2020-06-23 Regular CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
C�WE IDIAN,- MEETING MINUTES
IDAHO
City Council Chambers
33 East Broadway Avenue
Meridian, Idaho
Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 6.00 PM 6:10 PM
Item 1 : Roll-Call Attendance
* Liz Strader X Joe Borton
X Brad Hoaglun * Treg Bernt
Jessica Perreault X Luke Cavener
X Mayor Robert E. Simison
*Remote Participant
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
Item 3: Community Invocation with Vinnie Hanke of Valley Life Christian
Church
Item 4: Adoption of Agenda - Adopted
Item 5: Future Meeting Topics — Public Forum
Item 6: Action Item
A. Public Hearing for Midgrove Plaza (H-2020-0029) by Arthur
Berry, Located at 1450 E. Franklin Rd. - Approved
1 . Request: Rezone of 1 .96 acres of land from the I-L to the C-G
zoning district; and,
2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 buildable lots on
12.84 acres of land in the C-G and I-L zoning districts.
B. Public Hearing for Ascent Townhomes (H-2020-0039) by
Schultz Development, Located on the North Side of W.
Franklin Rd., Midway Between N. Black Cat Rd. and N. Ten
Mile Rd. - Approved
1 . Request: Annexation of 5.25 acres of land with an R-15 zoning
district; and,
2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 43 buildable lots, 11
common lots and 1 other lot on 4.97 acres of land in the R-15
zoning district.
C. Public Hearing for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2020-0024)
by Schultz Development, Located at 675 W. Waltman Ln. -
Denied
1 . Request: Modification to the Existing Development Agreement
(Inst. #1 081 31 1 00), which allows commercial/office/hotel uses,
for the purpose of replacing the agreement with a new
agreement allowing a mix of single-family and multi-family
residential uses to develop on the site;
2. Request: A Rezone of a total of 38.47 acres of land from the C-
G to the R-8 (10.13 acres), R-15 (12.20 acres) and R-40 (16.14
acres) zoning districts;
3. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 142 buildable lots and
18 common lots on 37.87 acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and R-
40 zoning districts; and,
4. Request: A Conditional use permit for a multi-family
development consisting of 272 residential units on 16.14 acres
of land in the R-40 zoning district.
Item 7: Future Meeting Topics
Meeting Adjourned at 9:46 p.m.
Meridian City Council June 23, 2020.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:10 p.m., Tuesday, June
23, 2020, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Brad Hoaglun
and Liz Strader.
Members Absent: Jessica Perreault.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Adrienne Weatherly, Bill Nary, Sonya Allen, Jamie Leslie
and Joe Bongiorno.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton
_X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt
Jessica Perreault _X Luke Cavener
_X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Council, I will call this City Council meeting in order. For the record it is Tuesday,
June 23rd, 2020, at 6:10 p.m. We will begin this regular City Council meeting with roll call
attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
Simison: Thank you. Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will, please, stand
and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation with Vinnie Hanke of Valley Life Christian
Church
Simison: Item No. 3 is the community invocation with Vinnie Hanke of Valley Life Christian
Church. Pastor Hanke, if -- we will recognize you and for the audience if you would,
please, take this as a moment to join us in the invocation or a moment of silence and
reflection. Pastor Henke.
Hanke: Mr. Mayor, City Council Members, thank you again for the opportunity to join with
you and to pray for you. Let's pray. God, I thank you for those whom you have called to
lead and to serve the city and, God, as they conduct their business this evening I pray
that you would provide them with wisdom, with courage and insight. Would you help them
to hold their authority with the fear before you, God, knowing that you are the chief and
end of all authority. God, we pray for the City of Meridian. We pray for the civil servants,
those on the staff and who serve our community so well. We pray for, God, those who
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 113 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 2 of 65
are on the front lines in the health field, the doctors and nurses and technicians. Pray for
their continued safety as they seek to serve during this pandemic. God, we ask, again,
that you would bless and protect the City of Meridian and that you would be glorified. We
ask these things through your son Jesus Christ, amen.
Simison: Thank you, pastor. Appreciate your time.
Hanke: Yep. Thank you.
Item 4: Adoption of Agenda
Simison: For the record Councilman Bernt has joined us at 6:13 p.m. Item No. 3 -- 4.
Adoption of the agenda.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Is Mr. Bernt going to be doing this or you want me to go ahead, Mr. Bernt?
Bernt: Go ahead. You're good.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Not knowing of any changes to our agenda, I move approval of the agenda as
printed.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda. Is there any discussion on
the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The agenda is
adopted.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Future Meeting Topics — Public Forum
Simison: Item No. 5, future meeting topics public forum. Madam Clerk, did anybody sign
up?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, they did not.
Item 6: Action Item
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 114 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 3 of 65
A. Public Hearing for Midgrove Plaza (H-2020-0029) by Arthur
Berry, Located at 1450 E. Franklin Rd.
1. Request: Rezone of 1.96 acres of land from the I-L to the C-
G zoning district; and,
2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 buildable lots on
12.84 acres of land in the C-G and I-L zoning districts.
Simison: Okay. Then we will move on to Item 6-A, a public hearing for Midgrove Plaza,
H-2020-0029, and I will turn this over for staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The first application before you
tonight is a request for a rezone and a preliminary plat. The site consists of 12.84 acres
of land. It's zoned I-L and C-G and is located at 1450 East Franklin Road at the northwest
corner of Franklin and Locust Grove roads. The site was annexed back in 1996 without
the requirement of a development agreement. A conditional use permit and a planned
development was approved at that time that has since expired. The Comprehensive Plan
future land use map designation for the southern 5.8 acres is commercial and industrial
for the northern seven acres. The applicant requests a rezone of 1.96 acres of land from
the I-L to the C-G zoning district. The area proposed to be rezoned is designated as
industrial on the future land use map. Because future land use map designations are not
parcel specific and adjacent abutting designation when appropriate and approved as part
of a public hearing with the land development application, may be used without an
amendment to the map. The applicant requests the abutting commercial designation
apply to the area proposed to be zoned C-G. Because the rezone is proposed to coincide
with proposed lot lines so that two zoning districts don't exist on one property, staff is
amenable to the request. At this time no buildings or users are planned. The property is
proposed to be subdivided and infrastructure installed for future development. The
property is intended to develop with commercial and industrial uses as allowed in the C-
G and I-L zoning districts. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown there in the middle
consisting of six building lots on 12.84 acres of land in the C-G and I-L zoning districts.
Access is proposed via two existing curb cuts on Franklin Road. The access closest to
the intersection will be restricted to maintenance vehicles from the city, Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District, or other authorized entities and will not be used by the public and four
existing curb cuts on Locust Grove Road. Only the two middle accesses are approved
byACHD via Locust Grove. ACHD has also approved the access driveways via Franklin
Road with western access signed right-in -- excuse me -- right-out only with full access
into the site until such time as the center median is constructed in Franklin. With the
eastern access gated and restricted to service vehicles only. A cross-access ingress-
egress easement is required between all lots. Five Mile Creek bisects the southwest of
this site and is required to be left open as a natural amenity. A 14 foot wide multi-use
pathway is required along the east side of the creek, which will serve a dual purpose as
a utility service road. A 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along both Franklin
and Locust Grove roads. Because development is not proposed at this time, concept
building elevations were not submitted. Future structures are required to comply with the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 115 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 4 of 65
design standards in the architectural standards manual. The Commission recommended
approval of this project. Ben Semple, the applicant's representative, testified in favor. No
one testified in opposition or commented on the application. Written testimony was
received from Ben Semple, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff
report. There were no items of discussion by the Commission or changes to staff's
recommendation and no written testimony has been submitted since the Commission
hearing. Staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Sonya, would -- would this rezone have any impact on our
currently approved Comprehensive Plan?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, no. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Cavener: Thanks.
Simison: Is the applicant with us?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, he is. Mr. Semple, you can unmute yourself.
Semple: Hi. Ben Semple with Rodney Evans & Partners. Address 1014 South Lapointe
Street, Suite 3, Boise, Idaho. 83706. Mr. Mayor and Members of City Council, I want to
thank the staff for their report and their help in getting us to the point that we are right
now. As was stated, we are in agreement with all of the conditions of approval noted in
Section 9 of the staff report, as well as the findings in Section 10 of the staff report. We
have worked with ACHD and are in agreement with the closure of the driveway
approaches as stated in their report, as well as the western most approach that they are
temporarily approving a Lot 6 -- or Lot 5. We are paying a road trust to them for a future
median construction if it occurs within their standard time frame and the property to the
south of Franklin redevelops, at which point a center median would be required, but we
will be contributing to that as part of a payment directly to ACHD. Other than that I don't
have much to add to the staff's report. Again, I thank everyone for their work on it and I
would stand for questions.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? All right. This is a public
hearing. Did we have anyone sign up to testify on this issue?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody in the public or online who would like to provide
testimony on this application?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 116 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 5 of 65
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Just one question to staff. Sonya, can you just talk briefly about -- it seems a
little unusual that we would have a rezone and a plat without any elevations and no -- no
DA requested. So, it seems very open ended, which would otherwise be -- it just seems
unusual. So, give us a little context. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's not unusual. But it
seems like it is and this is the one and only time that some of those specifics are captured
and required as a condition of a zone change is kind of a big deal. So, talk with me a little
bit about that.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, there is no development proposed at this time.
Rather than ask the applicant to guess at a concept plan that isn't going to happen, staff
wasn't overly concerned about it due to the size of the site and the existing and future
development slated for this area. It's -- it's next to industrial property. Staff just isn't overly
concerned about it. If you feel a development agreement is necessary and a -- and a
concept plan and building elevations are necessary, then, that is under your purview.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I guess asked another way is that do the UDC standards have enough structure
in them that gives you comfort that it's not needed and there is still enough parameters
that can direct the development in a way we want?
Allen: The -- the uses will be allowed as -- as for the -- per the C-G and the I-L zoning
district in the UDC and, then, any future development and buildings will be required to
comply with the design standards and architectural standards manual for industrial and
commercial uses.
Borton: Thanks.
Simison: Council, any other questions? If not, would the applicant like to make any final
closing comments?
Semple: Yes, Mayor and Members of Council. I guess to touch on Council Member
Borton's question about it, so the -- the reason that we are doing this rezone of just under
two acres is just to bring the zoning in compliance with the lot layout, so that we avoid
multiple designations of zoning on single lots right there. So, right now the -- the corner
at Locust Grove and Franklin is C-G and the two lots north -- northern most lots one and
two as shown on the preliminary plat are I-L. There is just this little strip right there that's
still zoned I-L that we are bringing into C-G, so that the four lots on the corner are all C-G
and the two lots on the northernmost are all I-L. And that's all I have to add. Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 117 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 6 of 65
Simison: Okay. Thank you very much. Council, do I have a motion?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I move to close the public hearing on Item 6-B, H-2020-0029.
Hoaglun: Second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Any nays? The
ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I think the presentation of staff and the comments from the applicant make good
sense that this request, both for the rezone and the preliminary plat, are appropriate as
presented, so I'm going to make a motion to approve Item 6-A, H-2020-0029, as
presented in the staff report dated June 23rd, 2020.
Hoaglun: Second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Item H-2020-0029. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
absent.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: We will move on --
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Sorry, Mr. Mayor. Before we move on to the next item, just a request for the
three Council Members that are -- that are in the room. So, Council Member Borton, your
-- your voice is somewhat faint. If you could just eat the microphone a little bit more, it
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 118 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 7 of 65
makes it a little easier for us remotely to be able to hear you.
Borton: Will do.
Cavener: Thank you, sir.
B. Public Hearing for Ascent Townhomes (H-2020-0039) by
Schultz Development, Located on the North Side of W.
Franklin Rd., Midway Between N. Black Cat Rd. and N. Ten
Mile Rd.
1. Request: Annexation of 5.25 acres of land with an R-15
zoning district; and,
2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 43 buildable lots, 11
common lots and 1 other lot on 4.97 acres of land in the R-15
zoning district.
Simison: Okay. Item 6-B is a public hearing for Ascent Townhomes, H-2020-0039. I will
turn this -- I open the public hearing with staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next item before you is a
request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 4.97 acres
of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located on the north side of West Franklin
Road, approximately a third mile east of North Black Cat Road. A previous development
application was heard by the Commission earlier this year for a multi-family residential
development on this property that was withdrawn by the applicant before it went to
Council. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium high
density residential, which calls for eight to 12 units per acre and it is within the Ten Mile
interchange specific area plan. The applicant is requesting annexation of 5.25 acres of
land and that does include adjacent right of way to the section line of Franklin Road, with
an R-15 medium high density residential zoning district consistent with the medium high
density residential future land use map designation for this property. The applicant
proposes to develop the site with a mix of 39 townhome units and four single family
attached units at a gross density of 8.65 units per acre, consistent with the uses and
density desired in the medium high density residential designated area in the Ten Mile
plan. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 43 buildable lots, 11 common lots, and
one other lot on 4.97 acres of land, proposed to develop in one phase. One temporary
right of way access easement is proposed on Lot 9, Block 6, via West Franklin Road and
that is this lot where the access is right here where my pointer is. Two local stub streets
are proposed to the west and two are proposed to the east for future extension and
interconnectivity. The temporary right of way easement is required to be released when
a local street connection is constructed to this site from a neighboring development. At
such time the access will be restricted to emergency and pedestrian access only. Twenty
foot wide public alleys are proposed for access to the rear loaded units running on North
Ascent Avenue, the main north-south street. The Purdam Drain along the northeast
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 119 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 8 of 65
boundary of this site within a 25 foot wide easement. The drain is proposed to be piped
with this development. A 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along Franklin
Road. A 35 foot wide buffer is proposed exceeding UDC standards. Because the site is
below five acres in size it is exempt from UDC standards pertaining to qualified open
space and site amenities. However, the applicant did submit a qualified open space
exhibit shown in the center there that depicts .55 of an acre or 11.2 percent qualified open
space consisting of two large common open space areas and half the street buffer along
Franklin Road. This calculation is actually higher as the open space exhibit does not
include parkways along internal streets, which are proposed throughout the development.
A children's play structure is proposed as an amenity for this site. The applicant is
required to provide off-street parking based on the number of bedrooms per unit in accord
with UDC standards. Although the UDC does not require on-street parking to be provided,
the applicant did submit an exhibit as shown showing a total of 32 spaces available for
guest parking along the main north-south street, North Ascent Avenue, which should be
sufficient to serve the development. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as
shown for the proposed single family attached and townhome units. These are the
attached units and these are the townhome units. Building materials consist of a mix of
horizontal and board and batten siding in a variety of colors with stone veneer accents.
Dwelling units range in size from 1 ,400 to 1,600 square feet. Each alley loaded unit has
a front porch. Those are as shown here. And each front loaded unit has a covered patio,
but not a front porch as required. These are the front loaded units. Based on the Ten
Mile plan, which requires garages that are accessed from the front to be located no less
than 20 feet behind the primary facade of the residential structure. Staff recommended
revisions be made to the plat and elevations prior to the hearing tonight to comply with
this requirement, which would also allow for front porches to be provided for these units
as desired in the plan. No such revised plans were submitted prior to the City Council
hearing tonight by the applicant. The Commission did recommend approval of these
applications. Matt Schultz, the applicant's representative, testified in favor of the
application. No one testified in opposition or commented. Written testimony was received
from Matt Schultz, the applicant's representative, in response to the staff report. He
requested a waiver to the requirement and development agreement provision A-F, which
requires front loaded garages to be located no less than 20 feet behind the primary facade
of the residential structure. He also asked for clarification on whether or not the entry
monument would satisfy the requirement in the development agreement provision A-G
for public art to be provided in the streetscape along Franklin Road. In response, if the
monument includes a high quality of design and includes a public art as described in the
Ten Mile plan, it could qualify. And Mark Bottles, the neighboring property owner to the
west, submitted written testimony as well. He is in support of the project, including the
density and housing types proposed. Key issues of discussion by the Commission are
as follows: They had a question regarding if there was a berm proposed within the street
buffer along Franklin Road. The applicant replied that a two to three foot tall berm is
proposed. They were in favor of the diversity of housing types proposed. They were in
favor of the open space and site amenities proposed, which is above and beyond UDC
requirements. And, finally, they were in support of the proposed design over that
previously proposed with the previous application. The Commission made the following
changes to the staff recommendation. They recommended approval of a waiver to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 120 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 9 of 65
development agreement provision A-F as requested by the applicant and the applicant
-- they directed the applicant to work with staff to determine the best type and placement
of public art to be provided in the streetscape along Franklin Road. The only outstanding
issue for Council tonight is that the applicant requests a waiver to development agreement
provision A-F, which requires front loaded garages to be located no less than 20 feet
behind the primary facade of the residential structure. And the only written testimony that
was submitted since the Commission hearing was from Susan Quarnstrom and you
should have a copy of her letter in your packet. Staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions at this time?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Sonya, is this image that-- oh. Yeah. Is that image -- is that image on the screen
the image which depicts the design with the waiver as requested that does not have the
garages setback at least 20 feet?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, correct.
Borton: Okay.
Allen: Just as proposed.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: A question. Just wanted to follow up on the public art requirement for the Ten
Mile interchange. I know there is those requirements. Is there no size of development
waiver? I mean this is under five acres. So, I wanted to know a little bit more details on
that.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, Council, there -- there is no waiver provision in
the Ten Mile plan. The Ten Mile plan is a -- is a guide -- guidelines for development. They
are not standards. Therefore, there are no exemptions.
Hoaglun: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Sonya.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 121 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 10 of 65
Bernt: Question for Sonya. In your -- in your opinion, do you feel like this development
is within in the parameters of the Ten Mile specific plan?
Allen: Mr. Mayor and Council, I think the question was -- I couldn't quite hear -- is if in my
opinion this proposed development is consistent with the guidelines in the Ten Mile plan?
Is that -- did I get that correctly?
Bernt: Yes.
Allen: I do believe it is consistent with the plan with staff's development agreement --
recommended development agreement provision about the garages being setback. That
is what the applicant is requesting a waiver on.
Simison: Council, any further --
Strader: Mr. Mayor, follow up?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, Sonya, are you in favor of granting that waiver or do you think that it's
important for the whole concept of the Ten Mile plan to not grant that?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, staff's position is that development
should be consistent with the Ten Mile plan. However, it's under your purview to make
any waivers to that.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Sorry. I'm going to -- I'm going to keep pulling it out of you, Sonya. What --
help me understand why -- what the importance is of having that design element or
standard within the Ten Mile plan in terms of, you know, by sticking strong to not giving a
waiver on that what are we achieving? Is it more cohesive with how the rest of the Ten
Mile plan will look? Help me contextualize that a little bit and the importance of it.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, of course that is a guideline in the
Ten Mile plan. So, that is what we expect of evolved development -- residential
development in the Ten Mile plan. The Ten Mile plan is more pedestrian focused,
pedestrian oriented. These are very much garage vehicular dominated, the elevations as
proposed. By-- by setting the garages back 20 feet it -- it brings -- the living area appears
to be closer to the street. I mean it's a -- it's a little -- it's a little closer setback. The
garages are required to be a little further back. So, it just makes them -- the living area
more prominent, as desired in the Ten Mile plan. It's -- it--the Ten Mile plan desires more
traditional neighborhood design and these are more just typical single family detached
like you see anywhere else in the city.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 122 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 11 of 65
Strader: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any further questions at this time? I see the applicant is with us online
and so we will turn this over to Mr. Schultz for 15 minutes. If you could state your name
and address for the record.
Schultz: Can you guys hear me?
Simison: Yeah. We can.
Schultz: And you can see me. All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Matt Schultz,
8421 South Ten Mile in Meridian. Happy to be here tonight via Zoom. I'm up in McCall
with family, so I'm social distancing and getting this City Council hearing at the same time.
It's great. So -- can you guys hear me okay and see me okay? Because I just got a little
thing that said unstable on my screen, so I just had to make sure. So, I appreciate Sonya's
intro, although I think there is a little bit of -- a little bit of confusion maybe that I seek to
clarify before I jump into the details and the architecture and things like that. I just want
to kind of step back and look at the high view on this particular parcel that late last year
we -- we thought we might try a little -- a little apartment site on a 4.97 acres that looked
like another project that we did previous to that. It looked good. Everybody liked it. They
just didn't like how it -- how it meshed with the Ten Mile plan on access and how things
fronted and they even -- all the Planning Commission even said that they liked it, it's just
that it -- the biggest issue for them was one that even staff didn't even bring up was it -- it
was -- it was a private apartment site with no connections. So, it was kind of its own little
thing. I got up there and said, hey, we don't have all the room for the alleys and the roads
and the alleys and the roads to get all the -- all the different things to come out in plan, so
they said, well, maybe we should just wait for more property to come in and I was like,
wow, it -- they really got me on that, because I could see Council saying the same thing
is how are you going to connect everybody else. So, that's why we went through it. We
didn't --we didn't like our chances moving forward with Council, although I'm not afraid of
an appeal occasionally. This was one that we saw wasn't going to go anywhere,
especially with how Commissioner Holland and everybody else chimed in about, hey,
maybe it's not in the best interest of the city is to take this five acres only in, let's just wait
for more property to come in and it's like, oh, man. So, we kind of shook it off, started
from scratch, got a little bit of inspiration from one in the area, Hensley Station, in terms
of attached single family. One of the important things about this area for the city, having
been involved in Ten Mile plan since its inception back in 2006, 2007, myself across the
street and some other ones, was, hey, Ten Mile interchange, we don't need density just
for the sake of density, we want some nice density, we want -- but, you know, we want
that target for this particular parcel needs to be over eight units to the acre, which is
impossible to get with your standard single family detached. We looked at it that way.
That's -- that's what we prefer. But it just -- we just couldn't get there. So, we looked at
the Henley -- Henley Station project, which has some attached -- excuse me. These
aren't -- these are just a couple of duplexes that we have in some corners, but the main
entryway is all traditional neighborhood, alley load, meaning porch front, you know,
promoting that sense of community and neighborhood community and detached
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 123 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 12 of 65
sidewalks and that was the main design feature that we knew we had to have to -- you
know, there on the left you can see the boulevard entryway to have the -- the design
element that the Ten Mile plan really, really, really promotes, which we have on our entry.
So, 65 percent of our units, which is, you know, the good majority are that de-emphasized
-- you got garages, but they are -- they are not on the main road and, then, as you enter
the -- the units that Sonya was talking about that we wanted the waiver on are the ones
that back up to Franklin and, then, there is a couple of littles in the corners there, you
know, the -- the attached -- they are not duplexes, they are zero lot line townhomes. So,
those are the ones we want a waiver on. We have 65 percent meeting the traditional
neighborhood. If you look at Hensley Station they had about 48 percent. Baraya across
the street had about 33 percent. I'm not sure about -- about -- excuse me, I'm drawing a
blank on the one on Overland and Ten Mile. They probably have something similar to
Baraya in that. It--the design of the overall subdivision certainly de-emphasizes garages,
although a hundred percent -- and this is where I take a little bit of an exception to staff's
interpretation that a hundred percent of all units have to either be an alley loaded or meet
this -- I don't know what it looks like -- 20 foot back from front garage and we are not
talking about 20 foot back in the road, we are talking 20 foot back from the front. I still
think that should be like a two instead of a 20 and the idea being back, then, I was involved
in was to break up that front facade on the two stories, so they are just not straight vertical
and I get it, I -- that 20 foot is just something that -- if I -- if I could even visualize what that
-- what that looked like or meant -- we looked at an option. The only way to potentially
accomplish it would be to turn those units along -- along Franklin sideways, lose four or
five and have common driveways and the Planning Commission didn't like that and I'm
still not even sure how we -- how we meet that 20 foot back, but -- but the big -- one of
the big issues on this project is access. It's on Franklin, so it's got great access in terms
of proximity to the Ten Mile interchange. Franklin's been widened a few years ago. It's
got the detailed sidewalks. It's there. It's in. We are not waiting for anybody to come
widen it. One of the problems is since it's a major arterial ACHD spacing says 1,320 feet
-- basically a quarter mile spacing. Where we located ours is where it would work out
good for this entry, but it's about 662 to -- to the east and to the west of--to the west there
is one across the street on Baraya and to the east there is one about 660 that's -- I think
it's called Entrata Farms or something like that. That's where the main access will be for
this project long term. Short term there is a 20 acre parcel north of us that kind of controls
a lot of the access and there is a stub street today from Entrata. It's about 200 feet away
in the north. So, what we proposed to ACHD -- and they -- and they did grant us the
waiver to not meet the 1 ,320 based on that -- that entryway when the -- the property to
the north does develop and adequate access is provided, that that would be converted to
an emergency access only, pedestrian only, and they are having us trust I believe 10,000
dollars for that up front, so they can come back in and put the bollards and they can make
a little tweak to their driveway. But other than that we thought it was important to -- even
though we could have skimmed by potentially on the open space and the amenity, we
thought it was important to put in the open space and the amenity with this -- this little
project. To Councilman Hoaglun's point, I was going to ask tonight for a waiver on the art
at the entry -- not that I'm anti art, I love art, I'm just not good at it and I think this little --
this little site, which does not have permanent access on -- on Franklin, probably isn't the
most appropriate place for it I guess if you will. So, Planning Commission loved it. They
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 124 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 13 of 65
loved it better than I thought they would. They thought it was a great way to accomplish
those things that are important in the Ten Mile plan, which is that front -- you have to
eliminate the -- just the straight garage fronts. They were in support of the waiver. Not
that -- like -- like Sonya said and they liked our open space and they thought our
architecture was -- was good. We hired Houston Bergosh to just come up with the -- the
best thing that they could come up with for this thing and, you know, in hindsight maybe
it's a little too expensive, but it looks great. It's what we want to do and we think it will be
a good little in-fill, if you will, into a site and to provide all those future connections, you
know, four of them, that they are important. In fact, Mark Bottles almost screwed me up
a week before Planning Commission when he said he wanted me to move my stub street
in that northwest corner to the north and I went -- I don't know how that's going to work.
