesses meet the required standards as stated in the Fire Department's comments. In addition, ACHD has reviewed the proposed access points and is recommending approval. See their attached comment letter in this report. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C& 11-3A-19): Per UDC Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family developments, the minimum number of off- street parking spaces are required to be provided: 1-bedroom units require 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit with at least one of those in a covered carport or garage; and 2- and 3- bedroom units require 2 spaces per unit with at least one in a covered carport or garage. The applicant is proposing 123 1-bedroom/studio apartments and 36 2-bedroom units requiring a minimum of 159 covered carport or garage spaces and 98 uncovered parking spaces for a total of 257 spaces. A total of 258 spaces are proposed, consisting of 160 covered spaces (118 carport spaces &42 garage spaces) and 98 uncovered spaces; this meets the UDC standards. The recently approved development agreement restricts this development to be age restricted to seniors, age SS and older,should the Commission determine any additional parking is required, conditions regarding the overall number of parking spaces shall be reflected hereto.Although the minimum parking space count is met as proposed,Staff is concerned a large number of the garage spaces will be used for storage rather than parking and will then reduce the availability of any guest parking. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval that all garage spaces are prohibited as storage units and must be for parking only. During the hearing, the applicant should explain how this ongoing condition will be met. UDC 11-3A-19B.3a states no more than 50% of the total off-street parking area for the site shall be located between building facades and abutting streets. The proposed parking layout meets this standard with no more than 44%of the total off-street parking being between the building facades and the residential collector roadways. Page 10 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 229 of 266 Bicycle parking is a requirement in every zoning district at the rate of one (1) space for every 25 vehicle parking spaces,per UDC 11-3C-6. Therefore, with 258 proposed vehicle stalls, the minimum number of bicycle parking spaces is 12. The Applicant does not show any bicycle parking on the proposed plans. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review submittal, the Applicant shall provide a minimum of 12 bicycle parking spaces and provide an exhibit with the submitted plans. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): There is an existing five-foot(5) detached sidewalk along W. Milano Dr. and N. Cortona Way with existing street trees that will be protected in place. The applicant is proposing 7' sidewalks along all parking areas that abut the building area and an interconnected sidewalk system for residents to use as walking paths. All sidewalks meet UDC Standards. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The project landscaping meets UDC standards; the approved landscape plan is included in Section VII.B. K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): There is no fencing proposed at this time. L. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): A copy of the conceptually approved building elevations and material board are included in Section VII.C. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 11 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 230 of 266 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(date: 1/8/2020) ueldal!Sleinana7Ly»y UODISRebll - O s fiuini1]uapuadapuu�uelpua,j - aa$SSaJSOJd-slUawn704 UO,y7na;SU07 ]Uawd0j2nad JOa]SaAUj g Q OaHvNa Sag e s� /�x/ z W f L. gp L ,4 I� LK - - _1 f rq r' --- -_ - II Page 12 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 231 of 266 B. Landscape Plan(date: 1/27/2020) ueId 5ullueld p N p o G ad—pueq i5UjAn jowas ivapuadapul ueplWoyy •J -LIM3d 3sn IYNowalloo luawdojanao—1—ul &e S S l l I M 1 OaU?J V3N,tl 3tl$ r�� NO 's �� E Ex"s � 63stli 3 y E��g.Et33 ASS S5 x RA !M J i J � V L4�•�. v mlm r F Page 13 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 232 of 266 C. Building Elevations su 14-13 1011a1z3 8—M Tl;uapisay ql�-N U 031 S 3 AM I r orn O &uuiI�owag 7uapuadapul ue111'Ap y u014exjddq;iwuad ash Ieu0i;ipuo3 auawd0jana4 uo�;sanul g g s a S�IIA 0a VNil39 F. S3 w' Ell El I 3 EE ❑I ❑I AT I❑ I f l � x r r. r. r a kj ql 1- ❑ � ❑ ❑I I❑ ❑ ❑I ❑ ❑ �� _� III❑I ❑ ❑Et,' I81 8 8 ❑ R] ❑ E ❑ III I❑I I❑ Jill. ❑I El �.', ❑4'Ljfi _ ,... I I El 1 11 Ell: -❑ fir° I T F1 1: i —L ❑ ❑ Ii ❑ ❑ El El , ❑ I I❑ ❑ ❑I ❑I ❑ =F ❑ R [I ��� r ® 7=1 e' ® ❑I �.. I II II i❑ J:E��= t ICI ❑ [❑i 8 ❑� ❑ ❑ I� a ffi ❑ ❑ I❑ ' a I , fill r r Z ©.' w J�mIII71 F Z: �$ _ G Z �� L Z`_� Page 14 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 233 of 266 o saogenal3�oua4xj asno49�13 HO�ISZAN1 "s re)�a sp w o Swn„ aluag 7uapuadapu1-11l w,w _M d -11-11ddy 71w1ad asp leuo w-:) ;uawdolanad uoa}saw, v «a 5 I M Oa Ntl NN3B m3 �9 W 8 � e rr r pr EEI Bt'-s 0 I =B B r [Ell 4 , h E O � t U Z v N I N m C Page 15 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 234 of 266 suogenal3 aoua4x3 oulM leµuaplsay y HODSSHANI g fV 5ulnld aoivas wapuedapul uell!WoW M uOpeopddv Ilwuad asp leuoplpuorD auawdolanap uooasanu� r oQ o¢arNa3q �Sa f { f f 1 =E11 Ill �I 7EII 8 f t 2- Ell f i 18 140 �. " I ie Jjjjj ® e E] -e e , I � -E ILI ElIEJ I� _ 111 8 h � Fi -Fi ii.I I Li 8 E ®- LL i ®_IEllke ®3� _ IE1 E, !e El CIF-IF] 8 [Ell Ell El IFF71 FH- B ® I818L1a= o w El [8 8 I a I[F] �,Ell81 11 F z w e e Page 16 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 235 of 266 D. Open Space Exhibit(dated: 3/12/2020) VT A 1 ! ! c:1 ®\ r 1 I -r. -1 1 ,y J — S LJ_J m q s I 1 I - I I oy � S^ BENNAFDO Wr LLS InveStcor Development 701,Construction Dr-ro a McMillan Independent Senior Living S O9 LANDSCAPE g= u .ie"m MATERIALS PLAN Page 17 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 236 of 266 a <<'; R • 4 ' VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning Conditions 1. Prior to submittal of any additional applications, the applicant shall execute the new development agreement on this site approved by City Council on January 07, 2020 for hearing application H-2019-0126. 2. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 Multi-Family Development. 3. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review submittal, Applicant shall provide plans that adequately show the required private open space per UDC Specific Use Standards 11-4-3-27B.3. 4. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review submittal, the Applicant shall provide a revised site-plan that shows a minimum of 12 bicycle parking spaces. 