But what you see here is that move. It still miraculously worked out efficiently and we
were able to give them a little jog that ACHD approved that would have that road to the
northwest line up in a spot that was better for him, better for that neighbor to the south,
and it's one of those rare -- rare, rare, rare for me sites where I have all my neighbors
happy where they didn't -- or they are just -- they are just not -- they are just not here,
they are not responding, I know it's kind of rare, especially for some higher density. But
we think we have a high quality project. We think that granting the waiver it will in no way
diminish the compliance of this project with the Ten Mile plan. As a bigger project looking
at the 65 percent that we do that are -- have the -- the garage in the back of the house, if
you will, these are actually a little bigger than Sonya said once they came out of the final
architecture after we submitted this or actually between about 1,600 and 1,800 square
feet, two car garage, two car parking pad, plus all that off-street -- or, excuse me, on-
street parking. So, we really feel like we check all the boxes and this is a great little piece
of the puzzle. The Ten Mile plan has been out there for about 15 years now and it's just
now kind of getting going in -- in a bigger way. So, with that I will stand for any questions
and thanks for your time.
Simison: Thank you, Matt. Council, any questions?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Matt?
Schultz: Yes.
Borton: Are you there?
Schultz: I'm here.
Borton: Okay. Make sure you can hear me. So, I want to --
Schultz: Yeah.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 125 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 14 of 65
Borton: There is a lot that looks really good with this development. The covered patio,
the front porch, the alley load, there is -- there is really some neat design elements, but
the questions with regards to the -- the 20 foot driveway requirements, what do we say to
the property to the east or to the west who comes in and -- and does the same thing,
makes the same request and, then, says the Ascent Townhomes did it, so why shouldn't
we do it. So, help us understand why -- what -- what really is unique here that outweighs
the principles that you -- that you were a part of that created the -- this particular -- not a
requirement, but it's a pretty clear direction that any application should comply with this
Ten Mile plan and -- and why granting you a waiver doesn't really grant a waiver to anyone
else along Franklin that could -- the end result being a bunch of separate projects that
lead to a long strip of garage fronts, which is exactly what that -- that provision was
intended to avoid.
Schultz: Yeah. Councilman Borton, thanks for the -- thanks for the question. If you are
talking about along Franklin Road, we have a pretty short section there where -- where
we back up. In my experience in laying out a lot of subdivisions over the years when you
do alleyways, there is always some that the geometry doesn't allow alleyways. You
usually have your perimeter has gone alley, the interior is alley and you have a mix and
that's why I'm a little surprised staff's digging in as deep as they are on the exact -- a
hundred percent of all units must be this, especially when it's something -- I don't even --
I don't have a picture of one of those houses that has a garage 20 feet back from the front
of the house and we are not talking about -- anything about driveways here, we are not
talking -- we have 20 foot driveways and the -- the structure is 20 feet back. That's -- we
have got that covered. We are talking about from that point back the garage has to be
another 20 feet back. I don't know what that looks like. Staff doesn't know what that looks
like. Somehow in that Ten Mile plan -- and I can tell you from all the other subdivisions
that have been approved before, across the street, next door and some other ones like
that, they have a good mix and the ones that are front loaded have -- have some nice
vertical differentiation like we have. They have a little bit of a setback or front forward on
the upper level. They have got porches and patios and knees and eyebrows and all those
words I don't know about the architects use, but at the end of the day they don't have 20
foot garages setback from the front of the house. They don't. And so I'm a little bit
concerned that it's in there, that -- that it's being interpreted so -- so harshly, I guess, in
that particular case and I mean no disrespect to the Ten Mile plan. I was involved in it
and I was in the steering committee on it and when we did Baraya and we actually
introduced architectural guidelines to help Baraya that talked about having at least a two
foot vertical offset between the upper and lower and all these features that you see here
and I think that -- I think that zero got added to that too somehow. I'm not sure. And I
mean that seriously and, you know, not -- not -- not -- not -- it's just -- I don't know how it
got in there and it's just -- if you look at anywhere else out there in the Ten Mile plan they
don't have that. So, in this particular case where we back up to -- we did it everywhere
we could. We did the alleys everywhere we could in this thing. Where we back up to
Franklin Road we could -- we could front those out onto up Franklin, you know, we could
use that as a -- as the front door without a berm. We didn't think it was appropriate in this
particular case, because it would be on a major arterial in this case if we fronted out that
way. So, we are trading now -- we could have done a front door on Franklin, these could
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 126 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 15 of 65
have been the same exact units we have in our entryway and we said, no, and staff and
P&Z all agreed, no, we would rather have a berm and a -- and a fence there instead of,
you know, having those units face out onto Franklin.
Borton: Matt?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Schultz: So, again, I -- I think the intent was to -- to honor the Ten Mile plan was to get
as much as you could in there for -- non-front loaded and we have done that.
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Schultz: So, I --
Borton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Matt, I appreciate that background and I will leave you
with a question that maybe you can come back with at the end after public, but what I was
just trying to get my head around was is it your perspective that it's a requirement of the
plan that you are requesting a waiver from or is it your perspective that you don't believe
a waiver is necessary because the plan doesn't really require it. And you can answer that
at the tail end. But that's what I was trying to get around, because I was more concerned
with -- it requires it and you needed a waiver, but if your perspective is you don't think that
the Ten Mile plan actually requires what's being asked of you, then, no waiver would be
necessary and I wouldn't have as much concern that some exception could be replicated
elsewhere. So, we can -- we can cover that at the back end, too.
Schultz: Appreciate that. We will just see what else comes out. Thanks.
Borton: Okay. Thanks, Matt.
Simison: Council Woman Strader, do you still have a question?
Strader: No. I think that was along the lines of what -- what my question was. I -- I guess
it's -- what I was struggling with a little bit -- I hear that other projects have not met this
design requirement. It sounds like maybe the design requirement for a hundred percent
isn't workable, but it's hard to contextualize if I haven't seen what's possible. I mean so if
-- if staff has some, you know, more innovative thinking about design that we are just not
seeing as part of the Ten Mile plan that we had sort of envisioned or is it just that -- for a
parcel of this size it's an unworkable requirement, I -- I kind of want to hear staff's opinion
about, you know, should -- or should we really be asking people to do something more
innovative in their design, is it really-- is it realistic that it's difficult to meet this requirement
and would -- a hard requirement for 65 percent, you know, be something that makes
sense here from staff's perspective.
Simison: And, Sonya, just to add on to that question, the applicant made a comment
about is it a typo and/or do we have examples. I have been trying to rack my brain about
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 127 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 16 of 65
a 20 foot -- I think my house is probably 14 to 15, but I'm just curious.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, I will respond to the Mayor's question
first. All garages -- the face of garages are required to be setback 20 feet from the back
of curb if there is a detached sidewalk or the back of sidewalk if it's attached and that
allows adequate room for a car to be parked on the parking pad without hanging out over
the sidewalk where pedestrians are at. So, in this case there the R-15 district has a ten
foot building setback to living area and a 20 foot setback to face of garage. So, I believe
that these are proposed -- the living area is proposed -- basically it's on the same plane
at 20 feet. I can't speak to if it was a typo or not. As far as I'm aware it's not a typo. The
intent is to have some variety in the -- in the wall planes and to make the elevations less
garage dominated and more traditional neighborhood design. I was not involved in the
Ten Mile plan, though, so I -- that's all I can offer.
Simison: Were we able to find -- are there renderings or examples of these types of
elevations as --
Allen: I do not have any. In order to do this the lots would have to be wider likely, which
has an effect on the overall density. You know, it would decrease the density if we did
that and with the types of dwelling units proposed, then, it would likely kick the density
below that desired in the Ten Mile plan or it would be close anyway. I'm not sure. Maybe
the applicant can speak to that if he --
Simison: And, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to hijack Council Woman Strader's question, just
tried to add to it, but I want to make sure she gets her questions answered as well.
Allen: Yeah. I believe I responded to her questions that she asked. Correct me if I'm
wrong, Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I think we had the same question. It was like show me what I'm not
seeing, which is certainly a difficult request, but if I haven't see something innovative that
-- that is a way of accomplishing this -- I guess my next question would more be to the
applicant, you know, it sounds like 65 percent of your units are trying to meet the spirit of
this requirement. Are there additional things you could do that don't involve 20 feet that
would make this less garage dominant? So, like I'm looking at the rendering in the lower
left-hand corner, I think if I was walking past that I would be seeing a lot of garage. Is
there another way of trying to accomplish the spirit of what we are trying to do is break up
this sort of visual of garages.
Schultz: All right. Council Woman Strader, thank you. Sonya, can you flip back to the
ones that are -- that do -- that do meet the -- I'm tired of looking at those right now. Yeah.
There is kind of more the traditional -- as you walk along all front doors and windows and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 128 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 17 of 65
porches along our main entry road and, then, the bottom is actually what you would see
from the -- the alley, from the public alley, which you are always going to see a garage
somewhere, just where is it. In this case it's -- it's off the alley -- drive down the alley you
will see a bunch of garages. You drive down the main road you won't. As you first drive
in that's what you are going to see is just what you see in the upper left-hand corner. You
look right or left you will see kind of what looks like the bottom -- the bottom one. Staff
did have us break up those garages, which we didn't really like so much in the two -- two
bays, if you will, instead of one large garage door, which -- it depends on your opinion
whether that helps or not, you know, showing them more individual garages or less bigger
doors, but that was one of the -- one of the -- yeah, it was one of the suggestions that
they get broken up and so what you see here is an evolution that went back and forth
before the final P&Z hearing between the architects and staff on how they could dress
these up to the better. To your point, Council Woman Strader, you know, what can we do
instead of doing that and if you could -- if you could go back to that original one, Sonya,
that we were staring at for a long time with -- these are the ones -- these are actually the
-- there is -- there is only two of these. There is one of these at the very east -- southeast
corner and there is one in the northwest corner. If you could flip back one, Sonya. I think
it's the four-plex front loads. Yeah. That's where those two were. Thanks. And if you
could put that one -- yeah. This is more I believe -- yeah. There is two different options
here. No. What -- what's going on here? I'm not sure what's going on here. But I think
the idea was this more shows the floor and maybe there is two different options on the
floor. But kind of breaking it up showing those --those overhangs over the garages, which
you don't have to do, you know. But that breaks up that straight front vertical plane that
you sometimes get, which doesn't look very good. And so -- so those -- those overhangs
which create kind of a porch look over the garage, if you look at the roof line above it there
is some articulation on that to break up that front facade. So, a lot of these things were
done to -- to -- to -- to counteract that. Now, back to this whole 20 foot back, I can't find it
either. I don't know what it looks like. If we had to -- if we had to, you know, lose five or
six lots and turn a few units sideways on Franklin, I'm sure -- I'm still not sure what it would
look like. But I do know that it would be counterproductive to the idea of efficiency in
housing, which is what the Ten Mile plan is all about. So, that's why -- and I hate to see
it and I hate to see us, you know, debating on this one issue. I know P&Z was like, yeah,
we are -- we are -- we like this a lot and we are okay with -- you know, with it being waived
if it needs to be waived. You know, if that is, indeed, the -- the -- the mechanism that
needs to be applied here. But back to Joe Borton's question about how do we prevent
this from happening either way. There is only one little parcel to the -- to the east of us,
it's about one acre, and there is a couple acres to the west and I think that those may be
able to incorporate a cap and half or a portion and still meet the spirit of the Ten Mile and
they may ask for the same thing we did, which was instead of fronting these units out onto
Franklin, which is a major arterial, let's grant the waiver, if you will, and put a berm there
and that's kind of a trade off in particular. So, I don't think you open up a can of worms
with other -- other sites in the Ten Mile plan by doing this. It's a very location specific
situation that I think we provided a good solution to.
Strader: Thanks.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 129 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 18 of 65
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Maybe changing gears. Matt, can we talk a little bit
about -- right. Click -- click like maybe a private -- Sonya, if you wouldn't mind pulling up
the -- maybe the parking map that you had. Perfect. So, I was trying to map -- I was
trying to understand on this map I see on the left-hand side public and private.
Schultz: That private shouldn't be there, Mr. Cavener. I'm sorry. It was a typo. It's a
public alley. Both of them are public alleys. That--we used to have a private drive before
-- before Bottles got involved and made me jockey some stuff around and that's what I
got left in there. Sorry about the confusion. But that is -- that is -- that is public alley on
both sides and, then, that -- the red area is a full width detached sidewalk. You can park
on the road there where the -- where we could show on-street parking.
Cavener: Okay. Thanks. And, Sonya, can you maybe advance a slide that shows the
landscape layout. Great. So, Matt, help me -- when you took a look at this -- recognize
there are some really unique challenges with this piece of land.
Schultz: Yeah.
Cavener: You know that I -- I'm always more supportive of more on-street parking than
less.
Schultz: Uh-huh.
Cavener: I'm just curious from that alley if there were architectural challenges or elevation
challenges that kind of prevented doing that alley as a -- as a public street that would
allow for some on-street parking?
Schultz: Councilman Cavener, we just looked at it from going east -- excuse me -- west
to east. You know, hey, we know we need alleys on both sides of this thing, so let's just
lay this out all the way across, what we have left on the east side is -- is either open space
or parking. I mean we could put more parking in that open space area over there off the
alley where we -- where we are showing the playground. There is room in there to add
probably about five to eight more spaces and still maintain the -- the playground and still
maintain that if -- if we think we need some more. We thought having an extra 30 was
good, but I did look at it that that -- that open space over there is very very ample and you
can't front lots onto it, so may as well put -- you could put some parking in it potentially.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor. I wonder -- and, you know, human nature is -- is kind of a funny
thing. I feel like you are going to get some parking there whether it's allowed or not. We
see that, you know, in developments large and small that for whatever reason people
don't walk or ride a bike or roller skate or whatever to their open space, they sometimes
drive over there and does that create an unnecessary challenge?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 130 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 19 of 65
Schultz: That -- that open space on the -- on the east side now -- I mean it's an easy --
Cavener: Yeah.
Schultz: It's an easy thing to do. The geometrics work. My -- it's been a while since I
looked at it, but it was something between five and eight spots that fit no sweat in there
and still -- still maintain ample open space, room for the playground, all that good stuff.
Cavener: It's like you anticipated my next question. Is it wouldn't impact your open --
your -- your open space requirements. You could kick it back.
Schultz: No. Yeah. We could take it down a little bit.
Cavener: Okay.
Simison: Council, any further questions? Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing.
Madam Clerk, did we have anyone sign up?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody in the public who would like to testify on this application
or is there anybody online who would like to provide virtual testimony using the Zoom
app? If so just click the raise your hand button. Give this a second see if anybody -- don't
see anybody in the audience looking to testify. Madam Clerk, if you would just confirm
we have no one that's raised their hand.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, confirmed.
Simison: Okay. Then, Mr. Schultz, any last comments?
Schultz: I think I was able to squeeze in Mr. Borton's answer and Ms. Strader's question.
I'm sorry I commingled them. But I -- I tried to get it all answered there about why -- why
I don't think that this is a special exception if you do approve this as -- as submitted and
proposed. We -- just a reminder we -- we would like to get that -- that art requirement
waive if possible. And if not we will think of something, but -- yeah. That's all. Thanks.
Simison: Thank you.
Bernt: Mr. Schultz? Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Mr. Schultz, are you still there?
Schultz: I am.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 131 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 20 of 65
Bernt: How are you doing, man?
Schultz: Good.
Bernt: Good. Good to see you again. One question for you. So, Ms. Strader asked a
question regard to the spirit of the ask. Would you be opposed to moving that set -- you
know, the garage back five feet or more just to see what that looks like or see -- you know,
to -- to coincide with what the Ten Mile specific plan is asking for?
Schultz: Councilman Bernt, thank you for the question and I don't want to say no, you
know. I definitely won't say, yeah, five feet, big deal. But I -- at the same time I -- I think
that with the additional architectural features we accomplish that statement ten of
breaking up that front plane, which is really the --the intent, because there was some bad
architecture going around 15 years ago. I don't know if you remember. Some really bad
vertical two story, jack-o-lantern looking garage door, two windows, vertical 20 feet and I
-- you know, it -- we are not going to mention any names, but, you know, if that was real
back then and that -- and we had some architectural guidelines that we submitted that
broke up that front plane -- it didn't say anything about 20. It did say something about
two. At least breaking it out by two and I understand five, which, okay, maybe we could
make a perfect five, but -- but -- sure. I'm sure we could do --
Bernt: So, what -- Mr. Mayor, follow up.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: So, by moving it back five would that just move the back of the house more or
would that encroach into living space? How would that -- I -- there was a question asked
before about what does this look like and I'm trying to picture this in my mind as well.
Schultz: I think the idea is to break up the front plane. So, it's not moving the whole
house back five feet, it's -- it's breaking up that top story and the bottom story, you know,
the breaking it up. So, what that would look like would be like Sonya said, the -- the code
allows living space to be within ten feet of the back of walk and we do that all the time,
even garage frontage stuff, if they are wider. In this case they are narrow, so there is not
a lot of living space to push out on the side of the garage, but on a wider lot you push out
the front. That still doesn't talk to this 20 foot from the -- from the front of the house. I --
you know, I guess that might be an extra ten feet. I don't know. It's -- it's -- it's just kind
of a -- it's kind of a different deal that I can't conceptualize either, but I think it's about
breaking up that front plane and our architectural features even before you asked me that
five foot question we believe accomplished that and that's working between staff and the
architect that, hey, if we can't get it can you give us something else and that's what they
came back -- I didn't get in the middle of it. Hey, man, give me your best shot and that's
what they came up with was those architectural features.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 132 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 21 of 65
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Schultz: There is design review required on this -- sorry about that. There is a design
review application after this required on this, but hopefully we wouldn't have that 20 foot
back requirement. But everything else would still be design review -- reviewed.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: One of the things I have noticed -- I used to commute a little bit down Ustick
Road and there is -- there is -- it's in the city of Boise and one concern I see with those
homes abutting against Franklin -- and if we require some changes to that, these homes
-- it's a small development, in-fill structure, ten to 12 homes on each side with -- with an
alley, but they move those homes -- as Mr. Schultz was saying, they want a berm, they
want to have some -- some yard. They moved them right up to the sidewalk and that's
their front door and Ustick now is very very busy and I look at that -- I drive past and I
thought those poor people -- it is an area of no use. You cannot sit out there on the porch.
They have a front door and a little porch and the traffic and you are just not that far away.
I think there is detached sidewalk, but it just -- traffic is zooming by and so all they have
is the back and I much prefer having a berm and the ability for people to have some sort
of backyard, some private space, to do that, even though it might sacrifice the fact that
these -- these 12, 13 -- I can't remember the count right there along Franklin -- has -- you
know, we -- we sacrifice a 20 foot -- extra 20 feet and have a 40 foot long driveway for a
home that has -- has no yard whatsoever. So, it puts more pressure on the open space.
But that's just an observation I had that for a home just like that, same setting, busy street,
same type site type of home right up -- right up against a major -- major road and I did
find it ironic that as Councilman Cavener was talking about, you know, parking space,
which we are always concerned about is it adequate, we are within the Ten Mile plan and
our whole goal there is to create more walkability, so we are creating more parking space.
So, it's just an interesting dynamic. And my other comment -- I think when it comes to
public art -- yeah, I'm surprised about that. Nothing to hang my hat over and if -- if Mr.
Schultz gets this, this is his one opportunity to do a statue of himself right there as public
art. So, you go with that.
Simison: Thank you, Councilman Hoaglun. Since the -- there is a song, all I can think
about from Councilman Cavener's comments was they are going to pave paradise and
put in a parking lot and taking away open space and greenery from people for parking is
a struggle for me personally, no matter what the size in this case, as we know that that's
what people want -- are asking more of.
Strader: One more question.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Question for the applicant. Looking at some of the renderings and maybe back
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 133 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 22 of 65
to the question about how much do we want people in Ten Mile and denser housing to
rely on cars versus other modes of transportation. Are some of the garages double
garages or are they -- are each of those designated to an individual townhome?
Schultz: Council Woman Strader, those are -- those are all two car garage with each
townhome. So, there is -- there is plenty of parking and so there is -- there is the
argument, like you say, are we encouraging pedestrian activity by giving them plenty of
parking space and in all actuality people park one car in there, if at all, and they store
some stuff in there and, then, they use their-- their driveway to park the cars and -- I don't
know. It's -- it's promoting walkability by eliminating driveway -- or, you know, garage
space. I don't know. We are kind of trying to push up the values and the sizes and it --
we will see how this works out here, you know. That's why we had to throw the amenity
in there we thought was we didn't want to -- we didn't want to skim on by, might do
something nice, so we are going for size and amenity and still -- still had some density
and so that -- it's a little bit of a puzzle, but we think we have been able to kind of hit with
this one, so --
Strader: Follow up.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, one issue that we have run into --there is a concern that even though people
have a garage for their car it becomes their-- it's a Councilman Cavener thing and I have
taken it to heart. It becomes -- like this garage becomes their storage facility. Can a car
-- I mean maybe not a giant truck, but can a car still fit in these driveways if we don't have
the setback that's normally required?
Schultz: Yes. Thanks, Council Woman Strader. These are all your standard 20 feet --
you are not going to get your F-350 -- your F-350 is probably get an overhang a foot or
two, but your standard car fits great, you know, and this is your standard driveway
setback. You will see on all the homes are doing an R-4 even or R-8. I mean this is it,
you know, and so it's a standard 20 foot from the back of curb that these builders -- you
know, sometimes they will do 25, but usually they go up to 20 and if a guy has a really
really long truck it's -- it's -- he's hanging a little bit into the sidewalk. But other than that
they fit.
Strader: Thanks.
Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Bongiorno.
Bongiorno: Mayor and City Council -- Council Woman Strader -- and Cavener, this one,
obviously, is a big thing for me with the parking and Matt and I have talked many many
times about parking and those 20 foot alleys, you know, will be signed, you know, no
parking fire lane, which is enforceable by Meridian PD, because I have a certain
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 134 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 23 of 65
development down off Records that they will park three in the driveway. They will put two
in the driveway and, then, they will park a third halfway in the street across the back. So,
we have had many many discussions with our developers and -- and I'm pushing that no
parking fire lane sign, because it's in our city code that police can write a ticket against it,
so -- and, then, obviously, we are encouraging the HOAs to do their own managing of
parking themselves. But it's -- it always seems to be an issue and that's why, you know,
we are trying to show you these parking plans and stuff ahead of time just to make sure
that, you know, everybody is happy with what's being developed.
Simison: Council, any further questions or do I have any motions?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I would move that we close the public hearing for H-2020-0039, Item 6-B.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed
nay. The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Hoaglun: Well, Mr. Mayor, I will take a stab at this one.
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I was reading through the minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting and it -- it -- it was -- not knowing what the plan was before that was -- did not
come before Council, it was interesting to note that this --according to the Commissioners
had high praise for this plan over the -- over the previous plan and there is certain
elements that really does help for connectivity and I'm glad to see that works out here,
because that can be very difficult and can stop a plan in its tracks -- that he was able to
work out with neighbors on both sides to work out access issues and we have emergency
access and a temporary entryway from -- from Franklin that will eventually close up and
-- and the -- really for five acres -- you know, you look at it as an in-fill project, even though
it's the first one there. It's one that lays out very nicely, gives ample open space, and a
range of houses that I think will -- will work for people and so with that thinking, Mr. Mayor,
I would move approval of H-2020-0039 and that item that approved the waiver of the DA,
provision number A.F as requested and that all other items as presented in the staff report
for hearing date June 23rd be included in the approval.
Cavener: I'll second.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 135 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 24 of 65
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: A question for Council Member Hoaglun. I didn't know if his motion -- and
maybe he touched on it or maybe I missed it. Anything included in your motion regarding
the production of the open space around the playground area for additional parking?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, if that's some -- you know, you truly think is
necessary. I didn't see it as necessary. I mean there is 32 parking spaces and it's that
give up open space for parking, you know, and that--you know, that's one of those things
-- that's just kind of in the eye of the beholder. If you think it's necessary, you know, I'm
not opposed to that. You know, I could be swayed. But to me the -- the value of the open
space and those amenities with the 32 parking spaces that are extra on top of the
driveways just -- yeah.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: I just -- I appreciate Council Member Hoaglun's comments. It's, obviously, not
I think the most critical element of this. Just more trying to get clarification on the motion.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think it's tough -- it's a tough balance. I think on this one I would rather see the
emphasis on the open space and hope -- hope that the residents will embrace more sort
of pedestrian mindset. We will have to see. I think for me on this one, one important
consideration -- I know we have some limited capacity in these schools. I think our next
discussion we will have a more robust discussion about the school's low unit count relative
to the number of students coming in and this is an area that we have planned on having
density and so I think that's why I'm supportive of it. It seems pretty well thought out. I
just ask the applicant to try during the design portion of the review with staff to try to do
what you can to get everybody feeling good that you are meeting the spirit of the Ten Mile
design, what it was intended to meet. So, that's it.
Hoaglun: And, Mr. Mayor, I didn't include it in my motion, because I think it's part of the
process already, just the fact that the applicant would work with staff on the placement of
the public art and be part of the streetscape. I don't think that was required to be in the
motion, but that was my thinking on that as well.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 136 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 25 of 65
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton. I agree with the motion and the reasoning behind it. I think
it's -- it's very sound and in the application makes sense. I in particular appreciate staff's
adherence to the -- to the Ten Mile plan and -- and its directives. I think Matt has done a
good job in -- in walking the line and tie sort of goes to the applicant in my eyes on this
one with regards to maybe some unique features with this in-fill project. It's small size.
It's a small percentage of product that is implicated with this 20 foot driveway issue. I
think it's going to be the rare exception when those components of the Ten Mile plan are
waived. This might be one of those rare situations. So, I'm worried about precedent, but
I think the applicant's done a good job in trying to craft how this one is unique enough that
it warrants that waiver. So, that's -- that's one of the reasons, among others, that I'm
supportive of the application.
Allen: Mr. Mayor? Excuse me. May I clarify the motion? The only change to the staff
report that I caught was the change to development agreement provision A.F to not
require the garage to be set back 20 feet from the living area facade. Was that correct,
Councilman Hoaglun?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, Sonya, yes, that was correct.
Allen: Thank you.
Hoaglun: And to follow up, Mr. Mayor, do I need to include about the public art placement?
Allen: That is already a provision in the development agreement.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, Sonya, that's what I thought. So, I thought we are good there.