5. The Applicant shall require that all garage spaces are used for parking only and not allowed to be used for storage. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall show compliance with this condition by submitting to the Planning Department a copy of the Rules and Regulations, or the like, for this multi-family complex that addresses this condition. 6. At the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review submittal, the Applicant shall substantially comply with the submitted site-plan, landscape plan, and elevations of this application. B. Public Works Site Specific Conditions: 1. There are two 8" water stubs at the east property line near N. Cortona Way and Turin Court. The southern water stub is currently not being used per the submitted site plan. This water stub will need to be abandoned at the main if not used. 2. The 8" Sanitary Sewer line coming from the east side of the property appears to have a bend in it; sewer lines need to be a straight between manholes with no bends. 3. A street light plan will need to be included in the construction plans for the project. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. Additional streetlights are required on W. Milano Drive to meet current City standards. General Conditions of Approval: 4. 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 Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 238 of 266 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. 5. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit 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 I I"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 6. 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. 7. 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 I 1-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 13. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Page 20 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 239 of 266 14. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. 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. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=184564&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty D. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183616&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr--1 E. Meridian Police Department(MPD) hyps://weblink.meridianciU.or,g/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=184435&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky F. Meridian Fire Department(MFD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183907&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: Page 21 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 240 of 266 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30- 2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features in this area; however,finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 23 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 242 of 266 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds the proposed age-restricted multi family project will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that it will provide alternative housing options for those SS and older that are close to existing commercial and retail services. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds the design, construction, and operation of the proposed age restricted multi- family project should be compatible with the existing residential uses and the future commercial uses nearby and will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed project complies with the conditions of approval in Section VII as required, Staff finds the proposed multi family project should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Because the site is already annexed into the City and these services are already being provided to the surrounding buildings, Staff finds the proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Although traffic may increase slightly in this area due to the proposed use, Staff finds the proposed age restricted multi family project should not be detrimental to the general welfare. Page 22 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 241 of 266 E IDIAN*-- IDAHO PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 F Item Title: Public Hearing for Victory Commons (H-2019-0150) Meeting Notes: Continued to May 7, 2020 C-/WE I� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.F. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item - Public Hearing for Victory Commons (H-2019-0150) by BVA Development, LLC, Located at 130 E. Victory Rd. and 3030 S. Meridian Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 243 of 266 E IDIAN*-- IDAHO PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING AGENDA March 19, 2020 Agenda Item Number: 4 G Item Title: Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020 for Lupine Cove (H-2019-0133) Meeting Notes: RECOMMEND DENIAL TO CITY COUNCIL CiWEI�� ITEM SHEET Council Agenda Item -4.G. Presenter: Estimated Time for Presentation: 0 Title of Item - Public Hearing Continued from February 20, 2020 for Lupine Cove (H-2019- 0133) by Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services, Located at 4000 N. McDermott Rd. Click Here for Application Materials Call 208-398-0642 during the hearing to provide live testimony ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Upload Date Staff Report Staff Report 3/13/2020 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 244 of 266 3/19/2020 City of Meridian-Public Hearing Sign In Form Tools Details and Signatures For Public Hearing Hearing Date: 3/19/2020 Hearing Type: PZ Item Number: 4-G Project Name: Lupine Cove Project No.: H-2019-0133 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=428 1/1 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING March 19,2020 f Legend 7,0 DATE: Continued from:February 20, 2020 ( jPpc�jec- t Lc=f�orti _0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton,Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: H-2019-0133 Lupine Cove ri_ LOCATION: 4000 N. McDermott Rd., in the NW 1/4 of 'x Section 33,Township 4N.,Range 1 W. -' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 7.09 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district and Preliminary Plat consisting of twenty-eight (28)buildable lots, seven(7)common lots and two (2)other lots on 7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 7 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential(MDR)(3-8 units/acre Existing Land Use Residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential(SFR)development Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8 Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 28 buildable;7 common&2 other Phasing plan(#of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units(type 27 new and 1 existing(SFR detached homes) of units) Density(gross&net) 4 gross/7.46 net Open Space(acres,total[%]/ Based on the applicant's calculations 0.81 of an acre(11.7%) buffer/qualified) is being proposed. Page 1 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 245 of 266 Amenities Children's play equipment,gazebo and basketball court Physical Features(waterways, The Five Mile Creek runs along the northern boundary of this hazards,flood plain,hillside) site. The McFadden Drain runs along the east boundary. Neighborhood meeting date;#of August 28,2019;9 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One(1)access proposed via N.McDermott Rd.,a collector Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) street Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross A stub street was required to the subject property from the Access Aegean Subdivision to the north,but the plan as submitted doesn't contemplate extension with this development.A stub street is proposed at the south boundary. Existing Road Network None Page 2 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 246 of 266 Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 3 miles from Fire Station#2 • Fire Response Time 5 minutes under ideal conditions;can meet the response time goals • Resource Reliability 8 1%from Fire Station#2—does meet the target goal of 80%or greater • Risk Identification Risk factor of 2—current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project(see comments in Section VIILC) • Accessibility Project meets all required access,road widths and turnarounds • Special/resource needs An aerial device is not required;the closest truck company is 12 minutes travel time(under ideal conditions)—Fire Dept. can meet this need in the required timeframe if needed. • Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for 1 hour;may be less if buildings are fully sprinklered • Other Resources NA Police Service • Distance to Police 8.5 miles Station • Police Response 5:30 minutes Time • Calls for Service 241 for Reporting District M719(1/1/2019—12/31/2019) • Accessibility No issues with the proposed access • Specialty/resource This proposed development is on the edge of the city limits. The Meridian needs Police Department already serves this area with the Oaks Development and Jump Creek. As of now no additional resources are needed at this time. Once all the surrounding developments build out such as Gander Creek,Aegean Estates and Owyhee High School it will require future additional police resources in this geographic area. • Crimes 241 (1/1/2019—12/31/2019) • Crashes 3 (1/1/2019— 12/31/2019) • Other The Meridian Police Department has no outstanding issues concerning this development application. All qualified open space provided in the development,to include all amenities, must be in an open area in order to allow for natural observation opportunities. Pathways and landscaping should not create hiding spots or blind spots that would promote criminal opportunities. The Meridian Police Department will support all Community Development Staff recommendations,Traffic Impact Studies from ITD and or ACHD to improve access,roadways,intersections,pathways and sidewalks before the project if fully completed. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer 0 feet Services • Sewer Shed North McDermott Trunkshed • Estimated Project See application Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining 13.81 Balance Page 3 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 247 of 266 • Project Consistent Yes with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns The maximum slope of sewer mainlines is 5.0%due to limitations on our collections televising equipment.Please revise sewer grade between existing SSMH(within McDermott)and the upstream manhole, SSMH Al. Water • Distance to Water 0 feet Services • Pressure Zone 1 • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's • Water Quality Yes-this development results in a long deadend water main which may result Concerns in poor water quality. This deadend won't be eliminated until the Count parcels to the south are developed. • Project Consistent Yes with Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns The water mainline in McDermott Road must be extended to the southern property line extended.Water mainline sizes were not indicated on the plans, however the McDermott line must be 12-inch diameter and the Lupine Lane line as shall be 8-inch diameter. Page 4 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 248 of 266 C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend i ff ff I�Proye�t Laca�iarr I�Proiec+Lc�c.:-_' _ �i filed-HIg ens r T Residentid 'y. Y. hAdium Density - {. - # sidential :MU-RG Zoning Map Planned Development Map (fLegend R Legend Proyeot Lucaim %*-ot Lacas n +-i Cfy Ling �'R-8 — Pear-red Pa-e's UT11 R-$ A ., _ -I J f RUT Fq .1. +'+ III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services PO Box 405 Boise,ID 83701 B. Owner: Justin Fishburn Page 5 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 249 of 266 4000 N. McDermott Rd. Meridian, ID 83646 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 1/31/2020 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/28/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 1/10/2020 on site Nextdoor posting 1/28/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan) (Note: This project was submitted prior to the new Comprehensive Plan being adopted; therefore, this project is being evaluated under the previous Plan) The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Medium Density Residential(MDR). The purpose of the MDR designation is to allow small lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. As noted above,the submitted plat consists of 28 building lots on approximately 7 acres of land which is 4 dwelling units to the acre. Staff finds the proposed density is within the density parameters of the MDR land use designation. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development: • "Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, medium-high and high-density single- family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities."(3.07.01E) The proposed single-family detached homes will contribute to the variety of residential categories in the City; Staff is unaware how "affordable"the units will be. • "Permit new development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City."(3.01.0117) City services are available and will be extended by the developer to the proposed lots upon development of the site in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Require useable open space be incorporated into new residential subdivision plats."