Allen: Yeah.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any further discussion on the motion? If not, the clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
absent.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: Council, I'm going to -- we didn't really get a break between. Does anybody
need a five minute recess before we go into the last one or do people just want to go?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor, I'm comfortable with moving forward if the Council is, but if someone
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 137 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 26 of 65
wants to take a quick break I'm supportive of that as well.
C. Public Hearing for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2020-0024)
by Schultz Development, Located at 675 W. Waltman Ln.
1. Request: Modification to the Existing Development
Agreement Inst. #108131100), which allows
commercial/office/hotel uses, for the purpose of replacing the
agreement with a new agreement allowing a mix of single-
family and multi-family residential uses to develop on the
site;
2. Request: A Rezone of a total of 38.47 acres of land from the
CG to the R-8 (10.13 acres), R-15 (12.20 acres) and R-40
(16.14 acres) zoning districts;
3. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 142 buildable lots
and 18 common lots on 37.87 acres of land in the R-8, R-15
and R-40 zoning districts; and,
4. Request: A Conditional use permit for a multi-family
development consisting of 272 residential units on 16.14
acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
Simison: I don't see anybody requesting a break, so with that we will move on to -- sorry,
I got to get back to my right piece of paperwork. I can't use my fingers to lick my -- Item
6-C, a public hearing for Tanner Creek Subdivision, H-2020-0024. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council, the next item and the final item before you tonight is a request
for a development agreement modification, a rezone, a preliminary plat and a conditional
use permit. This site consists of 38 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and it's located at 675
West Waltman Lane, west of Meridian Road on the north side of I-84. This property was
annexed back in 2008 with a concept plan for a commercial development consisting of
commercial, office, and hotel uses. However, the property was not developed as planned.
In 2018 a plan was submitted very similar to that proposed with the subject application
that was denied. At that time the property was designated on the future land use map as
commercial and a map amendment to medium high density residential was proposed.
Because the city was working on a new Comprehensive Plan for the city at that time,
which included changes to the future land use map, Council determined it was not in the
best interest of the city to approve the application at that time and preferred the applicant
participate in the Comprehensive Plan update that was in process, rather than making
changes to the map outside of that process. As part of that process the future land use
map designation for this site was changed. The current Comprehensive Plan future land
use map designation is medium density residential, which is a three acre strip along the
west boundary of the site as you can see on this map here on your left and mixed use
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 138 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 27 of 65
community on the remainder of the site. The applicant is requesting a modification to the
existing development agreement to replace the agreement with a new agreement
allowing a mix of single family residential detached, townhomes, and multi-family
residential apartment uses to develop on the side in place of the commercial development
previously proposed. The existing development agreement includes two different
conceptual development plans as shown, which depict 400,000 square feet of
professional office, hotel, big box retail and smaller retail spaces. The proposed
development plan as shown depicts a mix of single family residential, townhome, and
multi-family residential uses, which will provide a transition, zoning, and uses to the
existing homes to the west and existing and future residential uses to the north with multi-
family as a transition to future commercial and office uses to the east. Because the
development plan for this site has completely changed from the concept commercial
development previously approved and the terms of the agreement are no longer
applicable, staff is supportive of the request for a new development agreement to replace
the existing one. A rezone of 38.47 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 district, which
consists of 10.13 acres, the R-15 district, which consists of 12.2 acres, and the R-40
district, which consists of 16.14 acres is proposed consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan future land use map designations for this site. A preliminary plat is proposed
consisting of 142 buildable lots and 18 common lots on 38 acres of land. The plat is
proposed to develop in four phases as shown on the phasing plan on the right. The off-
site construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek and extension of Corporate Drive
from the north to Waltman Lane with a detached five foot sidewalk along the east side of
the street is proposed to take place prior to issuance of building permits in phase one.
The off-site replacement of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek and widening of Waltman
Lane and construction of a five foot wide detached sidewalk along the north side of
Waltman to Meridian Road is proposed prior to issuance of building permits in phase three
and construction of the berm along 1-84 with associated phases three and four. Because
noise from the freeway will affect future residents in this area, staff is recommending noise
abatement in the form of a berm and wall as proposed is constructed in its entirety with
the first phase of development as a provision of the development agreement. Additionally,
staff recommends the Waltman Lane improvements, including the bridge, take place prior
to issuance of building permits in phase two, rather than phase three as originally
proposed. A conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 272
apartment units on 16 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district is proposed. Access is
proposed via the extension of Ruddy Drive, a local street at the west boundary of this site,
and two accesses from Waltman Lane, a future collector street at the north boundary of
the site. One public street connection in the single family residential portion and one
driveway connection in the multi-family residential portion of the development. Public
streets and alleys and common driveways are proposed for internal access within the
single family residential portion of the site with private driveways within the multi-family
residential portion. Parking is proposed for the multi-family development in excess of the
minimum UDC standards. A total of 518 spaces are required and 548 spaces are
proposed for a total of 30 extra spaces. A detached ten foot wide sidewalk is planned
along the south side of Waltman Lane. Internal pedestrian pathways are proposed
through the central common area to amenities in the single family portion of the
development and provide connectivity to the common areas and amenities in the multi-
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 139 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 28 of 65
family portion. A ten foot wide segment of the city's regional multi-use pathway system is
proposed along the west side of the Ten Mile Creek along the east boundary of the site
with a pedestrian bridge over the creek for interconnectivity with the future commercial
development. A 20 wide landscape street buffer is required on Waltman Lane and a 50
foot wide buffer is required along 1-84. The buffer along Waltman is proposed to contain
a three foot tall berm and the buffer along Interstate 84 is proposed to contain a nine foot
tall berm with a five foot tall wall on top to buffer residential uses from the noise of the
freeway. Qualified open space and site amenities are proposed in excess of UDC
standards. A total of 3.14 acres or 14.3 percent of common open space and amenities
consisting of children's play equipment, pathways, and a basketball court are proposed
in the single family portion and 4.07 acres or 25.7 percent of common area and amenities
consisting of a clubhouse, swimming pool, shade structure, fire pit, internal pathway
segment of the city's regional pathway with a pedestrian bridge across the creek and
children's play equipment are proposed in the multi-family portion. Conceptual building
elevation photos were submitted for the proposed one and two story single family homes
with a mix of alley and front loaded units. Two story townhomes and two and three story
multi-family structures. The three story apartment buildings will be located along the east
boundary adjacent to future commercial uses. Single family homes along the south
boundary will be a single story in height. The Commission recommended approval of the
proposed applications. Matt Schutz, Schultz Development, the applicant's
representative, testified in favor of the application. No one testified in opposition. Clair
Manning commented on the application and written testimony was received from Michael
Swenson and Bill Kissinger. The key issues discussed at the public hearing from public
testimony are as follows: Concern pertaining to the density proposed. Opinion that it's
too high for this area and the resulting traffic -- opinion that traffic -- excuse me -- opinion
that Waltman Lane and the Meridian Road-Waltman Lane intersection can't handle the
amount of traffic the proposed development will generate. Opinion that Ruddy Drive
shouldn't be extended with this development. Concerns pertaining to traffic and safety.
Opposition to the project due to the traffic concerns and feeling that Waltman and the
Waltman-Meridian Road intersection couldn't handle the traffic generated from the
proposed development and the need for sidewalks on both sides of Waltman, not just
one. And, finally, concerns pertaining to emergency access to the site. Overcrowding in
area schools, traffic, provision of sidewalks, bike lanes, preference for the property to
develop with commercial uses to bring more jobs to Meridian. Key issues of discussion
by the Commission were as follows: Question of the applicant if amenities in the multi-
family development, i.e., the clubhouse and swimming pool, will be shared with the single
family portion of the development. The answer was no. Concern pertaining to the
extension of Ruddy Drive and the need for additional traffic calming for safety on Ruddy
Drive and Kearney Avenue to Waltman Lane. Concern that a lot of traffic from the
neighboring subdivision to the west will cut through this development. Concern that only
residential uses and not a mix of uses are proposed on this site as desired in the mixed
use community designated areas. Opinions that the proposed layout provides a good
transition between single family homes and future commercial development to the east.
Desire for -- desire for a larger more concentrated open space area in the multi-family
portion of the site and concern pertaining to the proposed phasing plan and bringing
construction traffic through the built portion and phases one and two to phases three and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 140 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 29 of 65
four at the back of the development. The Commission made the following changes to the
staff recommendation. They modified DA provision A-1-C to require all of the
improvements to Waltman Lane west of the Ten Mile Creek bridge to be completed prior
to issuance of building permits in phase two and the off-site reconstruction and widening
of the bridge across the Ten Mile Creek and associated widening of Waltman Lane,
including the off-site construction of a detached five foot wide sidewalk along the north
side of Waltman to Meridian Road to be completed prior to issuance of building permits
in phase three of the development, instead of phase two and include a new condition
requiring traffic calming measures to be implemented where Ruddy Drive connects to the
subdivision at the west boundary the site as allowed by ACHD. Outstanding issues for
Council tonight are as follows: There is three issues. The Commission directed the
applicant to consider and be prepared to discuss the possibility of reconfiguring the open
space area in the multi-family portion to increase the open space in that area. The
Commission requested that Council determine if the density is too high in the R-40 zoned
portion of the site and if they feel comfortable with the number of units proposed and,
finally, the Commission requested the applicant to reconsider and be prepared to discuss
with the Council the phasing plan related to construction traffic going through the
proposed neighborhood, as I previously mentioned, as well as timing of roadway
improvements and whether or not that phasing should be reconfigured. Written testimony
has been received since the Commission hearing from the following folks: Carolyn Harris,
Janice Wright, Kelsee Lorcher, Dan Thayden, Bobby and Lois Owen, Bill Kissinger, Clair
Manning, Duane Wiedenheft and Jane Brandt. Karen Christensen, Kim Coey, Melvin
Watts, Bethany Cluff, Julie Williams and Michael and Nancy Swenson. Overall concerns
pertained to school overcrowding, traffic, preference for commercial or low density mixed
use, rather than residential. Preference for the site to develop with uses that bring more
jobs to the community, instead of high density residential. Staff will stand for any
questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I will take a shot at -- I will just get right to the heart of one of my concerns. So,
we may not have an answer for this, but this is the kind of analysis that I think we need to
be able to do with the school district, so I'm looking at the public testimony, the letter that
was received from Kelsee Lorcher and I believe Ms. Lorcher has calculated other
developments that are delivering in the next 12 months, using the school district's formula
how many, you know, seats that -- that that results in. We have some capacity here in
these schools, but really getting to the heart of what has already being delivered today --
and I'm not sure this is accurate, but a certain amount of these kids are going to graduate
per year. If I'm following her math. It looks like at least at the elementary school, taking
that as an example, that with this application we will be 116 students over capacity and I
wanted to know from Sonya if we have sort of checked that math, if that seems consistent
with what we have heard and what we have approved, if she has any commentary on
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 141 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 30 of 65
that.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, the school district's letter, as you
stated, it shows that enrollment currently is under capacity and due to the amount of
growth in the area is also stated in the school district's letter. The school is actively
building new schools and boundaries are always changing, so it's -- it's really something
that we can't anticipate where these additional kids will land, so to speak.
Simison: Sonya, I believe the question she's trying to get at is did we look at the other
developments that are in this school zoned area to the determine whether or not the
information provided by the citizen was accurate or not.
Allen: I did not, Mr. Mayor.
Simison: Council Woman Strader, is that what you -- that's what you were looking at, if I
wasn't mistaken.
Strader: Yeah. Thank you. That -- I was trying to -- you know, I was excited because the
concept follows what I think we have been hoping to achieve, which is to sort of figure out
where is your capacity in the district. For what we have approved what are we really
looking at here. If there is capacity elsewhere that makes sense to me, but I'm just trying
to get a picture -- you know, it's one thing to say there is capacity, but it's another thing if
-- if we know for sure that -- that this will be far far over capacity. So, I'm just -- I'm trying
to contextualize the numbers I'm looking at. We can come back to this. I have a second
question.
Simison: Council, any other questions for staff at this time?
Strader: Mr. Mayor, maybe one more.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: If Sonya could just walk through the thinking on how this is consistent with the
future with the FLUM. Like how is this use consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
just explain -- I'm not seeing commercial. We are really heavily reliant right now on
residential as a city and just explain the thinking of why this kind of fits into what we are
looking for.
Allen: Mr. Mayor and Council Woman Strader, as stated in the staff report, staff's analysis
on consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was based on the adjacent medium density
residential future land use designation, loading, so to speak, to approximately half of this
property, which the new Comprehensive Plan allows without an amendment to the -- to
the map. Staff felt this was appropriate due to the existing single family residential uses
to the west and those to the north existing and future medium density residential uses
planned through the Comprehensive Plan for that area. Staff felt it was more appropriate
than commercial uses on the land that's west of the creek due to traffic and the existing
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 142 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 31 of 65
nature of the area. The commercial uses previously anticipated to develop on this site
would generate a whole lot more traffic in this area and staff felt it was more appropriate
for the commercial uses to be closer to Meridian Road and the commercial uses on the
north side of Walmart as well.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. To follow up in that same vein of questioning, you know, I like the fact
that they are stepping where the residential is in -- in volume and, then, the greater volume
will be butting up against commercial and -- and Sonya is correct about the amount of
traffic generated by commercial versus residential. But, Sonya, where I was kind of
curious about -- it's a mixed use and we are just applying -- you know, the applicant is
coming in with just one portion of the mixed use and not the other portion. So, is it possible
a future -- we don't know what a future development would come in for. They could also
apply mixed use, put in one strip mall and the rest could be residential. So, is that
allowed? I mean is it totally up to the Council -- future Commission and Council to
determine what that next parcel will look like or are there things in place in our plan that
said, no, that's the commercial component of this whole thing if we look at it or do they
become two separate entities?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, again, staff's recommendation was based on
floating, for lack of a better word, the medium density residential in place of that mixed
use community on the western portion of the property. So, really, the only portion that
would -- would be in the mixed use community is the multi-family, which is a good -- is --
the multi-family with the creek in between provides a nice break and transition to future
commercial development. So, the multi-family is really the only component at this time
proposed in that mixed use. So, to answer your question, we can't control in the future,
you know, what comes in on the -- the remainder of the mixed use community, but what's
proposed with this -- this site is -- staff does feel is consistent with that mixed use
designation.
Hoaglun: Okay. Mr. Mayor, if I might follow up.
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Make sure I interpret that. So, what I hear, Sonya, is really is incumbent upon
us that if we truly want this to be a true mixed use area we will have to be very careful
what comes in for that commercial component to make sure that is more towards the
commercial side, as opposed -- for it to meet the mixed use designation, as opposed to
all residential; is that -- is that correct?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, correct. There -- there could be more residential
as part of that. Maybe some, you know, vertical -- vertically integrated commercial office
uses.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 143 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 32 of 65
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Sonya. Appreciate it.
Simison: Council, any additional questions for staff? Okay. If not we will turn this over
to the applicant for 15 minutes. Mr. Schultz.
Schultz: All right. Hey, it's Matt again. 8421 South Ten Mile, Meridian. I have never
gotten this lucky getting two hearings in one night. It's kind of efficient in that regard and
I'm glad to be back after almost two years since -- I think at least three of you were at the
hearing two years ago August -- who is counting -- that we were denied. It was kind of a
somber mood that night. You guys had just gotten out of the big budget hearing meeting
and you were tired and here is a bunch of apartments, comp plan had just started and
what the heck are you doing here, Matt. It's not the time to talk about this kind of stuff. I
mean that's kind of my -- my synopsis of what Sonya said it wasn't in the best interest of
the city at this time given the fact that the comp plan was underway, which I didn't really
like, but I could respect and we did -- we did knuckle down and we were -- we are patient
people and we participated in -- in the -- the comp plan update. Jim Conger was in it.
was in it. Jon Wardle was in it. I think Jorgensen was there, along with some citizens at
large and some city staff and we had a very -- very good banter back and forth about all
the whys and wherefores of development in comp plans and all that good stuff. This one
came out -- I didn't know how it was going to come out in the final plan to be honest with
you after our discussions and it came out mixed use, which was kind of our -- our initial
presentation two years ago was, hey, this is a nonstarter for commercial back here in the
back, over a quarter mile back from Meridian Road, even though it's on the highway
commercial does not like to be that far back. In fact, it -- today it's even worse with, you
know, internet sales and all that, but back in '05 I think that was a very speculative shot
that they were going for way back then there that some big box would come in and do
that and they hit the downturn and it's just a nonstarter. But you do have to look at the
overall corner. Back at that time as well ITD owned -- I think I have got a little diagram
here -- 13 acres on the hard corner with the interchange that was, you know, where they
had their big pile of sand or salt or whatever and, then, that--and, then, redid the Meridian
interchange after this was zoned -- before my time. That got auctioned off to Hawkins
Companies and at the time I was like, man, it's just a matter of time before he assembles
the rest of it and turns it into a commercial project on that corner. I mean why would you
buy that corner and Hawkins is a commercial developer. So, it was interesting before the
P&Z meeting, you know, two years went by -- or almost two years, I went and looked at
the ownerships out there and Hawkins owned a bunch more properties around that piece
and they actually came to our neighborhood meeting and they were concerned that they
would have to do residential, because they would love to do a mixed use commercial and
office. I thought, well, perfect, you know, because we want to do residential, you want to
do that -- I know anything can happen, anything can change. But that's where it's kind of
teed up right now. We both have the same engineer. You haven't seen anything from
them yet. They own everything now, except -- at least the last time I checked -- and things
change -- except for the three acres in our north -- in our common northeast corner where
we abut along the Ten Mile Drain. There is three one acre parcels where there is three
residences there. But they own the other -- oh, let's see here, 11 parcels they have
assembled, so -- and we have assembled nine parcels and that's the good thing about
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 144 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 33 of 65
these assemblages -- they can be tough, but, obviously, you are not getting something
where you are trying to figure out how to do five acres. You know, we have got -- we have
the ability on both these parcels to do a comprehensive layout plan, integrate the uses,
get all your alleys and roads and open space where you need it and that's what's good
about these bigger parcels. This one is challenging. It's along the highway. We are
proposing single story homes and a large berm and wall along 1-84 and we are setting
back our apartments down there and having them two story along the highway as well to
mitigate that as best we can. But we really do think that this is -- the west residential
portion of a 70 acre, you know, mixed use, if you will, project. We have a pedestrian
connection between the two. Try to encourage pedestrian traffic, which we always like to
do. You know, pedestrian bridge, can't drive over it. Right in the middle. We are going
to shift that to line up with them where ever -- where ever it makes sense. We will work
together on it. But what we have here is something that went through two years ago.
P&Z liked it. ACHD liked it. Got to City Council and the timing was just bad. The timing
is good now and it's the same plan, but better. One of the things when we came in to
staff the second time around we didn't -- they didn't let us rest on our original site plan
and say, hey, can you integrate that -- that resident -- the single family and the apartment
is a little better. This one you see in front of you here we used to have a big central open
space, we had lots on the east side and that driveway connection was shifted to the south
and it just looked very -- like there was just a wall. There was no integration. And we
worked out with staff that, hey, what if you turn the lots to the north, move that access to
the north. We added some parking in that connection area. Some detached sidewalks,
instead of just a road between two lots, and really horizontally integrated, if you will, the
single family and the multi-family, which is hard to do, but we think -- because we do have
a bigger parcel we are able to do it and make our -- you know, make our connections.
Like Sonya said, we have two story apartments on our -- on our west side and as we go
east they step up to three. Overall -- you know, it comes down to a parking thing. Parking
and space, you know. So, we have --we have great open space. We have great parking.
We are actually leaving a few levels on some of those -- those apartments on the table,
so to speak, so we have plenty of parking that we could -- we want to be extra. We want
to be bigger. We want this to be -- to be nicer. I'm not going to lie. Everybody liked it at
-- at P&Z, except -- except traffic. It was all about the traffic. The three dissents we got
it was about traffic. Traffic. Traffic. Traffic. You guys are connecting Ruddy. Can you
not connect Ruddy, you know, which connects into something that historically there was
a bad connection with Waltman to what was the old Meridian Road. It got fixed when
they redid the interchange. Not the interchange, but they did the one way couplet.
Excuse me. When they -- when they redid the one way couplet -- how long ago was that
now? Five or six years ago now. They fixed that whole intersection. So, Waltman could
-- if it was done 20 years ago would have went through. Twenty years ago. But it got cut
off 20 years ago and so here we are kind of -- Waltman is a dead end road. It's a dead
end road right now. It goes back into about 20 acres of county properties that are
surrounded by the city and most of those people -- not-- not that we are -- I'm downplaying
their concerns and everything, but there is -- there is about 20 acres of people back there
that are on county property, surrounded by the city, that want to maintain their little dead
end road back there and I get it. I mean it's -- for being that close to the freeway it's kind
of nice. But I think the greater good is served by making that Ruddy connection, doing
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 145 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 34 of 65
traffic calming on it to mitigate it as best as possible. Our traffic study originally with
Waltman met all the thresholds without Corporate. We added Corporate. In hindsight
now like we had to to --for our phasing. We have to rip out the Waltman bridge to replace
it, because it's a substandard bridge right now. So, we had to do Corporate anyways.
But at the time when we first did it we weren't planning on doing Corporate, at least my
traffic engineer wasn't. So, all the numbers we have meet it at ACHD, at the traffic
engineer level, at the peer review level, the ITD level, they have even jumped in not really
looking at our site specific, but looked how we impact the interchange and their future
lane percentage and they want to get 150,000 out of this, which we have agreed to for
our percentage of a future lane that hasn't been built yet. But the traffic -- we meet all
that. Even though it may not seem intuitive that we would, that this is going to be, you
know, tragic if we connect it, the improvement to -- by the heavy lifting we are doing on
all these bridges and connections to -- to safety, emergency response, police, fire, as well
as just people wanting to get onto the highway a little quicker than having to go all the
way around Linder and up, it's an improvement. It's going to be maybe painful for some
people, because they didn't have that much traffic. They were on a dead end road and
now they are not. But it is the thing to do from an engineering, from a planning, from a
city planning standpoint it's a little painful, but it is the thing to do. So, we feel like we got
a good residential next that transitions from west to east. The density comes in I think
overall around ten to the acre, which -- it's kind of an R-15, even though we got R-8, R-
15 and R-40, the overall mix is right in there about ten, which isn't too extreme. We feel
like the bridges we are putting in and the offset connections that there was a little bit of
confusion last time, whether -- if we were going to do it or ACHD was going to do it later.
We are going to do it. We are going to do the highway connection in Corporate and a
water line going north in Waltman is going to be extended with a -- there is enough right
of way on the north side, we have since went and surveyed it, that we can get a sidewalk
on the north side. I contacted Valley Regional Transit right up front in this second iteration
and said, hey, do you guys want a bus turnout. Oh, no, no, no. We will never go back
there. But just to make sure people can get out to Meridian Road. We said okay. So,
that's why we are doing the sidewalk out to Meridian Road, so pedestrians -- to take
advantage of Valley Regional Transit to do so without having to walk in the road and, then,
when the commercial develops between us and Meridian Road they will put in the
sidewalk on their side and everything in the world will be complete. But we have got great
amenities. One of the -- you know, in the motion for approval I -- she threw out three or
four things to see if she could bring a few of those people back on the traffic and it just --
it just didn't happen. But one of the -- one of the things was open space. It's an interesting
give and take. It's all about trade offs. And there is a way to give more open space in the
-- in the -- in the -- in the multi-family. Even though we are already at -- excuse me. I got
my stats here in front of me. Even though we are already at 25.7 percent qualified in R-
40, we are way up there in R-40 and overall we are at 18.7 over the whole thing. So,
mean we have really good qualified open space, great pathways, great connections. We
have got all that covered. There is an interesting thing I throw out for your -- your
consideration. If you feel like there needs to be more big or centralized open space and
if you look at the -- the text. She put this on here. Great. Thanks. I just saw that up
online there. It was something I sent to Sonya in an e-mail -- that the building that's right
-- if you could put -- Sonya, put on the -- the bill -- the color rendering, please. There you
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 146 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 35 of 65
go. So, that building directly west of the pool and clubhouse, 5,000 square foot clubhouse
complex there, great pool, great clubhouse. Two story building. We could -- we could
eliminate that. I propose that we add those two stories back in the -- you know, on two of
the three buildings going south, because those are currently two stories and make them
threes. I think there is still good separation to the -- to the single family residential. It's
over a hundred feet away. So, there is good horizontal separation. So, you know, we
made them two and there was some thought process on the two. Three wouldn't be --
wouldn't be terrible for us. And you would increase -- you would have more larger open
space, I guess, if you will, even though they are pretty wide linear open spaces between
all buildings and pathways and I think it would jump the overall qualified of the whole site
up to like 20 percent from 18.7. So, it's an option. We like what we proposed. We think
the stair stepping of the stories was a good plan, but if that was really important that even
more open space next to that full -- it's -- it's -- it's easy for us. That's an easy thing for us
to do. But other than that, I think we got a great cohesive, pedestrian friendly -- even
though we are not in the Ten Mile plan, I think if you at least -- if you look at the single
family residential portion of it we are about half alley loaded, non-front dominated and
about half not, which kind of goes back to my speech on the last hearing about, hey, all
sites have a mix of front and alley when you do the alleys. But the idea was to have a
variety of housing styles, architectural styles, price points and still kind of fit in with
everybody. So, I hope I'm not ignoring anything. The schools was something that was
mentioned. I know one of the -- I just scanned through those letters today for the hearing
real quick and I apologize if I didn't catch everything, but the Baraya Subdivision was
thrown out there that I have been working for 15 years with the same applicant, you know,
what a -- or same owner, you know, coincidence. He actually has 14 acres set aside over
there that the school district has not moved forward on yet after 15 years for an
elementary school. It's just sitting there. So -- so, even though we may not know exactly
how many students are coming and exactly when, we also don't know how many school
sites the school district's got in their -- in their back pocket that have been set aside and
they are kind of playing -- they are playing their game in trying to stay ahead. Doing a
Clang good job considering the circumstances. One of the fastest growing places in the
country. But at the same time I know they have a 14 acre site on Baraya that doesn't
have a school yet, that he would like them to either buy or not buy, you know, and they
haven't done anything yet with it, so -- so, that kind of plays into the whole school -- school
thing and I know this general area, after our last hearing, had some discussions with
previous Council Members and they are like, hey, this is an area of town that's not and
one of our overly -- oh, my gosh, we are over the top in the school standpoint. Even
though all are challenged, this is one of the lesser challenged if you compare different
areas of town, because it is older, and so we are introducing some new energy really -- I
mean from the schools. It helps the commercial for us to get this kick started. I think it
will be exciting I think after all these years to see something happen on the property and
to move forward with a high quality development, so -- so I guess that's my presentation.