(3.07.02A) The proposed plat depicts a total of 0.81 of an acre(or 11.716) of qualified open space, however much of the qualified open space is ether developed with imperious surface or ponds which lacks creativity in the design per the purpose statement in UDC 11-6A-1. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) On the south boundary are rural county lots in excess of 4 acres. The applicant has not provided Page 6 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 250 of 266 any real transitional lot sizes along this boundary. The two (2) most impacted rural lots have a 5:1 and 3:1 lot ratio respectively. • "Require new urban density subdivision which abut or are proximal to existing low density residential land uses to provide landscaped screening or transitional densities with larger,more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban level densities and rural residential densities."(3.05.02F) Staff does not believe the transition proposed is adequate to the rural residential lots to the south. • "Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect local roads and collectors to adjacent properties(stub streets)."(3.03.020) A stub street was approved at the north boundary of this property with the Aegean Subdivision preliminary plat which is required to be extended on this property with development. This street would provide local street access to this development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The proposed plat does not depict a stub street in the location of the stub street approved with the Aegean Subdivision. • "Incorporate creek corridors as an amenity in development design."(5.09.01E) The City's mapping depicts the Five Mile Creek on the north boundary and the McFadden Drain on the east boundary of the development. The submitted plans depicts minimal improvements or enhancements in these areas. Staff believes these areas should be improved as an amenity for the development. • "Develop and implement programs to encourage and promote tree health and preservation throughout the City, including along waterways and within proposed development."(5.01.01E) The subject property contains many mature trees that will be retained or removed with development of the subdivision. The proposed landscape plan indicates that 1,958 caliper inches of mature trees exist on the site. Many of them will be removed for various reasons. The plan indicates of the 1,958 caliper inches, only 184 caliper inches will be mitigated and 134 caliper inches of existing will be retained on the site. If the plat were designed with less density,staff believes more of the existing mature trees could be preserved with the development. Staff believes the proposed development plan is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan in regards to land use and density. However, because the plat lacks transitional lots sizes on the south boundary and does not adequately address the transportation and open space elements of the Plan,Staff recommends denial. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION&ZONING The Applicant requests annexation of 7.09 acres of land,which includes land to the section line of N. McDermott Rd.,with an R-8 zoning district consistent with the Medium Density Residential(MDR) Future Land Use Map (FLUM)designation in the Comprehensive Plan. The legal description and exhibit map for the area proposed to be annexed is included in Section VIILA below. Proposed Use: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with 27 new single-family detached homes;the existing home is proposed to remain on a lot in the proposed subdivision. Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Page 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 251 of 266 The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VII.A. A development agreement is not being recommended as part of the annexation request because staff is recommending denial. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposed preliminary plat consists of 28 buildable lots (include the lot where the existing home is proposed to remain), 7 common lots and 2 other lots on 7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district. Lots range in size from 4,500 to 12,674 square feet(s.f.). The plat is proposed to develop in one phase. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is one (1) existing home and some accessory structures on this site;the existing home is proposed to remain on Lot 13,Block 2—all accessory structures that don't comply with the setbacks of the district are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. If the annexation and subdivision is approved,the existing residence should connect to City services and obtain a new address. Dimensional Standards: Compliance with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district is required. The minimum property size in the R-8 district is 4,000 square feet with a minimum street frontage of 40 feet. All of the lots conform the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-6. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): One access is proposed via N. McDermott Rd., a collector street; local street access is not available to this property at this time,however a local stub street was planned from the Aegean Subdivision to the north. The applicant is not proposing the extension of the roadway due to the cost associated with crossing over the Five Mile Creek for the extension of the roadway. ACHD did not require half the cost of the crossing from the developer of the Aegean project. Therefore,the crossing half the cost would be absorbed by the subject developer with long term maintenance by ACHD. ACHD is requiring the extension of the road consistent with their policy. Staff believes these two projects should be connected with a public street connection. UDC 11-3A-3 requires access to local streets when available and the Comprehensive Plan requires interconnectivity and the extension of stub streets with development. The stub street to the north is not shown on the proposed plat which is not consistent with the UDC or the Plan. The local street being proposed(Lupine Lane) does stub at the south boundary. This street does not meet the naming convention of the City and"Lane" should be removed from the street name as this nomenclature is reserved for private streets,not public streets. In addition to the stub street not being extended, approximately half of the residential lots take access from common driveways. The long term maintenance of the common driveways will be the responsibility of the HOA. Further,Public Works Department is being less supportive of common driveways because of the separation requirements between the services. They also oppose the extension of any mains (water or sewer)in said driveways as currently proposed by the applicant. Per UDC 11-6A-1, one of the objectives of subdividing land is to promote the extension public streets to improve vehicular network. Staff finds excluding the extension of the stub street and the excessive number of common driveways does not meet this objective of the subdivision regulations in the UDC. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): There are no pathways depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this property. The applicant is proposing a mircopath(Lot 7,Block 2)along the south boundary,preserving pedestrian connectivity in Page 8 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 252 of 266 the future. Common Lot 7,Block 2 must be developed in accord with UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-313- 12. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required along the frontage of this site adjacent to N. McDermott Rd. The proposed plat depicts the 5-foot wide sidewalk outside of the required landscape buffer adjacent to McDermott Road. The applicant should relocate the sidewalk in the 35-foot wide landscape buffer to ensure compliance with the UDC. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required along N. McDermott Rd. (measured from back of curb), landscaped per the standards in UDC Table 11-3B-7C. The proposed landscape plan depicts the buffer in a common lot as required by the UDC and landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C. Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G- 3E. Trees are proposed far exceeding UDC standards. Tree mitigation is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.As noted above, the property contains many mature trees that are proposed to be removed or retained as part of the project(approximately 1,958 caliper inches). The applicant is proposing to retain 134 caliper inches in the form of existing trees and mitigate 184 caliper inches. The remaining 1,320 caliper inches are not being mitigated.UDC 11-3B-10C.5(a) requires 100% replacement of the caliper inches.The mitigation plan as proposed by the applicant depicts mitigation of 184 caliper inches which does not comply with UDC standards. The applicant should coordinate with the City Arborist on the mitigation plan to ensure the development can accommodate as many caliper inches as possible. Qualified Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G): Because the area of the preliminary plat is above 7 acres in size,the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 apply. The applicant has provided an open space exhibit to show how she derived at the qualified open space for the development. In reviewing the submitted plan,some of the areas,the applicant is counting towards qualified open space does not meet UDC standards as follows: 1. Lot 7,Block 2 is not landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-12. 2. Lot 6,Block 1 is not improved with an amenity(parking lot does not count as an amenity) or meet the dimensional standards(50' X 100')to count towards qualified open space. 3. Lot 15,Block 2 is proposed to be developed with ACHD temporary turnaround. This area must be removed from the open space calculations. If this area is not dimensioned 50' x 100' with the removal of imperious surface, this area does not meet the City's open space standards. 4. Lot 13,Block 1 depicts a pond greater than 25%of the common lot and does not meet UDC standards in accord with UDC 11-3G-3B.7 and 8. 5. Lot 1,Block 1 is not included in the open space calculation. If this area was enhanced and improved in accord with City and the irrigation standards and integrated in the subdivision design as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan,the applicant could include this lot in the open space calculations.Without this lot, staff finds that the qualified open space proposed with this project does not comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3G-3. Amenities for the development include a gazebo,tot lot and basketball court in excess of UDC standards. Page 9 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 253 of 266 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-6 and 11-3A-7. The landscape plan submitted with the application details the fencing proposed for the project. Six-foot tall vinyl fencing is proposed along the west, south and a portion of the north boundary. The portion of 6-foot solid fencing along the north boundary is adjacent to a common lot and cannot be 6-foot tall solid fencing as proposed by the applicant. The fencing along the entire north boundary of the buildable lots,including Lot 14 and 15,Block 1,must be constructed as a 6-foot tall semi-privacy fence as proposed along the interior common lots within the subdivision. Six-foot tall semi-privacy fencing is proposed along the internal common lots and the northern boundary of Lots 16-22,Block 1 in accord with UDC standards. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is proposed in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. 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-I5): An underground pressurized irrigation(PI) system is required to be provided for each lot within the development as set forth as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. If a PI pump station is required on the developed property, such station shall be on a lot solely dedicated to that pump station and shall be owned by the entity that owns and maintains the PI system as set forth in UDC 11-313-6E. 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. Storm drainage will be mitigated with private drainage ponds at the end of the proposed common driveways and public street drainage is proposed to accommodate in common Lots 2 and 13,Block 1. Because ACHD drainage ponds are proposed within common lots,the proposed ponds must be designed in accord with UDC 11-313-11 or removed from the open space calculations. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevation photos were submitted for the proposed homes, as shown in Section VII.E. Building materials are proposed to consist of a mix of stucco,wood, and stone wainscot. Field and trim materials are distinguished by color and texture;window and door openings are accentuated with trim. Because the rear and/or side of 2-story structures on lots that abut N.McDermott Rd.will be highly visible, Staff recommends those elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g.projections,recesses,step-backs,pop-outs),bays, banding,porches,balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines.Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Annexation& Zoning and Preliminary Plat in accord with the Findings in Section IX. Page 10 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 254 of 266 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map GRITy F! 'wwl�o+tpa3cfdan `� 4 1602 W.Hays St.,Suite 306 Boise,ID 83702 s www.accu ratesu rveyors_oo m Land Description-Annexation A parcel of land being a portion of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 33,Township 4 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho being more particularly described as follows. BEGINNING at the found 2-inch aluminum cap monument in asphalt labeled PLS 7729 at the Y.corner common to Sections 32 and 33 In said township from which the found 3- 1 inch brass cap monument in asphalt with illegible labeling at the section corner common to Sections 28,29, 32 and 33 in said township bears N 00'32'36'E a distance of 2633.71 feet, Thence N 00'32'3V E along the section line and along the centerline of N. McDermott Road for a distance of 334.34 feet to a found 5/81 inch iron pin upon which a 2-inch aluminum cap labeled RLS 11463 was placed; Thence N 85'03'27"E along the centerline of the McFadden Drain(aka Teeter Drain) for a distance of 751.67 feet to a found 5/811 inch Iron pin with a plastic cap labeled PLS 13256; Thence 5 19"45'03"E along said centerline and its extension for a distance of 435.77 feet to a found 5/81'inch iron pin upon which a 2-inch aluminum cap labeled PLS 11463 was placed; Thence N 89'17'46"W along the center section fine for a distance of 899.36 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Parcel contains 7.086 acres,more or less. t 114639 1602 W.Hays St.,Suite 306 Boise,ID 83702 r. Phone:208-488-4227 www,acc u ratesurve yors.com Page 11 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 255 of 266 A A T10 A.P 4000 N. MCDERM077 RD. MEROIAN IV- 53646 LWNG 41THIN THE 5W 114 OF THE NW 114 OF SEC77ON 33. T.4N., R_rw., S.M. 29 2$ 10 SFC770V CORNER �g CP&f Na. 2019--01 71 65 ILLEGIBLE a11463 � N r1p3'27" 754,67' mass J. a Lj CAP, PLS 11463 KD CA 7,086 Acres w SGALE: 1'=IQ� Z� r'] G'-a 4 C47,2NfR SEC 7 ON 33 CF&F Na 106023324 32 33 M6977461w PCs 5467 Erz ° svr N 89'17'46" W 89906' SET.?'ALUM, 7 7J8.J6 V� 20I6T120634 CyyNr CAP, PC5 11463 PIS 7728 LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE -- SIEC770hi LINE FOUND 3 I/V BRASS CAP � $ OF ��{''MONUMENT ON AVWAL7 N 00'32,36" E SETWEE'N FOUND MONLIMEIVTS FOUND 2' ALl/MINLNd GAP AT THE 714 CORNEA' COM44ON TO SEC77ONS � MONUMENT W AS HALT 32 & 3T SEC 7 N SF C 71O. .32. &CORNER ti COMMON TO Sr=CTIO�I.S 28, 29, 32, 8r 33. �♦ FOUND 518"IRON PIN, v3 1800 W. HNys Street #209 Wi i PLASW GAP, OR AS NOTED t Soi®e, Idaho 83?08 s# (206) 486-4227 SCIK w ACCUrE t8 911r9ey0I8.00II1 DATE: JULY, 2619 JOB 1 D-178 Page 12 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 256 of 266 B. Preliminary Plat(date: 11/7/2019) LZ"I'INE ".-E --I 1 I--I I _T ' - .• - :�=-.. =m cr uc=.i�ut—=o�tTr ar we—slh of ouw - ,' .-. - _ ._-_ 7-7 C. ltiit. �I£3 � 1 r Nathan—"-° J.fang 11 afi3 —77 �� �•�P- M� �. #.� .mom .a,n . �r� Mom. ate:..` ,,' gV. IT I s� A MI.00AL ROAD SEMO\ SIURED DRIVE Page 13 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 257 of 266 C. Landscape Plan(date: 10/16/2019) ...s..<..�..�K...��...a,.....,...�a�..e ��YrC.�7'•. -="-'Y•_-� :i�L�..- _ �.`._.....ti � .aFa ii m .-. � .. �L....�--.- r.+�.r. .�..�"�.•..... ..-Yam..- - ... Q.,d.. a �J O� m TH6 PORTION IS IM WION LY LEFTBl K AN�WILL reE DE-fERMIHE�6Yh1E CfIV � r .. /�9\ � § , CD AR6OR13T S �` \}I�rl'III i'3 3 i :uc d]� N1\1 L101 i r Page 14 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 258 of 266 a'4 o a 5 m o iv _ s xsTx.oa 3 s � i > > • 9 " e • a to w - err it o 8(--� c. 00 d a CEO?.lwAr�uwE�xwwrq r . L•J 0 0 0 0 Page 15 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 259 of 266 e T ■ ■ ie ro.,��r�vorr.w�r m �■.� BILL IL BURLAP TREE PFAWNS SWUB PLANMr. I � I I I , II II II—IIJ =R � II N II II I r 5 FEET N FIE IBFFr CL OBED VIMH PENCE rr SMI-PRrYATE FENCE 5 FEET N HEIOHT — eL 71 I r _ T ■11lJ.� f �� •• �_� LV.73CAPE PLAN d Y3r1L■ra._ _ __ ■ PLhYCR.AF"f 3Y31'EM3 ROUN-73.5:PC-5489fL35 its fi1'S=?C IShiENI7-Y"RE=ERENC= V_tfiE !� S G%ZE13 AWSY";R==ERENC--IM.AGEys.,La, y L 1 Qd Page 16 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 260 of 266 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 11/7/2019)—NOT APPROVED LUPINE COVE SUBDIVISION srraacws oxr+[a�EvrrGarR �'... R���o u�..sa.. .n.b �an a Mono•N."�cowrr or so•��sr•r�GI iow+o a zav c ANo _.. .r tt.rs once re.. � APPLlCANI z acoao U sia,r.ae. as, A-,4 8A5l5 OF BEARING �.vERu p� r[s� H on s:.s'r xr•rry rn�.�n wv,.,.r�.rs - � •i e� �e C - Mcfad den Orofi OT{ 11 rr L'4 3 po%b� y n T � tTs t/o �O -a bM�cr 1035 IEGEN� 51965E c0"" ,,( r: ` aLocx " O 315F�n y, - ;'OF C,e{t 35,6873F(0.8N - � O mmr 37 37 5? 1, 4o sF a,Ilei SF I3�M�L.k�p �AAM1(JI,11� P1d�gad NAr.m All.w.s }o -daA6las .� a M, NathanerNa;h—, —r-1— J.Dan oI 14583 iri.ui Wiz:' sor ua•urrix.1 wion�rz, .'qm mow, n 11 o.:c�oe .so°>aaJ or v.•Miwrs :s• .vxezrcaow rz•aowoCS o°Fiow"` n•„or, ss°in m. ix'acuiiMn��avi:'i° YYCGfILre•[•P.. .r.caos�r..,n mr r<a.s Ninusnr.�.� rrervz•iwx,ra.uaz se.nc.o z�.,.:o•,m •01N''"'""' �z.•a sM.vnmr�n •o'xr rnv,�s . �Q..zer frr�.G -..m,�nn,...��„ra ,��rM�w.,•��„r. en�r ACHD LOCAL ROAD SECTION SHARED DRIVE _Nrti -NTS- I rr..srnr.]nn Page 17 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 261 of 266 E. Conceptual Building Elevation Photos 3 i■u eu. use urs r __ � Sa � s, m ll� 49 ♦� .'` Page 18 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 262 of 266 :Y AM F) Apr Page 19 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 263 of 266 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS (NO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DUE TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL) A. PLANNING DIVISION B. PUBLIC WORKS C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciN.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=181295&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=182011&dbid=0&rep o=Meridia n City E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridianciN.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=182431&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity F. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=181358&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=181368&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU&cr =1 H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=183096&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=183480&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed development is consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan in regards to land use and density however; the plat lacks transitional lots sizes on the south boundary and does not adequately address the transportation and open space elements of the Plan in order to support the proposed plan. (See section Y. above for more information.) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose statements of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities for the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 20 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 264 of 266 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses in the area, if transitional lot sizes are provided along the south boundary and more open space is preserved with the development. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds City services are available to be provided to this development. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the City as the proposed development is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and UDC standards. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord.08-1372,7-8-2008,eff. 7-8-2008) Stafffinds the proposed plat is not in conformance with the UDC because the proposed development does not show a stub street to the north boundary in alignment with the Aegean Subdivision, uses an excessive amount of common driveways, lacks adequate transition from the rural subdivision to the south and does not comply with the landscape and open space standards. (see section VI. above for more information). 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds public services can be made available to the subjectproperty and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Stafffinds the proposed plat is in substantial 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; Stafffinds 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 Stafffinds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, however the development would better serve the public interest if the plan increased the lots sizes along the southern boundary, eliminated the excessive use of common driveways, enhanced the surrounding waterways on the north and east boundary and provided more useable open space. Page 21 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 265 of 266 LUPINE COVE SUBDIVISION Lupine Cove Subdivision • 27 new lots, 1 existing home • Layout carefully designed to preserved include appropriately sized lots • Close proximity to new West Ada • Preservation of existing tree Schools and new charter school canopy to greatest extent • Density compatible to and with possible with applicant reworked adjacent approved preliminary tree mitigation plan plat • Located in area recently • Provides 11.9% open space identified by City Council as • Utilizes existing artesian well as appropriate for continued newdevelopment water amenity 25 LUPINE COVE Sl.;HDIVISION IP.".NO 33 --- --- -- --- - --- ..... ZQWG'AAW 5�FMCK5i OXMiEFfGf4FLCPFiR a�'�•�• 1rf Lr.v�avv.vL��;,H� iw gLu4Y.9NR_LIN. # N wa r rF(1. rrElR{1r+r�is {17FoS fh�rG U��res�io- ' rt + .. . l•L•/ f',rt SR 91F fr%f,rr4 RIC NR S£ f4R,RfM. P.YREFEREACM rr4 TY n_ hx I'4 Amer wLeer 3eLPrL�s,cw.aoiorr n CITY 6F MERiblAW—CLHIHTY OF ADA—5TATE OF UAM +i+rC p+[7E+daa rw-rs iw.T raly;ab�r.ur;r r+Arl i� 7 Ai{��SLYF�6Y Nn IriPll !f'P[fF'{'!f >R r+o wprp .rhr �rrah •,rm � :: ' &A—"GF 9EARWV sriK - -srcn�w'0_1E yf1P _ - - - r,.,,y,K. ,— LL� [uwrav �o a£rrws 3a 20. '•y* i�� 4.6 i MD[4ir R 'rW v ryr,9 RY[]H Ti■■ I 1pG6 a Ik slvu:rlV I�WU�9P x Pam? rar�•Aln ��—ee--- ��I� '�'.' NPTE� I x:.rxcr rwniL ur3 x+mw rau x xu,. ar 5,5 +AWL rZC✓af1wC fAMCL R§. is PP�Cd..pf.L kl@I kF A4P.LiFi J '. 3 Cf+[CT5£PA1�a]/rg�}n Go! V7}sr — +•Jew• ,Ls _ _1 :.1 a,ur sr - � I,r —.— hrmAI FXaT I 4M si . her a.ara I R k ,or .�,.'�"•� ] e .[, wL.r� 2 rr aa'e i IP waar.:ir o T " 4.1 ib r rn�inl-ws, h * •---- ,tiJf:f��. JA - {- � _ - '•� w� Y .G PSiwAlPr YaLT arwMl! _ WFRTr tlrIX YiYf .{I I�' � � • V m VLfcrL+c rYh. I } a �, mr.+Qi+.,a. I 3 ti5f ( fII I• y ;' a r � rts.l7x aJ° '7 l.1� ass so - NEI- ■ ciar•oer I BiOL' I I {,'�aass,� � K4 _ S N BKr�t'��Ir'87R318' AP- fh*w fLany'p Lui-0-D% I %r mAWk4rcr N F ,ww.r r..ur r�nxsar M FA laty.ar.dbK +5' NatthanIl7 - _— 73' 'J' 7s ,Da � _ I ff11 r s �!L G•' µ ` s J La,gi�71 $ ' L• MT1 l%NX. 1 WHA, TH34 L 4 DL V THC r in Ml4Y.�1 _ 1 lireu R�[ON G11gA nMFJY CU57 } r - -� #•°F y�YrxuF YYA°�d'TN�X 6'w yfrelixus s'wq n-twla srarua �: - rwAw<vm4mwKwALK 7saF urraurlso-LaAa YAUR KFrr8l !S'BfJAlnFat{frSoso .•'�+ Idl Ao�luYf_a'hes d'9F 3N'MWIlS \ FSR apq EYPP.367°i I +Lrc,Fryikp FOF?:M'NW'S . -Ss4F asrx4Tlio-x434 �IIITl 1M4r�fa;e� E " Y rrnum own caurnw Ur OF6•i31XulMDA- nrnSVY'I Mri> iH 3'-4UEP NFAG 5+MER TQFul-MWF 4•df fih" L[ "AAtM!llPf 78TE1 veraexr suw.saaL¢ i�'9FRh4X4fi+1�N4X ,�.ia DENSITY TRANSITION • 2017 Approval of Aegean Preliminary Plat — 14 / 1 7 f f. M FMOEN C� SPl1R E ENEI �'' MAY 5 Al Ani In VWyl 9AGK OF LOTS R 45 � SIDE -TARPS 15 I •ti, UNFLA1 nu por•..R,i �,c ,5 I ti 1 ,a --------------------------- Density Transition Apple Valley Subdivision 4.1. �Yk*T. 2 I !�hS06k Leaf+Ir iL11 ' I-i ]5_ v.r �weta �. �Ll.f R P k 4 b it al I - — ---- — --- --- - ———— Yi Ir Y. $aa .IH R L ----- ----,.,.- tom-..ter-- -----------aar.. _ _.....__--..-----^- -----/-- `--- I Conceptual approval for sitein 2017 k F 37 ( t2 r I - _ l - I i [H6 A AFRP, PATI MOS STUB STREETTrafficLoading at I e r sotY 0 4,ea4 LIP, oKra -SL��q 1oD' — __ w 9 L71 _ 1 r t P It 150'from center line of Padmos to edge of pavement I o- ACHD Criteria for evaluation of street continuation • Property size and configuration of • Location of canals and necessary current application crossings • Size and configuration of adjacent • Cost vs benefit of requiring canal parcels crossings • Redevelopment potential adjacent • Functional classification of to site adjacent and nearby roadways • Location of ped and vehicle • Reduces need for additional attractors connections to classified roadways • Emergency service provider needs • Location of existing stub streets Benefits of connectivity / stub streets • Reduces vehicle miles traveled • TIS for Aegcan did not trigger • Increases ped and bicycle connectivity additional roadway such as signaling, etc at residential collector connection • Increases emergency access to McDermott for Aegean except for • Reduces need for accesses to arterials left turn lane at intersection with McDermott • Efficient delivery of trash service, mail . Very low potential for reduced vehicle and deliveries miles vs cost and impact • Promotes intra-neighborhood • McDermott is a collector street connectivity to schools, parks, commercial centers, transit stops, etc No pedestrian or vehicle attractants served with stub street • Both parcels can develop appropriately