We do agree with staff's recommendation for approval. We like our phasing. We think
phase one and phase two -- maybe go simultaneously. It's kind of like phase 1-A and
phase 1-B and those are all going to go off of Corporate. We are going to have Corporate
in before those go and, then, we are going to have to shut down Waltman to replace that
bridge and replace the bridge, extend that sidewalk out to Meridian Road prior to phase
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 147 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 36 of 65
three. We do agree with staff. We would propose not doing the berm until phase three
and four. We get it. We are going to do it with phase one. You know, we are -- we do
agree with that.
Simison: Thank you, Matt. Your time is expired.
Schultz: So, yeah, I think -- I think that covers it and I will stand for any questions.
Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Matt, I have got two -- two quick questions -- kind of focused questions. The first
one. Can you give us the -- the quick snapshot of specifics in the DAthat -- that reference
what's being done to Corporate Drive for the first building permit in phase one? The
ACHD staff report talks about 40 feet north of the bridge, but 30 feet south. That created
some confusion. So, I don't know why it -- why it says that, but maybe you can give us a
snapshot of what's going to be done on Corporate. And the next question is going to be
about Waltman. Just trying to really frame those two roadway improvements so it's crystal
clear.
Schultz: Great. Thanks, Councilman Borton. I -- I know this was kind of left hanging a
couple years ago. We weren't crystal clear. So, we wanted to make sure we came in this
time and there was no doubt exactly what we were doing and so Corporate Drive right
away got dedicated back with the original commercial site. They--they had a three million
dollar special taxing district. At the time the one way couplet had not been done. They
had -- they had three times as many trips as we have per day, like 10,000. We have like
3,000. And so they had done for the right of ways there. I believe there is 54 feet of right
of way. Within that 54 feet, if it's off site to us, we are going to do a 30 foot paved, borrow
ditch on both side, sidewalk on one side, detached from the 30 feet and build the bridge
connecting to the existing Corporate Drive improvements. So, that will be one continuous
road. And, then, when -- when the property adjacent to Corporate Drive develops they
will do the curb, gutter, drainage, all those things that you really need to integrate with the
specific site that's going in. In the meantime we do the strip, pavement, like we did on
another subdivision in the area. So, that's -- that's Corporate and we want to do all that
work prior to phase one. In fact, before we -- before we get our first building permit we
need to have that stuff done. And so that's what we are going to do first, so that people
have an alternate route in and, then, we are going to -- and that will happen this winter.
You need to do them in the -- in the winters, because the stream flows. So, that's phase
one would happen this winter and then -- and, then, with phase three we propose phase
one and two kind of go maybe potentially at the same time -- doing the Waltman -- taking
the Waltman bridge out, replacing it with a good bridge. We are doing a ten foot detached
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 148 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 37 of 65
city pathway along the full length of Waltman and detached sidewalk and we are going to
replace that bridge and, then, there will be a crosswalk -- because the north side is where
we have a clear corridor, put a detached sidewalk away from the existing pavement, all
the way out to the existing sidewalk that's Meridian Road. And, then, when -- when the
guys come in -- and ACHD may come back later and put some curb and gutter, you know,
that's kind of -- you know, figure out the drainage a little better. But they supported this.
They kind of called me crazy two years ago when I offered to do it. You know, you
shouldn't have to do that, you know, and I'm like, well, Meridian might get mad at me. And
they did. You know, if -- if -- you know, by doing that -- we don't technically have to, but
we want to to make sure all those issues are handled for your sake, even though
technically it's not required for ACHD's sake. So, I hope that explains it, Councilman
Borton.
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One quick -- just summarize the Waltman Lane
improvements that are being provided off site. I know staff recommends that it -- that it
begin with a building permit of phase two, instead of three, but regardless of when that
starts are you -- is the existing Waltman Lane staying and you are expanding it to the
south to make it wider? What exactly is happening?
Schultz: Yeah. Sorry about that, Councilman Borton. Along our full frontage it's getting
widened. Along our full frontage, including the bridge, including that -- that little section
on the other side where it says pump house, that's our regional irrigation pump house,
but that will get widened enough to -- between the existing and new pavement, we will
have a lane -- a center turn lane and another lane. I'm not sure if -- I think there is a bike
lane. And, then, we have detached -- detached sidewalks eight to ten feet away with a
ten foot sidewalk and that full frontage will be done.
Borton: Okay.
Schultz: The off-site portion all we are going to do is a sidewalk and that off-site portion
would be something -- again, that's ACHD's existing road. It works for the two lanes until
the Commercial comes in and they are going to need a turn lane and they are going to
need to widen it like we did to match right in, do curb, gutter, sidewalk on their side on the
south side. That north side is an old -- it's in the city, but there is no curb, gutter, sidewalk.
Obviously you can see it on this aerial. It's an old storage -- storage lot that kind of got
done way back when and, unfortunately, they never had to put in the improvements that
typically would have to be put in modern times, like landscape buffers and sidewalks and
all that good stuff, so -- so, we are --we are kind of-- we are doing what they should have
done, again, you know, previously, you know, but it happens.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
Simison: Councilman Cavener, did you have some questions before?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 149 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 38 of 65
Cavener: I did, Mr. Mayor. Council Member Borton touched on some of it, but the piece
that I would like to focus on -- you had touched on in your -- your narrative for Council
tonight about some traffic calming measures.
Schultz: Uh-huh.
Cavener: I didn't see them reflected in the ACHD staff report and I'm just curious if you
can articulate kind of what engagement you have had with -- with the neighbors to the
west about that, as well as, you know, the Corporate Drive extension I think is also an
area that needs some focus and, Matt, I will preface it that, you know, obviously, the City
of Meridian have been talking at great lengths about getting the Linder Road overpass
extended and I think that when that happens we see probably what, again, we have heard
from a lot of the neighbors is concern about Ruddy being that access -- if I'm traveling
north or south on Linder and I want to get to Meridian Road, I'm avoiding Overland or
Franklin and so --
Schultz: Right.
Cavener: -- what traffic calming measures have you discussed with them and what are
you proposing to help mitigate those concerns?
Schultz: Thank you, Councilman Cavener. So, obviously, from day one this is a big deal.
I went in and asked ACHD on day one, hey, can we just not connect this. I just knew that
it was going to be, you know, a bad deal and the answer was pretty obvious, but I still had
to ask. You know, the answer is obvious, that, yes, you do have to connect it. Okay.
tried and I was serious, because I would rather not for my sake, because it opens up all
these issues that we are talking about right now, so -- so -- so, it's interesting -- we didn't
get a lot -- a lot of feedback from those particular neighbors. Most of our feedback -- 98
percent of its been from the Waltman residents. From those particular residents.
However, our site design, at least for our site, again, meets all thresholds for ACHD.
Ruddy slash Kearney as it turns north, we have designed -- you know, you could have
went straight over. I don't know if you noticed in that commercial site they kind of had a
road going straight over to Corporate more or less, that was -- that was more of a straight
shot and more of a, you know, speedway. You know, we -- we did a minimum radius
curve on Ruddy, which is a traffic calming measure. We do have islands at each end and
we are necking down the road to kind of get people to think about going slow right in front
of the curve and there is just not a lot of room before you get to Walmart. So, it's not a
long quarter mile straight run where people are going to get up on staff and go on, you
know, 60 miles an hour. So, from a traffic calming for us we don't -- we think we have
incorporated it. Really what it's about is the people that didn't have any traffic on Waltman,
the -- you know, on a dead end road they are not going to have traffic, you know, and
some of the people that live in the back of this existing subdivision over here to the west
since the mid '90s, you know, being at the back of the subdivision, they are now going to
be in the middle of a subdivision or on the front end of one side of the subdivision. So,
that traffic is going to change.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 150 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 39 of 65
Cavener: So --
Schultz: So, one last thing. It's about traffic calming. So, ACHD did put in there -- and
we had a two hour hearing at ACHD the first time around. This time around there are,
hey, we have already been through this. This was a two hour hearing. Neighbors. We
talked about it and you just don't know exactly which road is going to get the most. There
was one road that may get around, you know, nine hundred, a thousand trips, which is
still within thresholds and we are having to set aside 20,000 dollars that may be might get
used for some off- site traffic calming, whether that's speed bumps, having to do a speed
study after this is all built out and so we are setting aside money for that not knowing
exactly how people are going to go. And Linder overpass is going to help us on it-- I think
to get people maybe to some other places that they would otherwise go straight through
to Meridian Road. They might just go to the Linder overpass. So, it's going to help.
Cavener: So, Matt, what I'm hearing is you -- is you kind of feel like you have addressed
the traffic calming within your development. There is 20,000 dollars put into a fund after
the fact for off-site improvement based on traffic usage. The neighbors can request a
traffic study at a certain point in time, either before or after the Linder Road overpass and
those funds can be used to mitigate the impacts of how they are going to use Ruddy and
Waltman and Executive, is that -- or Corporate.
Schultz: And that's exactly what ACHD says in their staff report.
Cavener: Thanks. I -- I did not see that particular piece. I have been flipping through it
to make sure that I didn't miss it, but I must have. So, thank you.
Schultz: It's in there, yes.
Cavener: Eighteen thousand. Not 20.
Schultz: Yeah. I was rounding. Yeah.
Simison: Council, any further questions for the applicant? All right. All right. Thank you
very much. So, Madam Clerk, I know we have people who have signed up to testify this
evening, many with presentations is my understanding, so --
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, that's correct.
Simison: -- with that I will turn it over to you. If I could just remind all the applicants we
need -- or all the people who come to testify please say your name and address for the
record and you each should be afforded three minutes.
Weatherly: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The first person who will be joining us via telephone
is Clair Manning and, Clair, if you unmute yourself you should be able to talk. Mr. Mayor,
we are just having a technical difficulty with this citizen so far. Bear with us for a minute.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 151 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 40 of 65
Simison: I see we have Clair Manning in the Zoom, not on a telephone, with their hand
raised.
Weatherly: Clair, I'm going to make you a panelist, so that you can talk. It's going to
switch you over. So, please, stay on the line. Don't hang up.
Manning: Hi. Are you able to hear me now?
Weatherly: There we go, Clair. Thank you for your patience. Yes, we can hear you.
Manning: Thank you. My name is Clair Manning. I'm at 650 West Waltman Lane. Were
you able to give me control of the screen? I asked for this earlier. I'm not sure that went
through.
Johnson: Mr. Manning, I don't see that I can give you access. I'm trying to. But I'm happy
to click through for you in the interest of time. You see your presentation on the screen.
Manning: Oh. Okay.
Johnson: Okay.
Manning: Okay. So -- all right. Given that, I will go ahead and go. Good afternoon, Mr.
Mayor and City Council. Before we begin let's take a moment to look at my -- my
motivation. I can see how it would be easy to write us off as a few malcontents trying to
impede progress. However, the fact is we know this area better than most people in
Meridian and we want what is best for the city and at the end of the day we are citizens
you represent, we will be the ones in the next 20 years trying to get out of our driveways
and we will be the ones attending the funerals of the children killed on Ruddy Drive, so I
would ask that you take our testimony seriously as you consider this critical decision. So,
this is a -- this is a very strategic location that goes beyond my neighborhood. This
decision will affect the entire community. For that reason we will need to take a holistic
view of the area. Here at the end of Waltman and the -- the future commercial
development, that's the heart and soul of this city. It's one of the last great pieces of real
estate we have left. As Council Members you have the opportunity to leave a great legacy
here. This could be like the crown jewel of Meridian. Unfortunately, this area has a lot of
constraints you need to consider. Traffic study estimates this development will bring 2,928
trips per day and the target for a new collector is 3,000 trips per day. So, further, this
study does not take anything into account for that future development in that area. This
means you do not have all the data and you already are at your traffic targets. So, I know
the comfortable thing to do here is leave the traffic to ACHD. However, there is really too
much at stake here for you to wait for your next traffic study. So, we need to look outside
our traditional boxes and make sure we are making the right area here. Could you go
ahead and go back one slide, please, Chris. Okay. Thank you. So, you know, personally
I think this traffic is undeveloped. If you take a look to the north that's where the high --
there is already high density three story apartments that will connect via Corporate that
will drive traffic west to Peregrine. The adjacent neighborhood will connect via Ruddy
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 152 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 41 of 65
Drive. This will result in a large volume of traffic through residential to the freeway. So,
as mentioned before, ACHD has taken a wait and see approach to this, but you can see
the common area Ruddy Drive is prime for an accident. So, we really need to be proactive
before there is one. So, go ahead and advance to the next slide, please. So, leaving this
area let me direct your attention to the left-hand graphic. Those three story high density
apartments will exit on Corporate Drive towards the freeway and a mere 500 feet -- 15
feet later high density traffic from Walmart will merge across three lanes of traffic to the
freeway to enter this area. I will direct you to the graphic on the right. You must use that
left-hand lane where you can only sit about seven cars before you block an entire lane of
traffic into the city. Please advance. So, once on Waltman there is a lot of redesign that
needs to make -- happen to make this Corporate -- Corporate development work. But no
amount of engineering is going to get rid of that left-hand turn into that lane. This means
that you are going to have -- you are always going to struggle with getting cars into this
complex before you block an arterial road intersection. So, for that reason you really need
to carefully limit the amount of traffic -- eastbound traffic you are putting in and putting
that high density development down the street really isn't going to get you there.
Simison: Clair, if you could wrap up, please.
Manning: Yes, sir. So, you might see what -- this is what the traffic's already like. So, I
will go ahead and wrap up now. Next slide. So, unfortunately, this development is not a
good fit for this area. As such I would ask you to deny this application. Please don't let
your legacy be rubber stamping high density developments that the infrastructure cannot
sustain. Rather, I would ask you to take a holistic view of this area and leave a legacy
your grandchildren can be proud of. Thank you. Can I answer any questions for you?
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Manning, thanks for your testimony and joining us virtually tonight. You
made a comment that I'm hoping to get some additional insight. I don't know if you have
got an image you can speak to that, because you -- you talked about the Ruddy common
area being prone for accidents. Can you speak a little bit more about what you referred
to, like what you are meaning about that? And I don't know if you have any imagery that
you can point to to help me understand what you are saying.
Manning: Yeah. Could you go back to that second slide, Chris.
Weatherly: One moment, Mr. Manning.
Manning: Yeah. I don't know if you guys can --
Weatherly: It's just taking a moment to pull it up.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 153 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 42 of 65
Manning: Okay. Sure. One back, please. One back from here, please. Okay. So, you
see where that Ruddy Drive arrow is? So, essentially, I believe that -- that entire
neighborhood cut off by Ten Mile Creek is going to probably use this as an access to -- to
Meridian Road. So, as you are going through there there is like a common area. So,
there will be like a large volume of traffic going through there right where like there is a
common area and a lot of kids playing.
Cavener: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any additional questions? Okay. Thank you very much.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, next is Joseph --
Simison: We have a Michael Swenson with their hand raised and have they signed up to
testify on this item?
Weatherly: They haven't signed up to testify, but I have noted that their hand is raised.
After the people have gone that have signed up to testify, if it's okay with you, Mr. Mayor,
we will call him.
Simison: Okay.
Johnson: So, this is -- this is handheld two. Can the remote Council hear this okay?
Luke, Liz, do you hear this?
Hoaglun: Luke and Liz, can you hear using that microphone?
Johnson: Testing here.
Cavener: No.
Strader: No.
Cavener: Can't hear anything.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, will he come back?
Simison: I have never been through that door, so I don't know.
Johnson: Adrienne, can you stop the screen share so I can start it in here.
Weatherly: I don't know what he said.
Simison: He asked you to do the screen share, so we can start it in there.
Hoaglun: Well, Mr. Mayor, while we are getting ready, I will just share a little bit of a history
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 154 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 43 of 65
here. I have fond memories of this -- this location that Lorchers are going to share. If you
look up on the map above the red square and it says Lyndhurst place, as you come down
to the south there is a brown roof and that was our very first house we owned. We built
-- bought the property. I think it was a stubblefield development back in the early '80s
and those of you old enough to remember the late 70s, early '80s were not good times.
We picked up the lot real cheap. My wife and I newly married and had a little curb to it
and so we built the house, a little walkout basement and a deck and we got to look over
the Lorcher truck farm and is very bucolic and nice -- you know, we were in a subdivision,
but we were out in the open space. So, I understand why people want to preserve what
they have there and with Ten Mile Creek right there it was a very wonderful spot where
we -- our two children were raised in their early years. So, just kind of interesting to see
how things have changed over the years and -- yeah. And so it's -- there you go.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, it looks like we are ready to go now.
Simison: All right. Thank you. Thank you for that trip down --
Hoaglun: Memory lane. You're welcome.
Simison: Yes. If you could, please, state your name and address for the record.
Lorcher: All right. Joseph Lorcher. 740 West Waltman Lane.
Simison: You are recognized for three minutes.
Lorcher: Okay. As Brad said, he's looked over my farm when he lived there and -- and
we are still farming it, so I want to make sure and point out that what you see on the
screen with the red around it, that is my place. I am the north person across from the
development that people keep talking about when the north is being developed. I have
no plans to develop my seven and a half acres. We have been here since '75. We still
farm it. We still grow crops. We still plan to grow crops. I have a son that will probably
take over when I'm gone and plan on doing the same thing. So, I want to point out that
Greenhead Street -- stub street is not an option. At the Planning and Zoning they kept
talking about punching Greenhead through. Won't happen. So, just wanted to get that
out. Don't plan on developing. Matt said a couple times when the north -- property to the
north gets developed. That's me. I don't plan on developing. At the meeting they talked
about the same thing. I don't know where any of those ideas came from. There is no
plans for me to develop the seven and a half acres. There we go. This is where it says
that as long as I have more than five acres I can -- and my land is devoted to agriculture
-- I do not use the city water or city sewer and you need written permission for access
through my property. It won't be coming from me. Therefore, Greenhead Street will not
be a second access point to distribute traffic from the west neighborhood. Ruddy Drive
will be the only access point. If you look at the map to the -- on the left, right -- currently
the subdivision to the west of us has four access points onto Linder Road. Once they
open up Ruddy Street that's going to be one going to the east. Probably three-quarters
of that subdivision is going to be going through that one street. And, then, if you look at
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 155 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 44 of 65
the one that's to the right we have got Ruddy Street going through and turning right on a
curb right in front of the park area. This is where I think where Mr. Manning was talking
about where the death of the children will come is in front of that park where they are
turning on a blind corner right through a park area and there is going to be 3,000 cars a
day going through that area. As far as Waltman Lane is concerned, we got a nice ten foot
sidewalk in front of the development and, then, it shoots across and there is no bike lane,
five foot or six foot sidewalk to the north and they are going to have to cross the street to
get across the street with the traffic that's going on there and same with Corporate Drive,
there will be just a sidewalk. No bicycle lane that will help. So, still we are talking safety
of kids. Waltman Lane right now is like a huge sidewalk. There is at least a hundred
people a day that walk up and down that lane because of the lack of traffic.
Simison: If you can wrap up your testimony.
Lorcher: I'm sorry?
Simison: If you can wrap up your testimony, please.
Lorcher: Okay. In conclusion, with only one access point, all traffic coming from the west
neighborhood will be concentrated on Ruddy Drive and add the development's own traffic
on Waltman Lane and Corporate Drive will make this unsafe. Safety issues for
pedestrians bicycles, are our main concern with all traffic going through Ruddy and onto
Waltman Lane, especially by the proposed park and the crosswalks or the lack thereof.
I'm not opposed to developing these 36 acres, I'm tired of the weeds and the fire hazard
that this land is currently at. I'm opposed to the high density residential development. We
need a low density mixed use development that will follow Meridian's Comprehensive
Plan. I have lived and worked on Waltman Lane since 1975 and would love to see this
gateway to the city be more than high density apartments. It should be a gathering spot
for entertainment and small businesses. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Not a question but just a comment. I'm sure Council shares this, but to reassure
you that we have no intention to take your property. It's your private property. You own
it. It's up to you what you do with it. So, we are not going to do that. That's not how it
works. Just wanted to tell you that.
Lorcher: Thank you. What I was kind of -- people keep talking about -- especially Matt
and the -- and the Planning and Zoning Commission's kept talking about how this was
going to be developed, as if it was a done deal, and there is no plan for this to be
developed.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 156 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 45 of 65
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I do have one question for Joe.
Simison: Yes, Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Lorcher. Joe Lorcher. I'm sorry, Councilman Borton. Joe, I was just curious
watching you -- you and your brothers work on that truck farm when you were much
younger, are your -- do your kids work that hard still on that truck farm? Because you
guys really put in the hours out there.
Lorcher: My son Joe, he still helps me, and Kelsee worked until the day she turned 18
and said no more. So -- so they did work the farm going through school.
Hoaglun: Thank you, Joe.
Simison: Thank you. Council, anymore questions? Okay. Thank you very much.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, next is Sondee Watts. Sondee, if you want to just head through
that door over there, Chris will help you on the other side with your presentation.
Watts: Hi. My name is Sondee Watts -- oh. Are you ready?
Simison: Yes. State your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.
Watts: Okay. Thanks. My name is Sondee Watts. I live at 2099 West Snyder Drive in
Meridian. I will begin with the ACHD policy manual. In Section 7207.33. If a proposed
development only has one access to a public street, that is a local street. A maximum
forecast ADT to be allowed at any point on a local street access is 1,000 and is subject
to Fire Department requirements for the provision of a secondary access. As you can
see here Ruddy Drive connects two local streets and has one access point. Tanner Creek
will provide -- I'm sorry. Tanner Creek will produce 3,019 trips with 90 percent vehicles
traveling east and ten percent vehicles traveling west. Using the same formula as Tanner
Creek used, we can estimate the number of vehicles per day that will be generated from
the number of single family homes that are like located in the west neighborhood. Seven
hundred homes times 9.5 trip rates equals 6,654 total vehicles per day. If only 50 percent
of the neighborhood vehicles travel east, this is an estimated 3,332 total vehicles per day.
With the combined trip from the west neighborhood and Tanner Creek Drive development,
Ruddy Drive will experience 3,633 vehicles per day and Waltman Lane will experience
6,049 vehicle trips per day. In conclusion, Ruddy Drive is a local street connecting to
another local street. Ruddy Drive only has one access point. Greenhead Street is not an
option for a second access. The estimated 3,633 vehicles per day vastly surpasses a
maximum of 1 ,000 ADT allowed. This connection should be subject to the Fire
Department's requirements for the provision of a secondary access. Waltman Lane
infrastructure cannot sustain the estimated 6,049 vehicle trips a day. Ruddy Drive
connection will substantially increase traffic and negatively impact Waltman Lane. The
Waltman Lane-Meridian intersection and at that Meridian-1-84 interchange. One of the
Commissioners from the last meeting expressed their concern that this connection would
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 157 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 46 of 65
create an unsatisfactory service D or E for Waltman Lane. The sheer volume of additional
vehicles is shocking and will compromise the safety of children, pedestrians, and
bicyclists using Waltman Lane. It is unacceptable. The stub street connection is
irresponsible and does not contribute to smart growth. For this reason please deny this
development. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you very much.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, next to Steve McCarthy.
Simison: And I think we have got a pattern where they do return from the room.
Hoaglun: Yes.
McCarthy: I hope everyone can hear me okay. My name is -- hi. My name is Steve
McCarthy. I live at 10685 Pattie Street. I'm going to talk about the Meridian interchange,
the Waltman entrance, and the traffic congestion studies to show it will not be a safe
transition with additional traffic proposed by this development. As you can see here
residents in three different directions will be coming home by using one left-hand turn lane
into the Waltman Lane's entrance. Drivers have .14 miles to safely get from the off ramp
to the turn lane. That equals to one minute, according to Google. From the Meridian off
ramp you have to cross two lanes to reach the left turn lane. You have one minute to try
and cross over two highly congested lanes to get into the left turn lane during p.m. peak
traffic hours. This does not give the driver the adequate amount of staging and time
needed to execute and accomplish this safely. For us this will disrupt the through traffic
lane going into Meridian, because drivers are trying to get to the left lane and we will
cause traffic to back up. Oh. Sorry. I forgot to go to the slides. All right. This slide here
is showing the actual turn lane. Additional items to consider. The Meridian-Waltman
intersection receives 50,889 vehicles per day and, then, the other statistics that we found
was that the 1-84 Meridian eastbound on ramp is considered the fifth most congested
segment of road in Ada county. Not intersections, not interchange, but actual road. Give
you a second to look at those numbers. The eastbound on ramp received 52,182 annual
weekday traffic volume. The westbound on ramp receives 51,182 annual weekday traffic
volumes. This area is critical to the interchange and intersection function. This is an area
where motorists are responding to the intersection or interchange by accelerating and
maneuvering into the appropriate lanes to solve a complete turn. Access conditions too
close to intersections or interchange ramps can cause serious traffic conflicts and impair
the function of the affected facilities. Drivers make more mistakes and are more likely to
have collisions when they are presented with complex driving situations created by
numerous conflicts. This development and the Ruddy Drive connection will create 3,000
plus new traffic conflicts daily and will add a substantial amount of new traffic to the
already very highly congested intersection interchange. Added traffic will not attract new
businesses or desired communities. This area needs to be protected with open space
and low-dense, mix-use development. By doing this it will reduce and alleviate traffic
during peak hours and distribute the daily traffic throughout the hours of the day. I hope
you all carefully consider the detrimental impact and dangerous risks this development
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 158 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 47 of 65
will have on traffic, the gateway to the city, and public safety. Please deny this tonight.
Thank you all for your time and do you have any questions?
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you very much.
McCarthy: Thank you.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, next is Joe Lorcher.
J.Lorcher: All right. My name is Joe Lorcher and I live at 1182 West Avalon Street and
I'm here to discuss the original vision and master plan of the Southern Gateway
Entertainment and Hospitality District and the Downtown Master Plan is intended to help
identify potential opportunities and strategies for strengthening downtown's role in the
Meridian community in the Treasure Valley. As you can see, the Southern Gateway
Entertainment and Hospitality District is a large part of the master plan and this plan calls
for this district to show zero percent land use for residential. The focus for this district
originally was strictly for commercial use and some examples for this framework of the
Southern Gateway District between Waltman Lane and the freeway should include hotels
and upscale restaurants. This will enforce the -- the vision of the great hospitality from
the City of Meridian and it will be a better visual than a wall. The extensive landscaping
will help show that attractiveness and the beauty of the City of Meridian, which a wall
would not. A multiple purpose and entertainment sporting facility could serve as an
anchor point for cultural and community events, such as concerts, youth sports, festivals,
holiday bazaars and many other community building events and fun fact, Meridian is the
only city in the Treasure Valley that doesn't have a concert venue and all of this would be
a lot more attractive than a wall. These are four focus areas for the Southern Gateway
District that should be focused on. Livability. Create a more -- more places for the
community gathering and entertainment. Touch on this just before and this would be a
great opportunity to make a better culture in Meridian and this is also a golden opportunity
to build a Boise Hawks baseball field, seeings as Boise can't decide on where to put it. It
would be a great attraction from the freeway and it would create a lot of visitors and create
a lot of money for the City of Meridian. Mobility. One thing lacking in Meridian is parking
opportunities for downtown. A parking garage would fit great here and help fill that void.
Prosperity. Improve and attack -- and attract new businesses to Meridian. Sustainability.
Promote and encourage innovative and progressive development. In conclusion, the
Southern Gateway Entrance is the first impression visitors will have of downtown Meridian
from 1-84. It needs to be developed to enhance and beautify the gateway. A wall does
not give a positive first impression. Downtown Meridian is running out of land and we
need to preserve open spaces. This area of land needs to be developed strategically.
We need downtown elements that will contribute to a mixed use urban environment. This
area -- area could potentially promote entertainment and gathering places, which would
attract both local residents and visitors, resulting in economic growth. We have a real
opportunity here to make this a unique and creative and innovative progressive --
progressive development. Let's not waste this opportunity and high dense residency is
highly inappropriate for this area. Please carefully consider the negative impacts that we
have presented, the missed opportunities this development will bring to Meridian and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 159 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 48 of 65
deny this development. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you very much.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, next is Kelsee Lorcher.
K.Lorcher: My name is Kelsee Lorcher -- oh. My name is Kelsee Lorcher and I live at
2099 West Hunter Drive. First I would like to point out if you look at Melvin Watts' letter
that is submitted in the public comment, on pages five, six and seven, you will see the
formula and it shows the work of the math for the overcrowding a Peregrine Elementary.
Also in the West Ada School District letter for this development they say that the kids from
Tanner Creek might have to go to Pleasant View Elementary and Owyhee High School,
which is eight miles away. You can see that on page four of Melvin Watts' letter. Also the
letter only chose three developments as examples. There is many more happening, so
those -- more kids could already be going to Peregrine by the time Tanner Creek is
finished and also the Linder interchange isn't planned to be complete for another ten to
15 years. So, Waltman Lane will receive the brunt of that neighborhood. Matt Schultz is
relying on Hawkins' land to the east be developed as commercial, so their combined
developments will be mixed use as a whole. We have seen a situation before with
Hawkins and the Stapleton Subdivision where Hawkins owned a piece of land that he
was going to develop commercial, but, then, sold it off to Conger who developed that land
primarily with residential. Therefore, Hawkins plans should not have any influence on a
decision today. In this meeting we have no idea what we will actually do. As you can see
on the map, this area is for mixed use community and the comp plan shows only 20
percent of the development should be residential, not one hundred percent. There are
many sales goals with this development. One is to sustain, enhance, promote and protect
elements that contribute to livability and high quality of life for all Meridian residents and
also objectives and action -- actively implement action items in the Destination Downtown
master plan. Continue to develop and implement the desired vision and special areas --
areas with specific plans and along key transportation corridors and plan for appropriate
mix of land uses to ensure connectivity, livability, and economic vitality. This development
fails to provide safe pathways and bicycle lanes through downtown Meridian. It harms
the city's traffic flow as a gateway of the city. It will overcrowd our public schools and fail
to maximize -- maximize use of in-fill land by utilizing mixed use development and sales
to create economic growth and it fails to uphold the comp plan for a mixed use
development. It is located in a special area with specific plans in the Destination
Downtown Master Plan and need to be protected to reflect those visions. High density
housing is extremely inappropriate for this specific area. Responsible growth solves
problems. Irresponsible growth creates them and this is irresponsible growth. If you
approve this development today you will set a tone to future developers and citizens that
the comp plan and its tools, like the Destination Downtown master plan and Communities
In Motion do not matter. That the last two years of hard work and the 2,000 dollars spent
creating the comp plan hold no meaning or value to Meridan's future growth. Please deny
this development.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you very much.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 160 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 49 of 65
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we have Nick Eller next. He will be joining us on the phone. And,
Nick, I have unmuted you and you are welcome to state your name and address, please.
Eller: Yeah. Hopefully you can hear me all right. My name is Nick Eller. I live at 851
West Honker Drive in Meridian. I am in the Mallard Landing Subdivision directly to the
west of this development. And, you know, I got to hand it to those who showed up tonight.
I'm happy they did. I couldn't have said it better. So, I really have to just follow on to what
they have said. You know, traffic is a major concern. Ruddy Drive is a concern. I don't
have a fancy presentation to go through, but one of the items as I was -- that has been
completely overlooked in this since the very beginning is this is getting tucked in at the
very end of Waltman, as was previously described, and, then, we are talking about this
commercial development --well, the commercial development is going to have to do road
improvements, tear up the road, do the sidewalk. So, what happens when this
development is complete and we got to shut down Waltman for the -- you know, these
improvements to be made. All of a sudden everything's back flowing through the Mallard
Landing and Blue Horizon Subdivision back into Linder. Yeah, it's a short period of time,
but, you know, if we got six months of dealing with that, you know, is that worth it. I think
the phasing of this -- one, it's just not the right time. We don't have all the information we
need for the ACHD impact studies of the commercial development, combined with this
development, combined with the development to the west, the Linder freeway crossing.
There is a lot that's just completely unknown. I don't think it's the right time and -- and as
previously described in the other presentation -- or discussed in the previous -- previous
presentation there is so much more we can do with this piece of land. You know, going
through what you just heard do you really think this is the best we can do for Meridian
right up to Gateway? I don't think so. You know, if we approve this, you know, you might
be taking the chance that the commercial development that is bringing the jobs and
bringing community, that -- that could be out the window. So, you know, it's -- it's
something that you have to decide tonight whether you are willing to take that risk and
have another apartment complex. So, that's -- that's essentially where I stand. I stand
with those who live near me. I stand with my community. I stand with most people in
Meridian who will have to pass this every single day.
Simison: Thank you very much. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Not a question, I guess just more of a -- of a comment for the record for -- for
Council and for the public attending. I think Mr. Eller contacted a number of us today to
share his concerns. I know it hasn't necessarily been added yet to the -- the record yet,
but I'm sure the clerk will get that addressed and make sure that's included in our packet
as well. I appreciate it.
Simison: Thank you, Councilman Cavener. Council, any further questions? All right.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 161 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 50 of 65
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to allow Michael Swenson to talk now and he is the last
one that I see with his hand raised.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Swenson, if you would state your name and address for the record.
Swenson: Okay. This is Michael Swenson. 815 West Waltman. And I can actually give
you -- everybody's hearing me, I'm assume.
Simison: Yes, we are.
Swenson: I can actually give you some history that the -- they actually ran Waltman
through way back in the '90s and it was a disaster. It was like bumper to bumper cars.
This was right at the beginning of Mallard Landing. There is a whole lot more cars out
there and if you look at Mallard Landing it's --there is no through streets, other than Ruddy
maybe, but it's going to be a disaster and people are going to get hurt. If you are looking
at where the school is -- well, the school of Peregrine is on the other side of Linder, so
they are going to have to cross all these streets with people taking a shortcut and if you
look at the roads -- if you take Franklin over to Meridian Road and go to the freeway that
way, that's six stoplights. The proposal for -- for using Waltman, that's wide. What are
they going to do? You know, I think there is some things we should consider. Back in the
old days they were actually going to use Waltman as an emergency access. Well, that
was poorly planned. Well, when they were going to use part of my property and they
offered me 500 dollars for it and I said are you kidding. So, I didn't sell. But they never
were able to get much more than the bicycle through there. So, it's -- it's kind of a disaster.
I think we need to look at this more. I'm -- I mean I think we need to do something. This
should be more than cow pasture. I'm -- I'm on board with that. Should we look at partially
developing this and see what the land development -- development looks like? Should
we use this -- this access as emergency vehicles only? We could do that. That's what
Waltman Lane was supposed to be. But somebody built the fence too close and it never
worked. But we have the advantage to actually do something with it and looking at what's
going to happen in the long term. That's it.
Simison: Okay. Thank you very much. Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you very
much, Mr. Swenson.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we have one more hand in the online audience.
Simison: Okay. And if there is anybody in the audience who would like to testify we will
get to you right after this next person.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, this is Denise LaFever.
Simison: Okay. Denise, if you can state your name and address for the record and you
will be recognized for three minutes.
LaFever: Denise LaFever. 6706 North Salvia Way. And I would like to commend you for
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 162 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 51 of 65
doing Zoom. I think it's awesome. I would like to start by saying I'm not for or against this
project. I attended all the steering committee meetings and Conger and the
representative -- or representative was there for all of the meetings. What I do have an
issue with is going back to the west side of this property and taking a little sliver of mixed
medium -- or medium density and taking that little sliver and floating it across the whole
entire section. This print -- this practice sets it up for-- as long as you have a designation
anywhere touching a property you can float it across the whole entire thing. We had talks
about that and my stand was is we need to get some ruling around it or better guidance
around that. I can understand if you floated the designation to a stream, a road -- you
know, if you were floating this designation to Ten Mile and that was the reason for floating
it, that might make sense, but to just go back through in a Comprehensive Plan and seeing
if a designation floats is on -- on one of the sides, you can float it across the whole entire
project, I don't think is appropriate. And, then, this one is not any fault of the developers,
nor do I fault them for it. It is a fundamental flaw at the state level. I'm getting increasingly
concerned as a taxpayer that we have had a levy go through for Ada county that failed.
You have developers that don't pay impact fees. That's a state issue. But when you look
at your taxes, our taxes continue to rise and a good chunk of that is made at the school
district. Like I said, I'm not for or against this project. I am very concerned about the
practice of floating designations and especially taking a small sliver and floating it entirely
across the whole entire zone. What's to stop the next property from taking a little sliver
of housing and floating across it or floating the commercial all the way down. I mean
that's when I'm more concerned about it. So, thank you for your time and once again not
for or against the project.
Simison: Thank you, Denise. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Not a question. Just, Denise, it's nice to hear you. It's been a long time since
we have seen you in Council Chambers. Appreciate you being here tonight.
LaFever: Thank you.
Simison: All right. Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to testify
on this project? Okay. And there is nobody else online who has yet to testify that I can
tell who has had their hand raised.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, that's correct.
Simison: Okay. Well, then, with that I will turn this over to the applicant for ten minutes
for his comments.
Schultz: All right. I will try to cram it all into ten minutes. Do my best. Matt Schultz. 8421
South Ten Mile. Do appreciate everybody showing up and as you can tell the number
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 163 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 52 of 65
one greatest concern -- and it was the concern of some of the Planning Commissioners
is traffic and fixing something that should have been fixed a long time ago, but wasn't and
here we are doing a lot of heavy lifting to put in the roads that need to be put in and I do
just reiterate that Corporate -- it was never figured into any of our original calculations
and I called the engineer -- professional engineer that does these things and we don't
scare him. He just -- he -- that's what he does everyday is -- is traffic studies all over the
county, allover the state to certain standards. They get peer reviewed. I said, hey, what
do you think the split on Corporate is? You know, how -- you know, we are showing a
hundred percent going on Corporate. We are building Corporate. So, something's going
down on Corporate. He says, man, probably about 20 percent. I mean -- but that's what
engineers do. They -- they make judgments. Now, do you agree with it? Maybe, maybe
not. I think it's probably more, but he thinks it's about 20 and I think that's a big deal that
Corporate is going in in terms of diversifying and splitting up the traffic in and out for this
site. So, it is not all focused on that totally rebuilt intersection that ITD did that nobody is
using right now, you know, that has five lanes I think. It's -- yeah. Five lanes right there
that nobody's using on Waltman. I mean somebody is using that, because nine residents
on Walmart are using it right now, so -- so, obviously, the intersection was built for us. So,
I just want to cover through real quick and say that to Mr. Manning's point and Mr. Joe
Lorcher, Senior's, point -- and it's an interesting point that I thought about after our last
hearing and we have been through a lot of hearings together over the years and if we
convert it -- our multi-family residential to single family residential and dropped a hundred
units, it would be the same amount of traffic and the point is that traffic -- apartment traffic
generates about 40 percent less than single family residential traffic. It's interesting. I
never really thought about it before. I'm a civil engineer and I have been in the business
for 25 years, but talking to these -- these traffic engineers that is -- it's interesting that we
could drop the density on this, do you all things residential and have the same amount of
traffic -- coming out of a traffic study. So, I just want to point that out there as well, that
-- you know, that -- that it is more efficient to do high density apartment residential,
because they generate less trips and that's all these numbers are is based on trip
generation, standard level of care that everybody uses across the whole valley for the
size of a site and I do want to say that the future uses were incorporated. I believe they
are on a 2030 or at least back in the day it was a 2025 model on future traffic. So, all that
is incorporated. We are just not doing simple -- you know, simple traffic studies here, not
figuring the future uses into it and adjacent uses. Those are all incorporated into the traffic
study. So, when I see people kind of pulling numbers and saying 700 homes and times
two and times three, I really do -- all due respect, they are not professional engineers with
25 years worth of experience. They are very intelligent people. It seems obvious that
that's how much traffic it would generate, but it's not. That's not how much gets generated
and I can't point out the flaws in their exact formulas, but -- because I'm not a traffic
engineer myself, I'm just a basic jack-of-all-trades civil -- or least I was. Been working
around traffic engineers for a lot of years. So, I do apologize to Mr. Lorcher when he says,
hey, Matt is saying that's going to develop someday. Well, the city does say that will
develop someday in their master plan medium density residential. Someday. May not
be within his lifetime or his kids' lifetime or my lifetime, but maybe someday and the city
is planning for that to develop and we don't know when that will be. I have seen -- I have
seen the estate plans change in my 20 years in the valley on land and people said no
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 164 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 53 of 65
way, no how, and it's sold. Not that he will, not that his son will, but it could change. So,
that's how we approach things is that it could in the future. But, again, we did not
incorporate that connection to our traffic study, that was something that got pointed out at
P&Z that that could be a future connection, but that was never incorporated into our traffic
study, nor was the Linder overpass incorporated into our traffic study, just so everybody
knows. And it still meets all thresholds. So, this is not a death area. We are not going to
have a bunch of-- a bunch of funerals on Ruddy Drive. We have detached sidewalk. We
have traffic calming measures. Kids need to stay out of the street. You know, that's --
and there are lots of people in the street today like they said, walking. They will now have
sidewalks. Have detached sidewalks. They will have a safe way to travel to downtown
Meridian. In terms of -- we do have three accesses. We do have going through to the
Landing and we did up Corporate. We do have Waltman. We have three accesses,
instead of two. And, again, our traffic study worked on two, we are providing three. So,
when one of them is down we still have two and that's -- and that's the beauty of our
phasing plan. We still have two accesses at all times. Let's see. As far as Hawkins
buying it or not, she's right, who knows what's going to happen. But I know you guys
have control of what happens -- what happens on that piece and I know that this back 40
is not an office commercial. It really isn't. The Boise Hawks have taken a pass at this in
the past and the previous Mayor had a conversation with them, they wanted to -- Meridian
to pay for half of it and that didn't go anywhere. I mean -- so, this -- this has been around
the block on commercial and a lot of the downtown Meridian plan was based on that
commercial going through about the same time they did the downtown Meridian plan and
I'm not saying that downtown Meridian Plan is bad or faulty, I just think in this particular
area, this particular spot, that an 80 acre mixed use commercial over all of that site needs
exceptional regional access. It needs -- it needs Overland Road behind it, connecting to
interchanges if you are going to have an 80 acre site that's all mixed use entertainment
and I have seen those, they are pretty rare. Do we have 80 acres? And you don't see
them. And where are they? They are right on the main Fairview, Eagle, right on those
main roads. They are not back on a dead end road on Waltman. They are just not. And
so what we are doing is breaking this up into a logical transition. It will be an overall mixed
use. You have control over that future that's up against -- up against Meridian Road and
for all intents and purposes it's still going to be a big site. Over 30 acres. There is still
going to be a lot of opportunities to do a lot of great things on and ours is great. We think
they both make a really great combination. So, what you are doing -- you are not
sacrificing anything by approving a high quality development, provides a high quality
landscaped entry to the -- to Meridian, which doesn't really have any great landscaping.
There is one by the hospital, but the rest of them aren't too great. And we are going to
do a great one. As far as Steve McCarthy and the -- the on ramp, we are contributing
150,000 dollars to ITD. They -- they calculated our percentage of that future lane that
they are going to add that's a 15 million dollar lane. Our contribution of one percent --
which I think is kind of high myself, but that's what the traffic engineer came up with. So,
one percent of million, 150,000, and that's what ITD started doing lately is proportionate
share. I talked about destination downtown. This density is appropriate. I think ten is --
is -- is a good medium in the middle. It would be like an R-15 overall. I believe we have
four, seven, and 17 to the acre. It all averages ten. We believe that's an appropriate
density close to the interchange, close to downtown. That's where we want a semblance
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 165 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 54 of 65
of density, even though I don't count this as super high myself. As far as the phasing and
all that and Waltman shut down, like I said, we are going to have Corporate. Corporate
is going to be open on day one and that's going to be a great, you know, connection that
while Waltman -- the bridge that's substandard today, that needs to get fixed today, is
going to get fixed by us and ACHD in their cooperative agreement and that's how we are
doing both of these bridges is ACHD and us are going to split the proportion of the share
of those that need to get put in. So, it's not all on us. It's not all on ACHD. They are
happy to have us come in and share that with them and we are happy to have them share
it with us and plus the pedestrian bridge that we are putting into the commercial. So,
know I skipped over some things, but I only had ten minutes. I think we have a high
quality appropriate, well thought out in all aspects, plan that really does -- it adds a nice
entry to Meridian and we are looking forward to getting going this winter on it. So, thank
you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any additional comments or questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Question for the applicant. It's not your business necessarily to know the timing
of the neighboring property's development, the Hawkins property, and what it may
become, but this looks like residential use to me. I don't consider this mixed use. Do you
think -- do you -- have you had conversations where you think it might be possible to
come back in conjunction with that property under a joint development agreement or
some type of cooperation where you were -- you both put your plans in front of the city
around the same time. Just curious if that's possible from your perspective.
Schultz: Council Woman Strader, thanks for that. Short answer. I don't. Long answer.
This comes up whenever we talk about mixed use. It comes up all the time, where you
are one parcel -- in this case nine parcels within 23 parcels that are considered mixed
use and does every single parcel have to be mixed use or does it have to be mixed use
over the whole thing and can the whole thing be looked at as a separate -- I think in this
case because of the Ten Mile Creek, where it's at, because being a quarter mile back off
of Meridian Road is a nonstarter for commercial, it is dead, there is no value for
commercial in this thing. People have great ideas about what could go there, but
nobody's coming forward to say they want to do it and it really does -- no matter what
happens with us, we believe this residential is fitting within that mixed use of a logical
west to east where you want residential west, you want the commercial east up against
Meridian Road, with the Ten Mile drain in between the two and there might be more
residential in the Hawkins one. They came to our neighborhood meetings, which means
to me that they are there -- obviously they are interested. They are serious. They have
-- they have hired an engineer. Now, do they have that -- that anchor user to get them
really excited to move forward, I don't know yet. But they -- they said they want to do it
like Lakemore, which I don't know if Lakemore is cool or not, but they are saying they
want to do a mixed use office commercial. That's -- that's their vision. Now, were they
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 166 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 55 of 65
lying to me? They have no -- if they have no reason to lie to me -- that that's what they
would like to do. Now, those plans could change. But that's what they said that they
wanted to do.
Strader: Thanks for the feedback.
Schultz: No problem.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: My -- my concern for this project lies sort of similar -- the same page as Council
Woman Strader. I personally have never been a fan of making decisions on development
that doesn't meet the FLUM with hopes that future development will. I think it leaves the
door wide open for who knows what and so I -- that's my -- that's my greatest concern. I
wanted to state that before we -- we possibly go on to the next section of this public
hearing, so --
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I just wanted to mention also -- I mean that is my core concern. In terms
of this design or this actual setup for residential use, I actually think it's very well thought
out for a residential use. I just -- yeah. I really have to think about the -- the whole
economy for Meridian. We are really over reliant on residential and I know residential
could be a piece of mixed use, but I worry about setting this precedent of floating this
much without having like a joint application with that neighboring property. But I did want
to just say, you know, I -- I don't mind the apartments. I wouldn't mind having -- even
trading up for more -- a couple of stories on some of those buildings for more open space.
I just have some concerns about our overreliance on residential and I have a lot of bigger
concerns with the school situation, but I'm going to mention that in future meeting topics
and not pick on this one application, because it's a systemic issue.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I had a question for Matt. You mentioned the 150,000 dollars that you are
putting in for an extra lane on the -- it sounded like the overpass area. Was that the lane
going to Boise on the eastbound or is that -- is that -- correct? Okay. Can you speak --
Schultz: That's how I understand it, Councilman Hoaglun, is that it is that eastbound lane
over to Eagle Road, 15 million bucks, which I was like, whoa, you know, I hadn't heard
about it until they hit us up for it.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 167 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 56 of 65
Hoaglun: Yeah. I understand. And, Mr. Mayor, if I follow up -- can you speak -- the left-
hand turn to -- into Waltman has been much discussed and it is -- it is an issue to have a
single lane -- most of ours are now double -- double turn lanes and different things. Is
there any room for expansion on that? Because that--that is problematic. We are putting
a lot of cars into that area, especially if commercial does develop right there at the corner,
what room do they have, if any, for that left turn?
Schultz: Mr. Hoaglun, I think that room would come out of that commercial property, if
they did need it. You know, if they did it. I do want to say obvious -- it's an obvious, hey,
man, how are all these people going to get in there. But we do have a Corporate entrance
as well and that's the other benefit of the Corporate entrance, which has a signal, which
has a left turn, which, you know, it's -- it's -- it's built to handle this -- this traffic. So, it
gives us two ways to turn left and get over -- and out -- in and out.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, just to follow up on that point.
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: That -- that is an interesting dynamic -- because if I were in that development,
if it were here, going out to the new Corporate that connects and coming out gives you
more time to get into the left-hand lane, as opposed to coming -- turning right from
Waltman. That -- that does give you an option, so -- and that's the thing that makes this
a difficult decision, because there are many aspects of this that you have thought through,
Matt, you and your team, and trying to mitigate and -- and putting investment into the
bridges and sidewalks, the connector roads, pathways and those types of things that it --
I have often been wondering why this property hasn't developed for so long and -- and
there are just some issues -- and I think part of it is that -- that traffic portion and you have
gone a long ways in trying to figure that out. Like other Council Members have mentioned,
I'm a little concerned about the uncoupling of the property and -- and trying to make sure
that this truly meets the intent and desires of our future land use planning and what we
do with this property and what that looks like. Dead end roads are difficult and I do
commend you for making that -- not a dead end road completely, but it is -- it is still
problematic on that and the connection with Ruddy from -- from a city standpoint, I
completely understand opening that up, having that cross-access, emergency vehicles. I
was a little concerned for our neighborhood when living at Ustick and Ten Mile when they
put up the signs and they made the detour through our subdivision, it's like, oh, no, people
are going to find out, here is a back way they can get -- get around the intersection. But,
fortunately, it is very slow going through the subdivision. I mean it is just the nature of it.
So, fortunately, it didn't last. I'm sure people will remember it when the time comes again,
but I'm not quite so concerned, but it-- it is an issue we have to think about and especially
when time frames are so vastly different in our community where things should have been
done when they were done and they are -- and they are not and we have -- we have to
wait. So, you know, this one's a little -- a little problematic on a few fronts, but there is a
lot of good things about it and quality development for -- for that back half. But as I said,
I do have some concerns.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 168 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 57 of 65
Simison: Council, while a few others get their time, I'm first going to say thank you to
whoever used my words from the State of the City. I appreciate people actually watching
and implementing that into it and -- but in all seriousness from the --from my perspective
as a nonvoting member on this topic -- and it's even the perspective of when you look at
it where they talked about responsible versus irresponsible growth. On one hand this is
very responsible in what I view as responsible growth. They are solving problems. They
are putting --they are making road connections where they should exist. They are making
sidewalk improvements that otherwise would not be there. But it does doesn't come
without challenges as well, but it -- from -- just from the development perspective I do
think that no matter what goes into this property eventually we will have to see Waltman,
Meridian somehow reconfigured to allow for greater stacking, turning movements. I can
say from someone -- this is one of the very first things when I started with the city back in
2007 when I -- this first came in in the old City Hall and so I have followed this one for
years, but I have always felt that this land, as problematic as it is with the transportation
network, it is the -- can be as much as the community identifier that exists, if anything. I
mean if you look around that intersection -- I mean on one hand you got the Roaring
Springs, even though they are not right on the corner on the other side. You have got
Home Depot and Winco, nothing special from that standpoint. So, this could just be
another commercial aspect that doesn't have to be a game changer, but I don't know that
a residential apartment does it for me from that standpoint. Maybe it is -- I have always
hoped there could be something that could be off hours from normal commute times to
address and alleviate the 8:00 to 5:00 peak traffic time, not dissimilar to what some people
testified is how do you create a destination location where you can get people that are
coming during other hours when you are not fighting traffic to and from. So, it is a complex
property. I don't disagree with the others in terms of -- I think I would want to see a larger
plan. I think that that's what's been a concern theme throughout the last 13, 14 years with
this property is the larger plan and some people have done a lot of good work to assemble
the properties that allow for a common larger opportunity and I feel like we are halfway
there, at least to know, but not fully and it's -- so, it's a struggle from our standpoint. But
appreciate everything that Matt has put into it and their team in terms of the effort they
would go for the off site to make this a better area for the community. Not maybe
necessarily for the people that live in that area now, they may not see it that way, but I
think for the community as a whole it is definitely trying to make those improvements. You
turned off your mic, but Councilman Borton.