without the stub street ■ Aegean Estates Subdivision Time Extension Narrative Endurance Holdjngs LLC hereby applies for a time extension to obtain the City Engineer's Jnzre 20, 2019 signature on the first fmal plat for Aegean Estates Subdivision. The preliminary plat(H-2017- 0114) for Aegean Estates Subdivision was approved on November S, 2017, when the Development s. Jeantue Fisttburn Agreement(instrument No. 2017-116562)was signed by the Meridian City Council and annexation Fishburn Real Estate and zoning were approved(Ordinance No. 17-1755). Design of the final construction plans for the first phase is underway. The project engineering was Re: Weaver Property— Proposed Stub Struet f)oTn Aegean Estates delayed for design of the McDermott Road sewer main line by The Land Group. The main line has been designed and approved by the City of Meridian. Sewer and water lines are being extended in Dear Jeannie: January 2020 as part of Owyhee High School,these lines also will serve this property, We anticipate design completion of the first phase in early 2020. This letter is in response to your request to eIiininate,the proposed public stub street to the Weaver parcel. It is my understanding the Weaver propeAy has been Due to the fact that the City of Meridian and ACNU are currenting reviewing an application on the sold and the new owner has a development plan which does not include a parcel previously owned by the Weavers to the south(Lupine Cove Subdivision), we a&!ee to delete connection to the Aegean Estates project. You have contacted the City of Meridian the stub street to the south,,as the Lupine Cove development is a stand-alone 1roject with private driveways and a public street connection to McDermott Road. We hereby request that Item No. and Ada County Hihw�ay District, concerning the removal of the stub street_ Both 6.1.14 ofACHD's conditions of approv.al in the Ae can Estates Exhibit A. in regard to a connection agencies have agreed to remove the condition for Aegean Estates to provide a stub to Patimos Avenue,be removed from our conditions ofMpproval. street to the Weaver property if the Aegcan Estates owner- is in full a mernent. I met with the new owner of Aegean Estates, Corey Bart-on {Endurance Holdings, The applicant requests a two-year extension to obtain the signature of the City Engineer for the fast LLQ and he agrees to eliminate the Weaver stub street looted at the southwest phase ofAegean Estates Subdivision,to November S, 2021. corner of the Aegean (states approved preliminary plat. Please-:all ifyou have any questions or require additionat information, Sincerely, Engineering Solution LLP Becky Mca Partner LUPINE CC VR suiimviV ; ..n+w•r.n.r,.v m•±ar•--r+!.�.+..+ ivw's,a1Q JFIMlas r1' ty, Sr S,mi NAw+ sr:�y a-vie err�p aF sr.�ow ss r.w.a iw.rx 'r� i i �"i�l" 1, �} {aiT G/�iili%■l1�4ry1MFT Cf --S1F1[4F O,YP] err Sri :Alp MM OW / � _tee✓" 4� Y ii rilti��a WY _ 4 1%- ble Space J 453 SP r r pra�R 5 1 l - WFed�#p , } � � rG-+ pd$ 7 k aT� h,w.r 1u} 1 'Q;1 �yyr _1 J yJ aS-�Frf �.5F rte rtrr i 4 M1} a ,a.•. ; 1FC�fO [.Ct- l cw 7 LS aaticrt.nay , '�e"r i I tie} - •�} � � w •J'r] SFj ■ r•i rumor obi•u i ■ i 48. C) ED o O 0 z ■ r ■ r aroao'df�.fr� �a �r{R rlf+YJ4! ���� pp Ll I w..�• 1�43 HASrS OF SIEAMIG JUPM y� ati.f77ti.rA x wuso c af...e.• ,, .v ..x.7 swo■rr p.reri Lou.,a+r Zvrx t.ee <r +l k S #� G•'� f TrJ�ti e,n..w io crtrasitit ss:a s.. u.ariAcc ErMCvn a°.M o A,-,�°o,� -4401+� Q 3S rPPr Su rveeyin r Save r.�y.■ti■.x.�r � ■■�r ■•w.M■Ir�err Ir■1q#F+e Y0 ��, y � - ,� ,�pbr'•`..; � 1VF. . '• 71 yy '�5 m Y 1 � a� i; L i�k} � I� t.� �1 �wvw IS r.�ooa-�'' j � v F ' � ✓ � 10.Y �J.' IJ f5 „•i rat r X+22kk`ii 00 •w �- {-f•��i�� kk 5 t� t{f a.ala„w.w+_ a•+FNc s+f �' yy _ l �... _. ��. ..{-. #. 13 s� Ir�„kl{�`+J' -- •� }� a! A�,. �^{5 1S f Y! } J 5 }5 y 4`77, 1 I Y }r r x�'' .1 x~4 J � '+ I.Y •Y* Tom' T F`— f„ • _ �x t �- � 7 - J � ern ~ � �arv.a�r�}• f�} 'k 1 g9..t wc-m rm .o•a y :, u' iry. �. vnR•� ..., u' bf yuii .. 'n•Iu' ein +¢-+n f¢1� • � alb ��� �- t-+tl / F ���+.''.+ il { x � n 5 Elements to consider . . . • Applicant asks for recognition that • Identified recently by City Council site is uniquely shaped and has in area suitable to development unusual characteristics. • City services are currently being • Irregular shape extended to serve new schools • Large volume artesian well • New charter school to south • High water table due to continuous • Status of stub street dependent on artesian well production final flat plans for Aegean • Bounded on two sides with Subdivision irrigation facility not included in • 400 to 500-foot separation Master Pathway Plan and not ideal between south PL and homes in for inclusion in Pathway plan Apple Valley • Use of drain easements excluded • Site topography — site slopes by NMID without City maintenance northwest More elements to consider . . . • More homes using shared • With the extension of HWY 16, driveways can distribute cost of shortcut pathways to maintenance over more HOA fee McDermott do not provide any contributors benefit commensurate with the • Maintenance will be included in cost of construction at HOA documents and CCR's �$ 100,000 and future • Quiet driveways shared by 2 or 3 maintenance costs by ACHD homes are child friendly • Even with cost sharing, 28 lot subdivision absorbs a much • Project exceeds amenity larger share than larger requirements per staff report subdivision • Project meets FLU M designation of • Site is close to HYW 16 system Medium Density Residential which provides opportunity to • Lot dimensions are in compliance reduce vehicle miles for trips north with City Code and south in west valley • Project provides variety of housing • Helps fund regional sewer lift J p Y g station to north • Provides stub street connection to south • Incorporates some amenities into turn around to reduce impermeable surface Requested Conditions of Approval • Approve Lupine Cove Subdivision • Incorporate revised Open Space as proposed with the following Exhibit with elimination of stub street to • Eliminate guest parking north • Applicant to address fencing, street • Development Agreement, as name needed • Landscape micro-path in Lot 7 • Applicant and team work with City . Work with staff to locate storm Staff and City Arborist to eliminate Water in compliance with UDC or minimize tree mitigation • Standard City of Meridian language ' City required CCR's to address and conditions maintenance of shared driveways 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Stafffinds there are natural features (Five Mile Creek and McFadden Drain) that need to be preserved and enhanced as part of the development. Page 22 — Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda March 19,2020— Page 266 of 266