Borton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I can't add a whole lot more that hasn't already been
discussed. I think some of the questions have highlighted a lot that is really good with
this application and a lot of concerns that Matt's made a very strong effort in trying to
address. You know, among all of those considerations two things are certainly true. This
application absolutely reduces traffic, compared to what could otherwise go there. It's
more traffic than what exists today, obviously, with an empty field, so it's hard to appreciate
that perspective. But the existing entitlements would allow traffic way beyond what this
provides. There is information in the-- in the materials from the traffic engineer, it's around
30 percent of what would otherwise. It's a big number. More than zero. But it's a lot less
than what it could be. But what it also provides, without any question, is a whole heck of
a lot more strain on our school system than the existing designation and its existing
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 169 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 58 of 65
zoning. So, those are two truths that we balance, in -- in trying to determine if this makes
sense. I agree with the Mayor that the traffic challenges with this area plague this
property. I have seen it from -- since 2007 and before as well. I wrestle also with the
mixed use community designation. I remember a couple years ago when the request
was to amend the comp plan for medium high density residential I believe was the
designation and -- and the applicant was --was patient I guess to --to know that the comp
plan was in the process and that -- that change of some -- or perhaps any change was
going to come to this area and its designation and -- and part of me thought I might see
that vetted through the comp plan process that this area would be changed to medium
density or medium high density residential as a land use designation, but it wasn't. So,
somehow that group collectively assessed and determined that this area shouldn't be
medium high density residential, but, instead, should have that mixed use community,
which is a -- I think a very different -- truly a very different field, especially a gateway area
like this and -- and to rely -- we have done it a few times where you try to rely on adjacent
property owner to pick up -- to Councilman Hoaglun's question, if you have got to have,
you know, three -- at least three different uses in an area, if one of them gobbles up -- you
know, the first one in gobbles up one of the uses, the other areas hopefully pick up the
slack and cover the rest, but that's a -- that can be a dangerous way to -- to try and plan.
So, that gives me some added concern here, too, that--that it might not truly fit the mixed
use community identity that -- that our comp plan amendment has provided to us. So,
those are just some additional thoughts and concerns from the information we received,
from the testimony today and -- and all of the written information we have been provided,
which was -- which is very helpful.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Because I think all Council has kind of weighed in, I'm happy to share some
thoughts, which I think fall somewhat in line with -- with the rest of my colleagues. If I
recall, I supported this project two years ago and there has been -- there has been some
noticeable improvements then. I think that there is nobody on this body that has any
opposition to the layout, the design of what's before us. When this was before us, the
Linder Road overpass was maybe just a glimmer in, then, Council Member Palmer's eye
and we didn't know where connection points were -- were going to be made and what the
Lorchers' plans were with --with their farm. We, obviously, got a lot of clarity on that today
and we also know that the Linder Road overpass is much closer to being a reality and I
worry a little bit about -- not about the overall traffic count, it's really about what that
learned behavior will become once Linder Road is -- the overpass is completed. I think
with traffic calming it can be mitigated. The question I guess -- I have got a couple of
questions for staff that we can ask now or later is, one, to give Council a little bit better
understanding about the permitted use of floating land use designation and taking what I
think is three acres and kind of expanding it further or why that's a permitted use -- or
permitted change. And, then, just for clarification in terms of process, as I understand
right now, Sonya, we have got a land use designation that's currently listed or permitted
that is now inconsistent with -- with the FLUM. So, any clarification in terms of process
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 170 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 59 of 65
about if that's something that we at a bare minimum need to pick up tonight?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, I will respond to the request for more information
on the floating the designations. The new Comprehensive Plan states that future land
use map designations are not parcel specific and adjacent abutting designation, when
appropriate and approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application,
may be used. A designation may not be used, however, across planned or existing
commercial -- or, excuse me, collector or arterial roadways. It must not be used on a
parcel not directly abutting the designation and may not apply to more than 50 percent of
the land being developed. All other changes require an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan future land use map. Did that answer your question, Councilman
Cavener?
Cavener: Yes, it does. Thanks, Sonya.
Allen: You're welcome.
Simison: Council, is there any further comments or questions or is there a motion to close
the public hearing?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we close the public hearing.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Strader: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay.
The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bernt: I guess I will start out, Mr. Mayor.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: You know, I got to give credit to Matt and his staff for, you know, presenting a better
project than he did last time. There were a lot of things that he mitigated and a lot of
things he listened to that he changed and so I commend him for that and his staff. For
the most part, from a bird's eye view, I think this development isn't bad, I just think that in
the interest for our city, this parcel is zoned --you know, mixed use community is probably
the best option and, unfortunately, my concern that I had before is the same. I have never
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 171 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 60 of 65
-- like I said before, I have never been a fan of making decisions on development that it
doesn't meet the FLUM with hopes that other developments -- surrounding development
will connect the dots. I ultimately just -- I just -- I just don't think that's a -- that's a wise
choice and a wise move for the city. I think that it's always best to do it right the first time
and, you know, it's just -- it's just sort of a reality for me and so that's where I stand at the
moment and, again, I appreciate Mr. Schultz and -- and -- and what he's done to present
what he presented, it's just -- it didn't quite meet the mark for me tonight.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I -- I echo pretty much the same comments. I really do like this development's
design. I think it's well thought out. I don't mind the density. I do mind setting the
precedent of floating a designation that takes up such a small piece of this property across
the whole thing, so that more assurances that the, you know, neighboring property would
help us get to the right answer in the long run. I don't want to discourage Mr. Schultz. I
-- again, I really like a lot of aspects of it. I'm totally putting the school thing aside, because
it's just so systemic that we just have to have a separate conversation about it I think, but
in terms of the floating, that's really my -- my hang up. If this could -- I think it's possible
that -- you don't control that other property -- if -- if for some reason this doesn't pass
tonight and there is a path toward having a joint development with that neighboring
property, I would highly encourage you to come back with a more comprehensive vision
for this area. That in my mind would be a --take me much further toward justifying floating
farther than I think that we normally would. So, that's my feedback.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Again, it's always interesting listening to my colleagues
and hearing their insight. Council Member Strader and I share I think the same concern
about that -- that floating element and -- and I don't know what the right number is and
clearly I think it's one of those things that if the land I guess to the east of you had been
developed and we know what that is, it sounds like maybe Council would be more
supportive and so I -- part of me understands that, but, then, the other part of me says,
well, it feels a little bit like we are penalizing the one who is here first and that we as a
body can -- because they were here first we can be beholden to future development to
meet what we desire for the region -- for that area and clearly we have done that before.
I'm not saying that is the best practice in all cases, but it is something that we have done
before and -- and, obviously, will be a feedback we will hear from staff for any future
applications. So, I appreciate the commentary tonight, but I think overall I'm supportive
of the application. I think it should go forward. You know, one of the things that we haven't
talked a lot about is -- you know -- and I know a lot of people use this as a gateway and
they view this project as concerning because this area is a gateway, but I look at it as a
great way to also bring additional people into our downtown and when you look at kind of
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 172 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 61 of 65
the four corners and, yes, the four corners are separated by an interstate, but you have
got retail and restaurants and a children's museum to the east. South you have got, you
know, the Wahooz and the waterpark and we have got these kind of big corners that
generate a lot of traffic and a lot of commerce, but what we don't have is the residential
piece and I think having a residential piece is an important component of this area and so
I -- again, I'm supportive of the project. I think it's the right project for that piece of land
that has a lot of challenges. There is a reason why it hasn't went, you know, full
commercial is because of the challenges we have talked about and I just don't know if we
continue to wait and hope that we are suddenly going to get 20 years later what we
envisioned 20 years ago.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Yeah. To touch on something Councilman Cavener
talked on, you know, there is -- there is a -- there is a uniqueness to this property and --
and, you know, it's not a parcel on -- on Franklin Road that you can go, yeah, 65 percent
is good enough, you know, we can -- we can make that work and -- and -- and there is --
there is one good leg to this that's been presented, but to get it across the finish line is
going to take two legs for me and -- and -- and for the folks that are here tonight, you
know, it will change. Someday there is going to be a project come along that's going to
-- you know, it may not be a hundred percent great about it, but that's going to come along
and -- and it will develop and it's not going to happen I don't think tonight with this one
leg, but it was a -- it was a good first -- or second try, I guess, at it, because there is a lot
of good things about this and we are getting there that your traffic issues are still going to
be some work needed on that, but for me it just -- we need to see the whole thing and
make it more unique that we can go, yes, this is it.
Simison: Any further comments or do I have a motion?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we deny application H-2020-0024, Tanner Creek Subdivision.
Strader: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second and I think our city attorney would like a little bit
more information from you.
Nary: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, because this is an annexed
property that is requesting a rezone and development agreement application, it would be
helpful -- I think I understand your rationale, Council, from listening to the discussion, but
if you could at least articulate your reasonings for findings on that, since it is already
annexed.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 173 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 62 of 65
Bernt: Let me look on my notes. First and foremost, I move that we deny this application
because I think we should uphold the current Comprehensive Plan designation or the
FLUM designation of mixed use community.
Strader: Second agrees.
Simison: I have a motion and a second that agrees to the -- as to why. Council, is there
any discussion on the motion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Questions for maybe the motion maker or the second. Is there a
communication that the applicant or one of the neighboring property owners could provide
you in the next few weeks or months that would satisfy your larger concern about the
FLUM? I ask that in that -- again, if that's where some of our concern -- to at least see if
there is something from the -- it sounds like the Hawkins folks to provide. Again, I don't
know if it exists, but clearly if it doesn't exist the applicant could withdraw, but at least to
be able to create that opportunity for that type of feedback to be provided.
Bernt: I don't -- I don't know. I would -- I don't know what that looks like.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think normally if we deny an application there is a certain waiting period before
an applicant has to come -- can come back to us. I guess the only feedback I would have
is that if the Hawkins property were to come before us or if they were to jointly come
before us, I would be open to preemptively waiving that waiting period in the event that
that could happen. I don't think that quite gets to what Councilman Cavener is saying,
but I think -- I don't know if Mr. Nary has a method for which we could do that, but I would
be willing to more holistically look at this area if the two developments were -- if there was
a way for the two developments to come before us at the same time.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, Council Woman Strader, so, yes, I think if you
were to have -- there is a one year waiting period between applications if they are
substantially the same project. The -- what you are raising would be something that,
again, depending on what it is, would likely not be substantially the same, because we
are talking about a joint application or a joint development of some sort between the
western property and the eastern property. So, I don't see a problem with that issue,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 174 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 63 of 65
depending on what it is. The other thing that I wanted to clarify is more than I just want
to put on the record, I think I'm very clear on what you are wanting, Council Member Bernt,
but when you say maintain the FLUM, the conversation was three acres of this parcel are
listed as medium density residential and the concern to the Council was establishing a
precedent to float that over the entire parcel and, then, put all of the burden of the mixed
use community on the adjacent parcel and that's what I take by your concern about the
FLUM, that they are not setting a -- you are not wanting to set a precedent -- not
necessarily a percentage, but simply a precedent to put all of the -- one type of use on
one parcel and push all the rest to another. Is that generally the idea that's I think what I
understood from your discussion?
Bernt: Yes.
Nary: Okay. Thank you.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: With that I think I'm satisfied to call for the question.
Simison: Okay. The question has been called. Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
absent.
Simison: All ayes. And the motion to not approve passes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: Thank you, everyone, for being here and for that conversation and, Mr. Schultz,
we appreciate the work you put into that and enjoy your time with your family in McCall.
Schultz: Thank you.
Simison: We will see you back again soon.
Schultz: You will. See you.
Item 7: Future Meeting Topics
Simison: Council, we will turn to Item 7, future meeting topics.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 175 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 64 of 65
Strader: I have a future meeting topic and I don't think we are going to solve it -- but you
and I have talked -- I have told it to you directly. I -- I am having what I could only call kind
of a moral struggle with the state of the school system and really the inability for West
Ada to construct new schools and I -- I would be interested in having a discussion about
how we as a Council, if we want to at all, react to that fact pattern, if we want to consider
some more creative ideas and I -- and -- and, you know, whether it's -- and this is going
to sound a little extreme, so I want to kind of couch this comment very carefully --
Simison: And I'm going to ask you to couch your comments directly to what you would
like a future meeting topic to be, rather than having a conversation about the topic.
Strader: Thank you. Yeah. Sorry, I'm bad about that. I would like to have a future
meeting topic about whether it makes sense, because of our inability to build new schools,
to consider some type of formula for our building permits based on school capacity and
expansion plans and whether -- if we don't see some changes, either from the legislature
or other places, we want to either consider that as a Council or even consider putting that
on the ballot.
Simison: Okay. So, we will have that down and we will have a conversation regarding if
that should be done, that this -- or if there is a desire for Council. Are there any other
future meeting topics?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Hoaglun: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I thought I had one, but in looking at the calendar I don't think it can be
accomplished. I was wondering if we would find out if we are going to have a Fourth of
July fireworks show in our community this year and it seems that today's the 23rd, we
have our budget work -- budget public hearing on the 30th and, then, the next meeting is
July 7th. So, maybe if you could respond to -- are we having a community firework show?
Simison: I will respond via e-mail once that is official.
Hoaglun: Okay. Great. Thank you.
Simison: So, anything else in our future meeting topics?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Maybe not a future meeting topic, but just maybe a quick cursory reminder to
Council. If you have got questions that you are working through to get to staff or Finance
for our budget meeting next Tuesday, do your best to try and get those wrapped up and
sent over today or tomorrow, so staff has ample time to get us a comprehensive response.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 176 of 814
Meridian City Council
June 23,2020
Page 65 of 65
Also if you are planning to meet with directors and whatnot, please, reach out to them.
They have got busy schedules as well. Some of them also have Independence Day plans
and whatnot and they want to go camping, so we are not asking them to make those
meetings last minute. While I know they will do it, I just think we give them as much head
notice as possible.
Hoaglun: Good reminder.
Simison: Okay. Council, anything else or do I have a motion?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, I move that we adjourn the meeting.
Hoaglun: Second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting. Any discussion on the
motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it.
We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:46 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
7 7 2020
MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 7,2020— Page 177 of 814
(�E IDI y ITEM SHEET
Council Agenda Item -
Presenter:
Estimated Time for Presentation:
Title of Item -Zoom
Council Notes:
0
PREVIEWERS:
Department Reviewer Action jK Date
Johnson, Chris 6/17/2020 -2:00 PM
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 4 of 183
E IDIAN
I DA 0
N L H tl*
W
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Item Title: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum
(Up to 30 Minutes Maximum)
Signing up prior to the start of the meeting is required. This time is reserved for
the public to address their elected officials regarding matters of general interest
or concern of public matters and is not specific to an active land
use/development application. By law, no decisions can be made on topics
presented under this public comment section, other than the City Council may
request that the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for a more detailed
discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to further assist you in
resolving the matter following the meeting
Meeting Notes,.
/ E IDIAN
WIN ' L
IDAHO
Planning and Zoning Public Hearings
Staff Outline and Presentation
Meeting Notes:
Changes to Agenda: None
Item #6A: Midgrove Plaza (H-2020-0029)
Application(s): Rezone & Preliminary Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 12.84 acres of land, zoned I-L & C-G, located at 1450 E.
Franklin Rd. at the NWC of Franklin & Locust Grove Roads.
History: This site was annexed in 1996 without a DA; a CUP/PD was approved at that time that has since expired.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial (southern 5.8 acres) & Industrial (northern 7+/- acres)
Summary of Request: Rezone of 1.96 acres of land from the I-L to the C-G zoning district. The area proposed to be rezoned is
designated as Industrial on the FLUM. Because FLUM designations are not parcel specific, an adjacent abutting designation, when
appropriate and approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application, may be used without an amendment to the
map. The Applicant requests the abutting Commercial designation apply to the area proposed to be zoned C-G. Because the rezone is
to the
request.
At this time, no buildings or users are planned; the property is proposed to be subdivided and infrastructure installed for future
development. The property is intended to develop with commercial and industrial uses as allowed in the C-G and I-L zoning districts.
A Preliminary Plat is proposed consisting of 6 buildable lots on 12.84 acres of land in the C-G & I-L zoning districts. Access is proposed
via (2) existing curb cuts on Franklin Rd. the access closest to the intersection will be restricted to maintenance vehicles from the
City, NMID or other authorized entities and will not be used by the public; and (4) existing curb cuts on Locust Grove Road. Only the 2
middle accesses are approved by ACHD via Locust Grove; ACHD has also approved the access driveways via Franklin Rd. with the
western access signed right-out only with full-access into the site until such time as a center median is constructed in Franklin, with the
eastern access gated & restricted to service vehicles only. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement is required between all lots.
The Five Mile Creek bisects the SW of this site & is required to be left open as a natural amenity-use pathway is
required along the east side of the creek which will serve a dual purpose as a utility service road.
required along both Franklin & Locust Grove Roads.
Because development is not proposed at this time, concept building elevations were not submitted. Future structures are required to
comply with the design standards in the ASM.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Ben Semple, Applicants Representative
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: Ben Semple, Applicants Representative (in agreement w/staff report)
v. Key Issue(s): None
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: None
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2020-0029, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of June 23, 2020: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2020-0029, as presented during the
hearing on June 23, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2020-0029 to the hearing date of ____________for the following reason(s): (You should state
specific reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #6B: Ascent Townhomes (H-2020-0039)
Application(s):
Annexation & Zoning
Preliminary Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.97 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located on the
north side of W. Franklin Rd., approx. 1/3 mile east of N. Black Cat Rd.
History: A previous development application was heard by the Commission earlier this year for a MFR development on this property
that was withdrawn by the Applicant before it went to Council.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MHDR (8-12 units/acre) TMISAP
Summary of Request: Annexation of 5.25 acres of land with an R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district is requested
consistent with the MHDR FLUM designation for this property. The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a mix of 39 townhome
units & 4 SF attached units at a gross density of 8.65 units/acre consistent with the uses and density desired in the MHDR designated
area in the Ten Mile Plan.
A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 43 buildable lots, 11 common lots and 1 other lot on 4.97 acres of land; proposed to
develop in one phase. One temporary right-of-way access easement is proposed on Lot 9, Block 6 via W. Franklin Rd.; two (2) local
stub streets are proposed to the west and two (2) are proposed to the east for future extension & interconnectivity. The temporary
ROW easement is required to be released when a local street connection is constructed to this site from a neighboring development; at
such time, the access will be restricted to emergency & pedestrian access only. wide public alleys are proposed for access to the
rear-loaded units fronting on N. Ascent Ave., the main north/south street.
this
development.
Because
te amenities. However, the
Applicant did submit a qualified open space exhibit that depicts 0.55 of an acre (or 11.2%) qualified open space consisting of 2 large
common open space areas & ½ the street buffer along Franklin Rd. This calculation is actually higher as the open space exhibit doesnt
include parkways along internal streets. A chil
The Applicant is required to provide off-street parking based on the number of bedrooms per unit in accord with UDC standards.
Although the UDC does not require on-street parking to be provided, the Applicant submitted an exhibit showing a total of 32 spaces
available for guest parking along the main north/south street (N. Ascent Ave.) which should be sufficient to serve the development.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed SF attached & townhome units as shown. Building materials consist of
a mix of horizontal and board & batten siding in a variety of colors with stone veneer accents. Dwelling units range in size from 1,400 to
1,600 square feet. Each alley-loaded unit has a front porch and each front-loaded unit has a covered patio but not a front porch as
required. the
primary façade of the residential structure, Staff recommended revisions be made to the plat & elevations prior to the Council hearing
to comply with this requirement which should also allow for front porches to be provided for these units as desired in the Plan.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Matt Schultz, Applicants Representative
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony:
Matt Schultz, Applicants Representative (response to the staff report) - The Applicant requested a waiver to the requirement in
DA provision #A.f which requires front-
structure. He also asked for clarification on whether or not the entry monument would satisfy the requirement in DA provision
#A.g for public art to be provided in the streetscape along Franklin Rd. in response, if the monument includes a high quality of
design and includes public art as described in the TM Plan, it could qualify; and
Mark Bottles (neighboring property owner to the west) - project, including the density & housing types
proposed
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Susan Quarnstrom
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2020-0039, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of June 23, 2020: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2020-0039, as presented during the
hearing on June 23, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2020-0039 to the hearing date of ____________for the following reason(s): (You should state
specific reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #6C: Tanner Creek (H-2020-0024)
Application(s):
Development Agreement Modification
Rezone
Preliminary Plat
Conditional Use Permit
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 38 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 675 W. Waltman Ln.,
west of Meridian Rd. on the north side of I-84.
History: This property was annexed in 2008 with a concept plan for a commercial development consisting of commercial/office/hotel
uses; however, the property was not developed as planned. In 2018, a plan was submitted very similar to that proposed with the
subject application that was denied at that time, the property was designated on the FLUM as Commercial and a map amendment to
MHDR was proposed. Because the City was working on a new Comp Plan for the City at the time, which included changes to the
FLUM, Council determined it was not in the best interest of the City to approve the application at that time and preferred the Applicant
participate in the Comp Plan update that was in process rather than making changes to the map outside of that process. As part of that
process, the FLUM designation for this site was changed.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR (3 acre strip along west boundary) & MU-C on the remainder of the site
Summary of Request: A modification to the existing DA is proposed to replace the agreement with a new agreement allowing a mix of
SFR detached, townhome & multi-family residential apartment uses to develop on the site in place of the commercial development
previously proposed. (slide 2) The existing DA includes two (2) different concept development plans for the site as shown, which depict
400,000+/- square feet of professional office, hotel, big box retail & smaller retail spaces. (slide 3) The proposed development plan
depicts a mix of SFR, townhome & MFR residential uses which will provide a transition in zoning & uses to the existing homes to the
west and existing/future residential uses to the north, w/multi-family as a transition to future commercial/office uses to the east.
Because the development plan for this site has completely changed from the conceptual commercial development previously approved
and the terms of the agreement are no longer applicable, Staff supports the request for a new DA to replace the existing agreement.
A rezone of 38.47 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (10.13 acres), R-15 (12.20 acres) & R-40 (16.14 acres) zoning districts is
proposed consistent with the Comp Plan FLUM designations for the site.
A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 142 buildable lots & 18 common lots on 38 acres of land; the plat is proposed to develop in
four (4) phases as shown on the phasing plan. The off-site construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek & extension of Corporate
rior to
issuance of building permits in Phase 1; the off-site replacement of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek & widening of Waltman Ln. and
construction of a 5 detached sidewalk along the north side of Waltman to Meridian Rd. is proposed prior to issuance of building permits
in Phase 3; and construction of the berm along I-84 w/associated Phases 3 & 4. Because noise from the freeway will affect future
residents in this area, Staff recommends the noise abatement in the form of a berm & wall as proposed is constructed in its entirety
with the 1st phase of development as a provision of the DA. Additionally, Staff recommends the Waltman Ln. improvements, including
the bridge, take place prior to issuance of building permits in Phase 2, rather than Phase 3 as proposed.
A CUP is proposed for a MFR development consisting of 272 apartment units on 16 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
Access is proposed via the extension of Ruddy Dr., a local street at the west boundary of the site and (2) accesses from Waltman Ln.,
a future collector street, at the north boundary of the site one public street connection in the SFR portion & one driveway connection
in the MFR portion of the development. Public streets, alleys & common driveways are proposed for internal access within the SFR
portion of the development with private driveways within the MFR portion of the development.
Parking is proposed for the multi-family development in excess of the minimum UDC standards; a total of 518 spaces are required &
548 spaces are proposed for a total of 30 extra spaces.
the
central common area to amenities in the SFR portion of the development and provide connectivity to the common areas and amenities
de of
the Ten Mile Creek along the east boundary of the site with a pedestrian bridge over the creek for interconnectivity with the future
commercial development.
-84. The buffer along
the buffer along I-
buffer residential uses from noise of the freeway.
Qualified open space & site amenities are proposed in excess of UDC standards. A total of 3.14 acres (or 14.3%) of common open
-family portion;
(slide 9) & 4.07 acres (or 25.7%) of common area and amenities consisting of a clubhouse, swimming pool, shade structure, fire pit,
pment are
proposed in the MFR portion.
Conceptual building elevation photos were submitted for the proposed 1- and 2-story single-family homes with a mix of alley- and front-
loaded units, (slide 11) 2-story townhomes and (slide 12) 2- and 3-story multi-family structures. The 3-story apartment buildings will be
located along the east boundary adjacent to future commercial uses. Single-family homes along the south boundary will be a single-
story in height.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
vi. In favor: Matt Schultz, Schultz Development (Applicants Representative)
vii. In opposition: None
viii. Commenting: Clair Manning
ix. Written testimony: Michael Swenson, Bill Kissinger
Key Issue(s) of Public Testimony:
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing:
Carolyn Harris, Janice Wright, Kelsee Lorcher, Dan Thaden, Bobbie & Larisa Owen, Bill Kissinger, Clair Manning, Duane
Wiedenheft & Jane Brandt, Karen Christensen, Kim Coey, Melvin Watts, Bethany Cluff, Julie Williams, Michael & Nancy
Swenson - concerns pertaining to school overcrowding, traffic, preference for commercial or low density mixed use rather than
residential; preference for the site to develop with uses that bring more jobs to the community instead of high density residential.
Notes:
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2020-0024, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of June 23, 2020: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2020-0024, as presented during the
hearing on June 23, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2020-0024 to the hearing date of ____________for the following reason(s): (You should state
specific reason(s) for continuance.)
h2
Planning & Zoning June 23, 2020Commission Meeting
Slide 1
h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order:
hoodc, 12/19/2006
FLUM
ILandscape PlanPreliminary PlatG-L to C-
FLUM
Conceptual Building Elevations for FrontREVISED-Loaded Attached Units -
2
3
R 4 40-R15-R8-
5
6
Cross 7 Ln.Section of Berm & Walkway along Waltman -CrossSection of Ten Mile Creek & Pathway-
8
Proposed in 9-Proposed in MultiPedestrian Bridge over the Ten Mile Creek:PortionFamily -Single
10
11
Clubhouse 12
acres (18.74%) to 7.62 acres (20.1%).The qualified open space on the overall 37.87 acre site would increase slightly from 7.21 change in the total unit count or parking spaces proposed.
of the buildings south of the new open space area. This change would not result in a stories on two -to 3-building to the west of the clubhouse and increased the height from 2story
16 unit -however, the open space could be increased to 28.3% if they removed the 2The Applicant prefers the current design which provides 25.7% qualified open space; development to
increase the open space in that area. family portion of the -possibility of reconfiguring the open space area in the multiThe Commission directed the Applicant to consider & be prepared
to discuss the
�E IDIAN�-- ITEM SHEET
IDAHO
Council Agenda Item -6.A.
Presenter:
Estimated Time for Presentation: 0
Title of Item - Public Hearing for Midgrove Plaza (H-2020-0029) by Arthur Berry, Located at
1450 E. Franklin Rd.
Click Here for Application Materials
Click Here to Sign Up to Testify
Council Notes:
ATTACHMENTS:
Upload Date
P&Z Commission Recommendations and Staff Report Staff Report 6/15/2020
Planning and Zoning Minutes Minutes 6/4/2020
REVIEWERS:
Department
Clerk. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 6/15/2020 - 9:24 AM
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 5 of 183
STAFF REPORT E
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 6/23/2020 Legend
DATE:
Iff Project D=ffl or .0 0
TO: Mayor&City Council =kMtW
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533 E.3 - I
SUBJECT: H-2020-0029
Midgrove Plaza ®�
Y I
I
LOCATION: 1450 E. Franklin Rd. (Parcel '
#S1107449996; SE 1/4 of Section 7, -
T.3N.,R.IE.) -- -
I
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Rezone of 1.96 acres of land from the I-L to the C-G zoning district; and,Preliminary Plat consisting
of 6 buildable lots on 12.84 acres of land in the C-G and I-L zoning districts.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 12.84 acres
Existing/Proposed Zoning C-G&I-L existing/1.96 acres to C-G proposed(resulting
in both C-G and I-L zoning for overall site that coincides
with proposed lot lines)
Future Land Use Designation Commercial(southern 5.8 acres)&Industrial(northern
7+/-acres)
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land(pasture)
Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 6 buildable lots/0 common lots
Phasing Plan(#of phases) 1 phase
Number of Residential Units(type 0
of units)
Density(gross&net) Not applicable(no residential uses are proposed)
Physical Features(waterways, The Five Mile Creek bisects the southwest corner of this
hazards,flood plain,hillside) site and is an open waterway;a portion of the site within
that area is in the floodplain.
Neighborhood meeting date;#of January 15,2020;no attendees
attendees:
Page 1
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 6 of 183
Description Details Page
History(previous approvals) ROS#3527;AZ,CUP/PD(Arthur Berry&Doug Tamura)
approved in 1996(expired);PBA approved in 2007(ROS
#8037)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway District
• Staff report(yes/no) Yes,draft report
• Requires ACHD Commission No
Action es/no
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via existing curb cuts on Franklin and
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Locust Grove Roads [2 via E.Franklin Rd., only one of
which is proposed for a public access to this development
(the other access will be restricted to maintenance vehicles
from the City,NMID or other authorized entities);and 4
via Locust Grove Rd.]
Traffic Level of Service Better than"E"for both Franklin&Locust Grove Rds.
Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross There are no stub streets that exist to this site; cross-access
Access should be provided between the proposed lots
Existing Road Network None
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There are existing attached sidewalks along Franklin and
Buffers Locust Grove Rds.that were constructed with the adjacent
road widening projects;no street buffers exist
Proposed Road Improvements None(there are no roadways, bridges or intersections in
the general vicinity that are in the IFYWP or CIP)
Fire Service
• Distance to Fire Station 0.5 mile
• Fire Response Time Falls within 5:00 minute response time area-nearest
station is Fire Station#1 —can meet response time goals
• Resource Reliability 75%-does not meet the target goal of 80%or greater
• Risk Identification 4—current resources would not be adequate to supply
service(risk factors could include multi-story buildings,a
large gathering of people in a single location,and an open
waterway)
• Accessibility Unknown if project will meet all required access,road
widths and turnaround as a site plan was not submitted
• Special/resource needs Unknown if project will require an aerial device;can meet
this need if a truck company is required.
• Water Supply Unknown what the water supply requirement will be as a
development plan was not submitted.
• Other Resources
Police Service
No comments were received.
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent
• Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunk Shed
• Estimated Project Sewer See application
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance 13.91
• Project Consistent with WW Yes
Master Plan/Facility Plan
Page 2
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 7 of 183
Description Details Page
Water
• Distance to Water Services Directly adjacent
• Pressure Zone 3
• Estimated Project Water See application
ERU's
• Water Quality None
• Project Consistent with Water Yes
Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns The water main should be upsized to a minimum of 8-
inches. Unused water service stubs into the property must
be abandoned at the main per Meridian standards.
C. Project Area Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
Legend Legend
tki,aec-L.xaiian I IFro ec LOC CI
nm
�� 7.
Y :
F lu1U-C Low Derin
ih
r Resid ffiiol_
�I m MHOWnsNolan
ih{ V
toenTI
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
RILegend R T Legend --
R: �7
IffProtect LucaIm -I .. ' _ Project Laeaiibn
City Lirrr�
RUT R L'O -
- —Planned Parcels
M1 V. LLL I I I-iL _
r
t�
L--LiIUL-O RU:
R- y
RUT R C-Fl R1
R1
RUT � R-4 -
Page 3
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 8 of 183
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Arthur Berry—4804 Roberts Rd.,Boise,ID 83705
B. Owner:
Same as Applicant
C. Representative:
Ben Semple,Rodney Evans+Partners,PLLC— 1014 S. La Pointe St., Ste. 3,Boise,ID 83706
IV. NOTICING
Planning&Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Notification published in
5/13/2020 6/5/2020
newspaper
Notification mailed to property
owners within 300 feet 5/12/2020 6/2/2020
Applicant posted public hearing
notice on site 5/17/2020 6/10/2020
Nextdoor posting 5/12/2020 6/2/2020
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan)
The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates the southern 5.8
acres as Commercial and the northern 7 acres of this property as Industrial.
The purpose of the Commercial designation it to 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 residential may be
allowed in some cases,but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site
design, connectivity, and amenities. Sample zoning include: C-N, C-C, and C-G.
The purpose of the Industrial designation is to allow a range of uses that support industrial and
commercial activities. Industrial uses may include warehouses, storage units,light manufacturing,
flex, and incidental retail and office uses. In some cases uses may include processing,manufacturing,
warehouses, storage units, and industrial support activities. Sample zoning include: I-L and I-H.
At this time,no buildings or users are planned;the property is proposed to be subdivided and
infrastructure installed for future development. The property is intended to develop with commercial
and industrial uses as allowed in the C-G and I-L zoning districts per the Allowed Uses listed in UDC
Tables 11-2B-2 and I I-2C-2,respectively.
The area proposed to be rezoned from I-L to C-G is designated as Industrial on the FLUM. Because
FLUM designations are not parcel specific, an adjacent abutting designation,when appropriate and
approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application,may be used without an
amendment to the map. The Applicant requests the abutting Commercial designation apply to the area
proposed to be zoned C-G. Because the rezone is proposed to coincide with proposed lot lines so that
two (2)zoning districts don't exist on one property, Staff is amenable to the request.
Page 4
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 9 of 183
The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development:
• "Ensure that adequate water supply and pressure are available for fire protection in areas
suitable for industrial and commercial uses."(3.03.01D)
Adequate water supply and pressure is available to serve this site.
• "Improve and protect creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial,industrial,
and residential areas."(4.05.01 D)
The Five Mile Creek, a natural waterway, bisects the southwest corner of the site and is
required to be left open and improved and protected with development in accord with UDC
11-3A-6B.1 and the Comprehensive Plan.
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services." (3.03.03F)
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.
• "Integrate the Meridian Pathways Master Plan into the site development review process to
ensure planned paths are built out as adjacent land develops."(3.07.02H)
A segment of the City's 10 foot wide multi-use pathway is depicted on the Pathways Master
Plan along the northeast side of the Five Mile Creek to the Franklin/Locust Grove Rd.
intersection.
• "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)
The site abuts industrial property to the west; no buffering is required between industrial
properties or between C-G and I-L zoned properties.
• "Encourage new development to include buffered sidewalks,a sidewalk separated from the
motor vehicle lane by a planter strip, especially on collector and arterial roadways."
(6.01.01J)
Attached sidewalk currently exist adjacent to Franklin and Locust Grove Roads;street
buffers will be required to be constructed with development of the property and landscaped
per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.
• "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped
parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe." (2.02.02)
The proposed property is an infill property that is currently zoned in the City but has not yet
developed.Approval of the proposed rezone and preliminary plat will assist in facilitating
future development of the property.
VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS(UDC)
A. Rezone:
The proposed rezone is for 1.96 acres of land from the I-L to the C-G zoning district to coincide
with lot lines proposed on the preliminary plat in Section VIII.B. The proposed zoning is
consistent with the adjacent FLUM designation of Commercial on the abutting property to the
Page 5
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 10 of 183
south as discussed above in Section V. A legal description for the rezone area is included in
Section VIII.A.
The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to
Idaho Code section 67-6511A. Because this site is already zoned in the City and a development
plan is not proposed with this application, staff does not recommend a DA is required as a
provision of the rezone.
B. Preliminary Plat:
The proposed plat consists of 6 buildable lots on 12.84 acres of land in the C-G and I-L zoning
districts. The subdivision is proposed to develop in one phase.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are no existing structures on this site.
Proposed Use Analysis:
No uses or development are proposed at this time. Future development will be subject to the
allowed use tables in UDC 11-213-2 and 11-2C-2 for the C-G and I-L zoning districts
respectively.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
Future development should comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district in
UDC Table 11-213-3 and the I-L zoning district in UDC Table 11-2C-3, as applicable.
Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3)
Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and
improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3)
Access is proposed via(2)existing curb cuts on Franklin Rd.—the access closest to the
intersection will be restricted to maintenance vehicles from the City,NMID or other authorized
entities and will not be used by the public; and(4)existing curb cuts on Locust Grove Road.
The draft ACHD report does not support the western access via Franklin Rd.but does
approve the service driveway closest to the intersection if it's restricted from public use with
a gate located outside the right-of-way; however,the Applicant and ACHD are still in
discussions on this issue.ACHD has directed the Applicant to submit a request for
modification of policy to allow the access as a right-in/right-out with a road trust to
construct a median in the future in Franklin Rd.Without access via Franklin Rd.,Lot 5
cannot develop without a bridge access over the creek. The City is amenable to the access if
approved by ACHD.
Further,ACHD only approves of(2) accesses off Locust Grove Rd. at 360' and 735' north
of Franklin Rd.(i.e.the two middle accesses).All other curb cuts are required to be closed
with curb,gutter and 7'wide attached sidewalk to match existing improvements. Staff is in
agreement with ACHD's decision as UDC 11-3A-3 limits access points to arterial streets to
improve safety and ensure motorists can safely enter all streets. Therefore,the plat should
be revised to remove these accesses.
Staff recommends a cross-access/ingress-egress easement is provided between all lots in the
proposed subdivision and to the abutting property to the west through Lot 5(Parcel
#S1107449111)to reduce access points via Franklin Rd.in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2.
There is an existing cross-access easement from Locust Grove Rd. across this property to the
abutting property to the west as depicted on the plat that is proposed to remain.
Page 6
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 11 of 183
A note should be placed on the face of the final plat prohibiting direct lot access to N.
Locust Grove and E.Franklin Roads other than those accesses approved with this
application.
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
A 10' wide multi-use pathway is designated on the Pathways Master Plan along the northeast side
of the Five Mile Creek to the Franklin/Locust Grove Rd. intersection. Because a 7' wide attached
sidewalk exists along E. Franklin Rd.,the Park's Dept. is not requiring a 10' wide pathway in that
location or widening of the sidewalk; a pathway should be provided along the northeast side of
the creek in accord with the Plan.
Because the pathway will serve a dual purpose as a utility service road,the pathway should be
constructed at 14' in width with a turning radii of 28' inside and 48' outside.A public pedestrian
easement should be provided along the creek and extend to the intersection as recommended by
the Park's Dept. to allow for the pathway to be constructed in the future.Because there is a 20'
wide sewer easement in the same location as the pathway, no additional width is required for the
pedestrian easement based on the increased width of the pathway-the extra width of the sewer
easement will accommodate maintenance of the shoulder of the pathway if needed.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 :
Sidewalks are required to be provided adjacent to all streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. Five-
foot wide detached sidewalk are typically required along arterial streets (i.e. N. Locust Grove Rd.
and E. Franklin Rd.; however,because there is an existing 7' wide attached sidewalk along both
Franklin and Locust Grove Roads that is in good condition,the Director has waived the
requirement.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to N.Locust Grove Rd. and E. Franklin Rd.,
both arterial streets,measured from the back of sidewalk, as depicted on the plat; landscaping
should be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C as depicted on the landscape plan.
Depict curb,gutter,sidewalk and landscaped street buffers across the two accesses via
Locust Grove Rd.that aren't approved to remain.
Landscaping is required along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
12C. The total lineal feet of pathways with the required and proposed number of trees
should be included in the Landscape Calculations table on the final plat landscape plan to
demonstrate compliance with UDC standards.
Storm Drainage:
An adequate storm drainage system shall be 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.
Waterways(UDC It It
The Five Mile Creek bisects the southwest corner of this site and lies within a 90' wide easement
held by NMID. The creek is required to be left open as a natural amenity and shall not be piped or
otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.1 and should be protected during construction.
A 90-foot wide conservation easement exists for the Five Mile Creek as noted on the plat that is
proposed to be retained and protected.
Fencing(UDC 11-3A- :
All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C.1 and 11-3A-7.No
fencing is proposed with this application.
Page 7 — —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 12 of 183
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manuan:
The Applicant did not submit concept building elevations for future structures within this
development as no uses or structures are planned at this time. Future structures are required to
comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rezone without the requirement of a Development
Agreement and approval of the requested preliminary plat with the conditions noted in Section IX
per the Findings in Section X.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on May 28,2020.At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject RZ and PP requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing:
a. In favor: Ben Semple,Applicant's Representative
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting. None
d. Written testimony: Ben Semple,Applicant's Representative(response to the staff report
—in agreement)
e. Staff presenting pplication: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. None
3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission:
a. None
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
5. Outstandin issue(s) for City Council:
a. None
Page 8
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 13 of 183
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map
®RGEOMATICS 2308 N.Cole Rd.,Ste.G
SURVEYING MAPPING Boise,I❑ 83704
EXHIBIT"A"
Re-Zone Description
A parcel of land,being a portion of that Parcel described in Warranty Deed Instrument No.
111069481,Ada County Records, and also being a portion of"Parcel One"as described in
Meridian City Ordinance No. 748 recorded as Instrument No. 96104790,Ada County Records,
lying within the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7,
Township 3 North, Range 1 East Boise Meridian, City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, being
more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Southeast Corner of said Section 7,thence South 89'46'02 West,along
the South Line of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7,
662.90 feet to the Southwest corner thereof;
Thence North 00"26'59" East,along the westerly boundary of said East Half,590.04 feet to its'
intersection with the northerly boundary of"Parcel One"as described in Meridian Ordinance
No.748,the POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing North 00"26'59" East, 132.88feet;
Thence South 89`34'03"East, 662.73 feet to the East Line of the Southeast Quarter of the
Southeast Quarter of Section 7;
Thence South 00"26'25"West, along said East Line, 125.19 feet to the northerly boundary of
"Parcel One"as described in Meridian Ordinance No.748;
Thence South 89"46'02"West,along said northerly boundary,662.90 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 85,513 Square Feet(1.963 Acres),more or less.
End of Description
Prepared by: Aaron Rush, PL5 C�A�t LAN,)
124�4
sP 4
y�rF QF ,9R.Z.
4�OAF
Page 1 of 1
Page 9
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 14 of 183
EXHIBIT II BII
RE-ZONE SKETCH
SE 1/4, SE 114, SEC. 07, T3N, R1 E
NOTE 588"29'511
330.01'
FOR ADDITIONAL BOUNDARY INFORMATION,REFER
TO RECORD OF SURVEY NO.8037 AND WARRANTY
DEED INSTRUMENT NO. 111069+181.
Q
DESIGNATED 1-L
SCALE: 1" = 150'
14501.
FRANKLIN RD
589"34'03"E 662.71'
N00°26'59"E 500"26'25"W
132.85' AREA FOR RE-ZONE TO C-G
85,513 S.F./1.963 AC. 125.18'
589"46'02"W
POINT OF 662.80'
BEGINNING [� EXISTING ZONE
BOUNDARY
( RDINANCE NO. 748) A
w
\� DESIGNATED C-GLn
W
L q
N >�
Ln
LR
E. FRANKLIN RD _ � 7 B
S89°46'02''W 662.90' 18 17
Page 10
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 15 of 183
B. Preliminary Plat(date: 1/13/2020)
2�GROVE PLAZA SLBDIVISION
Ri F 11:1-— 7,�F�-'--rT-TE F I JI
Nv.,err 0.•,, qCl �� ,.swr�. —•'
R P �
LEGEND
G
72AZM OF
—
��Klr1a431rj
I
, erpc 'la
'i�'� 5 A.� _ 2DlMG A1A SEYHRCNS N6if5
—♦�rw. mcp .�l y. — —�w.a�w as' p ��ca-vr .a....e. d....-.e. �-�., � ....�.�.
r,wv `�� A J.� *t-o�+��} �� yuoz �ra�r•..�.� .e m..e...e��.n.a®.®...
„aree.msP•--' =N�_: iiso.c �.......,ae.�,,..e
r-GrNssP
W wzn+x+c1
---PER
i45O E"FRAHKLIN RD • 4"_
12.831 ACRES
� I r �� � !uoe� ! {a,ggti !/ LA1Y1&fi1F'E ApCMiECt cl w�mr�r.ici s.i a,.
l J�
_ xmo�t
n �7iSV i ICI v,■c Fc-�uNwca` j
L,RVEYING4PMAPPING
a ��• I tlu Isl9�s "1VESTIIIX COfIMTING 3
�PREL.IMIN'MY PLAT w _
W = PP01
Page 11
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 16 of 183
C. Landscape Plan (date: 1/25/2020)
I
£]IPA�LIY TL+N09[AP�PLiV Ol'L9iLL
L2 9
.uwvo.
7450 E.FFvKLlr,Rd
% x. ._;J y
� 5
MO
i4 oc
LqT a 1� } iA.a9J.6[SF '
2 S7+AG 5 ICA Ec6en6E
ja
5 y5
i'hFkEu�lw•hr Fui uw6S'�ll hAw..c8E3.er6
-_. .-Tom.—.- TT1 !�` on•�I
Page 12
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 17 of 183
r✓a�., ate. - 4 �-,—t
.5�
E4'T 4
LOT$ r
114 M 07 5F t 294 F1C
iC-OIOnIWI a —
J M1* ail Xw
}+FSfl E.FRAMJe<L3Pf RD12.d31 ACfiVS k
UL
_ =
I 5'�
r�tPxFi�wrwrrAuwosc,wFPtA Eai-Wo 'll•^,�••..^�#.
LpT S
I W AC
72,62243 EF
tl-L 7IOFIIN67 .�
L0T7
MAC
13.413A SF
_��3PEPWJ_=4�S
�~ 1
Page 13
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 18 of 183
IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. The final plat shall include the following:
a. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be depicted between all lots in the
subdivision and to the abutting property to the west through Lot 5 (Parcel
#S1107449111) in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2.
b. Include a note that prohibits direct lot access via N. Locust Grove Rd. and E. Franklin
Rd. other than those accesses approved with the preliminary plat by the City and ACHD;
remove accesses accordingly that aren't approved.
2. The landscape plan included in Section VIII.A.3, dated 1/25/2020, shall be revised as follows
prior to submittal of the final plat application:
a. Depict a 14-foot wide pathway along the northeast side of the Five Mile Creek in accord
with the Pathways Master Plan as required by the Park's Dept.; and landscaping(i.e. 5'
wide landscape strips on either side of the pathway planted with a mix of trees, shrubs,
lawn, and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one (1)tree per 100 linear
feet of pathway) as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.
b. The Landscape Requirements table shall include the total lineal feet of pathways with the
required and proposed number of trees to demonstrate compliance with the standards
listed in UDC 11-313-12C.2.
c. Depict curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaped street buffer across the two accesses via
Locust Grove Rd. that aren't approved to remain.
3. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division for the
multi-use pathway along the northeast side of the Five Mile Creek;the easement shall extend
to the Franklin/Locust Grove Road intersection for future construction of a pathway as
required by the Park's Dept. The easement shall be submitted prior to submittal of the final
plat for City Engineer signature.
4. A 14-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be constructed along the northeast side of the Five
Mile Creek in accord with the Pathways Master Plan as required by the Park's Dept. and the
Public Work's Dept.
5. The Five Mile Creek shall be protected during construction and shall be left open as a natural
amenity and shall not be piped or otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.1.
6. The access driveway from E. Franklin Rd. nearest the Locust Grove/Franklin Rd. intersection
(230' west of the intersection)that runs along the northeast side of the Five Mile Creek shall
be restricted from public use with a gate located outside of the right-of-way as required by
ACHD. The driveway shall be constructed to Public Work's standards for access roads [see
Supplemental Specifications for access roads(2-16)].
7. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in
UDC Tables 11-213-3 for the C-G zoning district and 11-2C-3 for the I-L zoning district, as
applicable.
8. All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C.1 and 11-3A-7.
9. A new detached sidewalk is not required to be constructed along N. Locust Grove Rd. and E.
Franklin Rd.;the Director waived this requirement because there is an existing 7-foot wide
attached sidewalk along these streets,in accord with UDC 11-3A-17C.
Page 14
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 19 of 183
10. Future development shall obtain approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design
Review from the Planning Division prior to submittal of building permit applications. The
site design and structure(s)shall comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19
and the Architectural Standards Manual.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 A Floodplain Development Permit required for this development. The SW area, including
Five Mile Creek is subject to the terms of a conservation easement,recorded as instrument
No 108135169 for the protection of designed wetlands.Development with floodway,
requires a no-rise analysis.
1.2 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.
1.3 The water main should be upsized to a minimum of 8-inches. Unused water service stubs
into the property must be abandoned at the main per Meridian standards.
1.4 The Geo Technical report submitted for the subject site points out numerous items that will
require special attention. The design engineer for this project should pay particular close
attention to the findings and recommendation for the successful design and performance of
all foundation systems, sub-surface drainage, and utility trench backfill.
1.5 The access driveway from E. Franklin Rd. that runs along the northeast side of the Five Mile
Creek shall be restricted from public use with a gate located outside of the right-of-way as
required by ACHD. The driveway shall be constructed to Public Work's standards for access
roads [see Supplemental Specifications for access roads (2-16)].
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.
Page 15
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 20 of 183
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-
round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any
existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not
available,a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a
single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of
assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final
plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to
evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed
per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code
42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic
service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering
Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be
used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho
Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B.Whitney at(208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment
procedures and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and
activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for
this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to
occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a
performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the
final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404
Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all
building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material.
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.
Page 16
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 21 of 183
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation
district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have
been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be
required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record
drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be
received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures
within the project.
2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A
copy of the standards can be found at
http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272.
2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the
amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse
infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost
estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an
irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for
surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please
contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the
amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse
infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost
estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an
irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for
surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please
contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=186325&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC
hty
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
No comments were submitted.
E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=188777&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
No comments were received.
G. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187168&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
Page 17
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 22 of 183
H. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=186411&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
iv
I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ)
https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=18 6 72 0&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n C
hty
J. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.m eridia n c i 02.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=188996&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
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;
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to C-G is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial which abuts the area proposed to be
rezoned.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment will allow for future commercial
development of the property which will provide for the retail and service needs of the
community in accord with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose statement of the
commercial district.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by
any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited
to, school districts; and
The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse
impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services
within the City.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
This Findings is not applicable as the application 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:
Page 18
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 23 of 183
1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Commission finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, is in substantial
compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation.
(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;
The Commission finds that public services can be provided to the subject property and are
adequate to serve future 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, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of
capital improvement funds.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the
proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers(see Section IX
for more information).
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare;
and,
The Commission 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.
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on
this site that require preserving.
Page 19
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 24 of 183
CAE ���AN ITEM SHEET
IDAHO
Council Agenda Item - 6.13.
Presenter:
Estimated Time for Presentation: 0
Title of Item - Public Hearing for Ascent Townhomes (H-2020-0039) by Schultz Development,
Located on the North Side of W. Franklin Rd., Midway Between N. Black Cat Rd. and N. Ten
Mile Rd.
Click Here for Application Materials
Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at Hearing
Council Notes:
ATTACHMENTS:
Des
Planning and Zoning Recommendations and Staff Report Staff Report 6/12/2020
Planning and Zoning Minutes Minutes 6/4/2020
REVIEWERS:
Department Reviewer Action
Clerk. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 6/12/2020 - 1:10 PM
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 31 of 183
STAFF REPORT lc�
w
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING June 23,2020 Legend
DATE:
Project Lacfl�iar ---
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: H-2019-0122
Ascent Subdivision -"
LOCATION: North side of W. Franklin Rd., east of N.
Black Cat Rd. in the SW %4 of Section 10,
Township 3N.,Range 1 W.
r
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation of 5.25 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; and, Preliminary Plat consisting of 43
buildable lots, 11 common lots and 1 other lot on 4.97 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 4.97 (the configuration of the parcel has been verified to be
an original parcel of record in accord with UDC 11-1A-1)
Future Land Use Designation MHDR(8-12 units/acre)in the TMISAP
Existing Land Use Agricultural
Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family attached and townhome dwellings
Current Zoning RUT in Ada County
Proposed Zoning R-15
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 43 building/11 common/1 other
Phasing plan(#of phases) 1
Number of Residential Units(type 43 units(4 attached units&39 townhome units)
of units)
Density(gross&net) 8.65 gross/16.93 net
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 0.55 of an acre(11.5%)
buffer/qualified)
Amenities Tot lot with a children's play structure
Physical Features(waterways, The Purdam Stub Drain crosses the northeast boundary of this
hazards,flood plain,hillside) site
Page 1
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 32 of 183
Neighborhood meeting date;#of March 24,2019;4 attendees
attendees:
History(previous approvals) H-2019-0122 Ascent Subdivision(withdrawn)
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway
District
• Staff report Yes(draft)
(yes/no)
• Requires ACHD No
Commission
Action(yes/no)
• Existing Franklin Rd.was widened to 5-lanes in 2017 and fully improved with curb,
Conditions gutter and sidewalk abutting the site;no ROW is required to be dedicated
and no frontage improvements are required.
• CIP/IFYWP Capial Improvements Plan(CiP)0 lri"raled Five Year Work PWn QFMPI:
i Black Cas Roect is 1--jsed in The GIP to be widened�v 5-lames from Cherry Land tv Frenklin
Road balwwri 20,71 and 2025
Black Cal Road is listed in the CIP 11a bi3 widened to 3lanesfrom Mend Road to Franklln
Rued beTwmm 2426 and 2030.
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One temporary(1)access proposed via W.Franklin Rd.,an
Hwy/Local)(Existin and Proposed) arterial street
Traffic Level of Service Acceptable(Better than"E")—Franklin&Ten Mile Roads
Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross 2 stub streets are proposed to the west and 2 stub streets are
Access proposed to the east for future extension;no stub streets exist
to this site
Existing Road Network None
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Existing sidewalk on Franklin;no buffer
Buffers
Proposed Road Improvements None
Fire Service
• Distance to Fire Station 3.4 miles—split between Fire Stations#1 and#6
• Fire Response Time Falls within 5 minute response time
• Resource Reliability 63%for Fire Station#1;unknown for Station#6—does not
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 VIII.C)
• Accessibility Project meets all required access,road widths and turnarounds
• Special/resource needs An aerial device is not required;the closest truck company is 6
minutes travel time(under ideal conditions)—Fire Dept. can
meet this need in the required timeframe.
• Water Supply Requires 1,500 gallons per minute for 2 hours;may be less if
building is fully sprinklered,which all are proposed to be
• Other Resources NA
Page 2
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 33 of 183
Police Service
• Distance to Police 3.5 miles
Station
• Police Response 3:5 minutes
Time
• Calls for Service 1,372 within a mile of site(2/1/2019—1/31/2020)
• Accessibility No issues with the proposed access
• Specialty/resource No additional resources are required at this time;the PD already services the
needs area
• Crimes 141 within a mile of site(2/l/2020—1/31/2020)
• Crashes 44 within a mile of site(2/l/2020—1/31/2020)
West Ada School
District
1.Distance Enrollf"s UDIM 3tWin
a.g
(elem,ms, PeregHH&ElanwntIew W 650 2.3
hs) MerkHan Mlddl4 School 1?92 1230 3.2
2.Capacity of
Schools Ml'"IltSh 5choo, is 2400 1.9
3.#of Students
Enrolled OWD W the abunda nt amourll of pow1 h in the area,West Ada Is arthrely building new iebml%a nd bowldaties are always
omri I These fMle.re sruElents could polentiaNy att@rod PkaMnt V►ew Elarpentp y.irnd Owyhee High School,
4.#of students 34
predicted for
this
development
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent
Services
• Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunkshed
• Estimated Project See application
Sewer ERU's
• WRRF Declining 13.92
Balance
• Project Consistent Yes
with WW Master
Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concerns None
Water
• Distance to Water Directly adjacent
Services
• Pressure Zone 2
• Estimated Project See application
Water ERU's
• Water Quality None
Concerns
• Project Consistent Yes
with Water
Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns None
Page 3
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 34 of 183
C. Project Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
(fLegend Legend
Rik
I�Project Laca�iar � �- iU I�JrProjea#Loc�:-.;�.
i ti 31 -
_ - h Density
'fie rrr aynre
1 ensity Hi De sity
Em
P rnt Residren io'
Y�
F
MU-Res
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
(fLegend R. ��
(fLegend �
IffPrapect Luca-nor ! I Pra�ct Lacaf6n ---
R-$ R-1sr ;_ City unyk
RUT — Planned Pa-ae's
OWN R1
M-E - - ---
R1 RUT,
hA1 -
L"�D C,N +
lwtl R- RUT
R R- -
C-C '
Ic
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Matt Schultz, Schultz Development—PO Box 1115,Meridian, ID 83680
B. Owner:
Christiansen Family Limited Partnership—576 E.Vivid Sky Dr.,Meridian,ID 83642
Page 4
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 35 of 183
C. Representative:
Same as Applicant
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper notification
published in newspaper 5/13/2020 6/5/2020
Radius notification mailed to
property owners within 300 feet 5/12/2020 6/2/2020
Public hearing notice sign posted
5/12/2020 6/10/2020
on site
Nextdoor posting 5/12/2020 6/2/2020
V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
Staffs analysis on the project's consistency with the guidelines in the TMISAP applicable to this
development are in italics.
LAND USE:
This property is designated MHDR(Medium High Density Residential) on the Future Land Use Map in
the Comprehensive Plan and is within the area governed by the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan
(TMISAP).
The MHDR designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses,condominiums, and
apartments. Residential gross densities should range from 8 to 12 dwelling units per acre. These areas
are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or
near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for
residents. Developments need to incorporate high quality architectural design and materials and
thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent
uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity.
Per the TMISAP,MHDR designated areas should include a mix of housing types such as row houses,
townhouses,condominiums and apartments with higher densities near MU-C and Employment
designated areas transitioning to smaller-scale and lower density buildings as the distance increases from
higher intensity uses. The proposed development includes a mix of single family attached dwellings and
townhome units at a gross density of 8.65 units per acre is consistent with the mix of uses and density
desired in MHDR designated areas. Part of the larger MHDR (&HDR) designated area to the east
closer to MU-C designated land has already developed with apartments at a higher density as desired;
the remainder of the MHDR designated area surrounding this site has not yet developed.
TRANSPORTATION:
The ACHD Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP)lists Black Cat
Rd. to be widened to 5 lanes from Cherry Ln. to Franklin Rd.between 2021 and 2025; and Black Cat
Rd. to be widened to 3 lanes from Overland Rd.to Franklin Rd. between 2026 and 2030. Franklin Rd.
was widened to 5 lanes in 2017 and fully improved with curb,gutter and sidewalk abutting the site.
Street Network(3-17): The Transportation System Map included in the TMISAP does not depict any
streets planned through this site.
Page 5
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 36 of 183
Connectivity(3-17): Connectivity to adjacent parcels is proposed with two (2)stub streets to the west
and two (2)stub streets to the east which will result in connected neighborhoods and better access for
emergency personnel in accord with the Plan. Perugia St., a local street to the east should connect to the
northern east/west street(W. Tomahawk St.) in this development when the property to the east
redevelops, which will provide a connection to Franklin Rd. via Umbria Hills Ave.
Access Control(3-17): In order to move traffic efficiently through the Ten Mile area, direct access via
arterial streets is prohibited except for collector street connections. Until the property to the north
redevelops and a street network is established in this area, this site has no other access than W. Franklin
Rd., an arterial street. A temporary access via Franklin is proposed until such time as access is
available from the adjacent property then the access will be closed except for emergency and pedestrian
access, in accord with the Plan.
Complete Streets (3-19): The TMISAP incorporates the concept of"complete streets,"meaning all
streets should be designed to serve all users,including bicycles and pedestrians unless prohibited by law
or where the costs are excessive or where there's clearly no need(pg. 3-19). The proposed development
includes attached and detached sidewalks for pedestrian use and on-street parking but no bicycle lanes;
because no collector streets are proposed, Staff does not recommend bicycle lanes are required.
Streetscape(3-25): All streets should include street trees within the right-of-way. The proposed
development incorporates tree-lined streets with detached sidewalks along the main north/south street
(W.. Chair Lift St) through the development from Franklin Rd. adjacent to alley-loaded lots. The
east/west streets (W.. Chair Lift St. & W. Ski Hill St.) that provide access to front-loaded lots adjacent to
Franklin Rd. (Lots 1-7, 11-14, Block 6 and Lots 3-4, Block 5) and two other front-loaded lots (Lots 2-3,
Block 1) at the north end of the development have attached sidewalks. To more closely comply with the
Plan,Staff recommends detached sidewalks with 6'(with root barriers) or 8'wide landscaped
parkways(without root barriers)are provided along both sides of W. Ski Hill St. and W. Chair Lift St.
which could be accommodated through narrower streets in these areas consistent with Traditional
Neighborhood design.
DESIGN:
Street-Oriented Design—Residential Buildings(3-33): Usable porches should be a dominant element
of these building types. Porches should be located along at least 30%of the front fagade of the buildings
(the facade facing the primary street) although a higher percentage is recommended as is porches on one
or more facades as well. When possible, garages should be loaded from a rear alleyway. Where garages
must be accessed from the front,the garages must be located no less than 20' behind the primary
faVade of the residential structure.Front-loaded 2-car garages that are visible from the primary
street must be designed with two(2)separate garage doors.
The proposed alley-loaded townhomes have porches along 40% of the street frontage;front-loaded
townhomes and single-family attached dwellings do not have porches facing the internal street but do
have covered patios facing Franklin Rd. at 56%of the street frontage although they won't be visible
because a 6'tall solid vision fence is proposed to provide privacy of rear yards. Front-loaded garages
are not located 20'behind the primary faVade of the structure,nor do they have two(2)separate
garage doors as required. With the current lot configuration, compliance with the garage setback
requirement is not possible—lots would need to be widened and the number of units reduced to
comply.If the number of units are reduced by 3 or fewer, the density of the development will still
comply with that desired in the Ten Mile area,however, if reduced by 4 or more, the density will be
below that desired in the Ten Mile area. Staff recommends the Applicant explore alternate design
options to comply with this requirement while maintaining a gross density of at least 8 units per acre;
an alternate plan should be submitted in accord with this provision prior to the City Council hearing.
Page 6 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 37 of 183
All of the proposed elevations for front-loaded homes depict one garage door instead of separate
garage doors for each parking space as required—these elevations should be revised to reflect
separate garage doors for each parking space in accord with the Plan.
Buildings to Scale(3-34): The key elements to consider are the continuity of building sizes,how the
street-level and upper-level architectural detailing is treated, elements that anchor and emphasize
pedestrian scale,roof forms,rhythm of windows and doors,and general relationship of buildings to
public spaces such as streets,plazas, other open space and public parking. Human-scale design is critical
to the success of built places for pedestrians.Staff believes the proposed 2-story homes demonstrate
continuity of building sizes within the development; the street level and upper level architectural
detailing corresponds with each other to unify the design, while the awnings and overhangs over the first
story along with tree-lined streets and ground floor windows anchor and emphasize the pedestrian scale
of the development as desired.
Neighborhood Design(3-36): In the Ten Mile area, all residential neighborhoods should be developed
in consideration of traditional neighborhood design principles and concepts,which include mixed
housing stock,architecture and design, streetscapes and streets. A mix of housing stock is proposed
consisting of single-family attached and townhome dwellings,which contribute to the diversity of
housing stock desired in this area. Currently, front-and alley-loaded single-family detached homes,
townhomes, and multi-family apartments exist in this area. Relatively short block lengths are proposed
with several stub streets to adjacent properties,which allows for better and more convenient pedestrian
and vehicle connectivity. Staff recommends landscaped parkways are provided throughout the
development for a streetscape consistent with the Ten Mile Plan and neighborhood design
concepts.
Building Form and Character(3-37): Architectural character should establish a clear sense of place
and distinct identity in each activity center and neighborhood while each building should maintain a
degree of individuality. The proposed conceptual elevations demonstrate the coordination of key design
elements, materials and colors, while maintaining individuality for each unit(see Section VIII.F).
Building Facades: The primary facade of the structures should be placed at the minimum setback as
close as possible to the street for a consistent street-scape. The primary facade should always include
an entry into the building as close as possible from the primary street for direct access from adjacent
public spaces. The space between a building facade and the adjacent sidewalk should be
appropriately landscaped with a combination of lawns,groundcover, shrubs and trees. The Applicant
states the individual yards will be maintained by the HOA for a consistent appearance;Staff
recommends a combination of lawn,groundcover, shrubs and trees are provided in each front
yard as desired in the Plan.
Building Heights: Low-rise buildings of 2-4 stories in height over much of the area is desired. The
proposed attached and townhome units are all 2-stories in height in accord with the Plan.
Stoop Frontage: For street and block frontages along residential streets and areas with a moderate
amount of pedestrian activity, it is recommended that ground floor elevations be 18 to 24 inches
above sidewalk grade and that the individual units open directly onto adjacent rights-of-way.
Because this is a smaller development and isn't in a mixed use area, there won't be a lot of non-
local pedestrian activity; therefore, Staff doesn't recommend required compliance with this
guideline.
Porch and Fence Frontage: The porch and fence frontage provides a building facade set back from
the street to allow room for a private fenced yard,which signals the break between the public realm
of the street and sidewalk to the private realm of the yard and porch. Porches along the front of the
building allow residents the opportunity to interact and engage in activities in the public domain
Page 7
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 38 of 183
while maintaining a level of privacy.Although not a requirement, Staff recommends the Applicant
consider this guideline in the design of the project.
Roofs: Because the Ten Mile Area includes a wide variety of individual buildings, it's assumed
there will be a mix of flat and pitched roofs. Pitched roofs are required for MHDR designated
areas and should be,where possible,symmetrical hips or gables,with a pitch between 4:12 and
12:12 and have an overhang of at least 12 inches. The overhang can extend to a maximum of
2.5' beyond the fagade of the building.Roof brackets and rafter tails are encouraged. Staff
recommends the proposed structures include roofs consistent with this guideline.
Public Art(3-47): Public art with a high quality of design should be incorporated into the design of
streetscapes.No public art is proposed. Staff recommends public art is provided in the streetscape in
accord with the Plan; this could be incorporated into the subdivision identification sign.
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):
• "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of
Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D)
The proposed medium high density attached and townhome units will contribute to the variety of
residential categories in the Ten Mile area as desired.
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in
accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for
diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G)
Two housing types (i.e. single-family attached and townhomes) are proposed in this development
which contributes to the variety of housing types in this area.Lot sizes are proposed ranging in size
from 2,057 to 6,036 with an average lot size of 2,492 square feet(sf.) which will accommodate the
proposed 2-story attached and townhome units.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed residential dwellings and site design should be compatible with future development on
adjacent properties that are also designated for MHDR uses.
• "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections,easy
pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools,and the incorporation of usable open
space with quality amenities." (2.02.01A)
The proposed plat depicts a large usable common open space area at the east boundary of the site
with children's play equipment as an amenity and detached sidewalks with landscaped parkways.
Sidewalks are proposed along all stub streets to adjacent properties, which provide for pedestrian
connectivity; no segments of the City's regional pathway are planned on this site.
• "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the
extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of
Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A)
The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems;services are proposed to
Page 8
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 39 of 183
be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans.
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter,
sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with
development as proposed.
• "Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal conforms
to the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is provided."
(3.03.03)
The proposed development plan is consistent with the City's vision in terms that medium high
density residential uses are proposed. Public services and infrastructure are proposed to be
provided.
In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision of the
Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density and transportation.
VI. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. ANNEXATION&ZONING
The Applicant requests annexation of 5.25 acres of land with an R-15 (Medium High-Density
Residential)zoning district consistent with the Medium High Density Residential(MHDR)Future Land
Use Map(FLUM) designation in the Comprehensive Plan. A preliminary plat,landscape plan and
conceptual building elevations were submitted showing how the property is planned to develop with 39
townhome and 4 single-family attached units(see Section VIII).
Based on the analysis above in Section V, Staff is of the opinion the requested annexation with the R-15
zoning and proposed development is consistent with the MHDR FLUM designation for this site.
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.
The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to
Idaho Code section 67-651 IA. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application,
staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT
The proposed preliminary plat consists of 43 building lots, 11 common lots and I other lot on 4.97 acres
of land in the proposed R-15 zoning district. The minimum lot size proposed is 2,057 with an average lot
size of 2,492 square feet(s.f.). The plat is proposed to develop in one phase.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are no existing structures on this site,the site is vacant/undeveloped.
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
The proposed subdivision and subsequent development is required to comply with the minimum
dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I I-2A-7 for the R-15 district. Staff has reviewed the
proposed plat and it complies with these standards. Zero lot lines should be depicted on the plat where
single-family attached and townhome structures are proposed to span across lot lines.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3):
One temporary right-of-way access easement is proposed on Lot 9,Block 6 via W.Franklin Rd., an
arterial street; two(2)local stub streets are proposed to the west and two(2) are proposed to the east for
Page 9
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 40 of 183
future extension and interconnectivity. The temporary right-of-way easement is required to be released
when a local street connection is constructed to this site from a neighboring development; at such time,
the access will be restricted to emergency and pedestrian access only.
Twenty(20)foot wide public alleys are proposed for access to rear-loaded units along N.Ascent Ave. in
accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. All alleys should be signed"No Parking Fire
Lane" and have an address sign at each entrance to the alley; each residence that has a back to an
alley should have an address posted on the front of the building as well as on the alley side.
Secondary emergency access to the site is not required by the Fire Dept.because all of the structures will
be sprinklered. This property does not have an access easement via Zimmerman Ln.,the private lane
along the west boundary of the site which is part of the property to the north.
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
There are no pathways depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this property.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
A detached sidewalk was recently constructed along the frontage of this site adjacent to W. Franklin Rd.
when ACHD widened Franklin Rd. in accord with UDC standards. Detached sidewalks are proposed
along the main north/south street(i.e.N. Ascent Ave.)in front of alley-loaded homes; Staff
recommends detached sidewalk are also provided along all other internal streets as well in accord
with traditional neighborhood design guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan.
Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17):
A 10-foot wide parkway with a drainage swale exists along Franklin Rd. between the curb and detached
sidewalk constructed by ACHD with the road widening project;because this area is within the right-of-
way,no trees are allowed.Native vegetation(grasses and flowers)was planted in this area and will be
maintained by the HOA. All parkways within the site adjacent to detached sidewalks shall be
landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along W. Franklin Rd. (measured from back of curb),landscaped
per the standards in UDC Table 11-3B-7C. A 35-foot wide buffer is proposed with landscaping in accord
with UDC standards.
Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-
3E. Trees are proposed exceeding UDC standards; however, detailed calculations should be included
in the Landscape Requirements table demonstrating compliance.
Qualified Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G):
Because the area of the preliminary plat is below 5 acres in size,the qualified open space and site
amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 do not apply. However,the Applicant did submit a qualified
open space exhibit, included in Section VIII.F, depicting 0.55 of an acre(or 11.5%)of qualified open
space consisting of a large grassy common area,half the street buffer along Franklin Rd. and parkways
along the detached sidewalk in front of alley-loaded homes. This calculation will actually be greater as
Staff recommends parkways are provided along all internal streets.
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.
A 6-foot tall open wrought iron fence is proposed along the northeast boundary adjacent to the Purdam
Drain; and a 6-foot tall vinyl fence is proposed along the west, east and south boundaries in accord with
UDC standards.
Page 10 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 41 of 183
Parking: On-site parking for each unit is required per the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 based
on the number of bedrooms per unit. Two car garages with two (2)parking pads per unit are proposed in
accord with UDC standards.A total of 32 on-street parking spaces are also available for guests per the
exhibit in Section VIII.E.
Waterways: The Purdam Stub Drain,an NMID facility,runs along the northeast boundary of this site
within a 65' wide easement(25' on this property). Any encroachment within this easement will require a
License Agreement with NMID. The drain is proposed to be piped with this development in a common
lot with an exclusive NMID access easement;the HOA will be responsible for maintenance of this lot.
The common lot should contain grass to prevent weeds if allowed by NMID.If not allowed, a letter
to that affect should be submitted from NMID.
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.
This project will be serviced by existing 8-inch water and sewer main stubs in W. Franklin Rd.
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.
Primary pressure irrigation will be provided by Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District(NMID)via an
existing regional pump station for Baraya Subdivision directly south of this site across Franklin Rd.
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 by underground seepage beds and/or shallow landscaped retention
areas. Drainage swales exist within the parkway along W. Franklin Rd.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual) (TMISAP
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed 2-story townhome structures as shown
in Section VII.F. Dwellings are proposed to be configured in 2, 3 and 4 attached units. Building
materials are proposed to consist of a mix of horizontal and board&batten siding in a variety of colors
with stone veneer accents. Dwelling units range in size from 1,400 to 1,600 square feet. Each alley-
loaded unit has a front porch and each front-loaded unit has a covered patio but not a front porch as
required.
Final design is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual
and the design guidelines in the TMISAP as stated herein. Submittal and approval of a Design Review
application is required prior to submittal of building permit application(s).
VII. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation&Zoning with the requirement of a
Development Agreement and Preliminary Plat per the conditions included in Section VIII in accord with
the Findings in Section IX.
Page 11 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 42 of 183
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on May 28,2020.At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Matt Schultz,Applicant's Representative
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting. None
d. Written testimony: Matt Schultz,Applicant's Representative (response to the staff
rSort)
e. Staff presenting gpplication: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony
a. None
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Question regarding if there is a berm pmosed within the street buffer along Franklin Rd.
—the Applicant replied a 2-3' tall berm is proposed;
b. In favor of the diversity of housing types proposed;
C. In favor of the open space&site amenity proposed which is above and beyond UDC
requirements;
d. In support of the proposed design over that previously_proposed.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. Recommend approval of waiver to DA provision#A.f as requested b, t�pplicant;
b. Applicant to work with staff to determine the best We and placement of public art to be
provided in the streetscape along Franklin Rd.
5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. The Applicant requests a waiver to DA provision#A.f,which requires front-loaded
garages to be located no less than 20' behind the primary fagade of the residential
structure.
Page 12 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020- Page 43 of 183
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map
EXHIBIT
Description For
R-15 ZONE AND ANNEXATION
ASCENT SUBDIVISION
A portion of the Southeast 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 10, Township 3
North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho being more particularly
described as follows:
Commencing at the S114 corner of said Section 10 from which the SW comer of
said Section 10 bears North 89615'34"West, 2640.54 feet;
thence along the South boundary line of said Section 10 North a9°15'34"(Nest,
376.47 feet to the DEAL POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along said South boundary line North 89015'34"Wast,
36665 feet;
thence leaving said South boundary line North 00°34'26"East, 843.25 feet to a
point on the approximate centerline of Purdam Stub Drain;
thence along said centerline South 39'15'34" East, 572.39 feet;
thence leaving said centerline South 00°34'26"West,404.77 feet to the REAL
POINT OF BEGINNING_ Containing 5.25 acres, more or less.
E 0 .p
7729
�y 3f-?9Wb
CF 0)
�.CR
Page 13
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 44 of 183
I
+I
I
G
I
q � �
N
JL
U ¢I
kn
' 5.25 ACMES E
f
!Y I
Iti
!1
NO, SLR s�G I
I I�
0- 77729
729
I
E I
I
1 I
I
5.9 S•10 897.44 1/4 5.1 Q
3T5.4�_
5.16 5.7 5 1——— N 89'15'34"W 366.65' —— ——
W. FRANKLIIV ROAfl (PUBLIC) hf89'15'34"W 2640.54' RP4B-/ 5,15
BASIS 4F BEARING
EXH91T — DRAWING FOR gas n10�
I QA H O 19-251
SURVEY R-15 ZONE AND ANNEXATION SHEET NO.
B4�&@.!f}kH0837J9 ASCENT SUBDIVISION 1
GROUP, LLC LOCATED IA THE SE i/4 OF TAV "1/4 4F SEC7MDN 1q T.M., DYfG.DATE
RAW., R.M.,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 3/24/2020
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020- Page 45 of 183
B. Preliminary Plat(date: 5/26/2020)
Y
Q I L..
I —L
"it r
do
It
y L
'IMF I '
�. 4D
�.a•�s-��sye-=aul-•
_ 9
f;;p7
5 rr■r■E o■r��r�E irk ";'
ASCENT SV-
w C1.fl
EL F..- EI T ■{{ J
! ILLS� k- •1'1•' � _��.� .� �.
IRS
_}
u 6.
t ■j
f " I W
a
+ i}"
CIA
Page 15 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 46 of 183
C. Landscape Plan(date: 3/24/2020)
77
I } it-��: wyc-.�•r.*
2
r
i I
— 1 f
i
raw _
YL�/KLIN g7tid
ASCENT TOWNHOMES
LANDSCAPE COLOR PLAN --
MERIDIAN. IDAHO
seas r.eow• — �
Page 16 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 47 of 183
MR
Lto
------------
40
41
pi
7 .
Puoel7 --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June co.zozo- Page 400r1on
CT .
Y�SNRu�PLersF[A'� rn _ �� a.
,--A �I
PLAb
a
Li#
Page 18 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 49 of 183
D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 5/22/2020)& Site Amenity Detail
tTY OF MERIDIAN OPEN
SPACE REQUIREMENT
TOTAL OPEN&PAC E
"Ad,6 sE n.4--j 7o.n%
UAURE❑OPEN SPACE
OPM CF+'4R IrPRAREV"T,W* Bhzm=
aF'rt FILh aF'rt�htrP 3IPx Fr fN?!G7 21WQ w f-"lU
Ile+"
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
flI:ALFE'D OPEIL SPACE
I
IIr
J
2
I k
i
W_FRANKLIN ROAD
s��:t•=toa-o
A ENT TOWNHOME � G2°
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT X .
Page 19 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 50 of 183
i
i
C
:f
Compliance:
This play stnKiure has been designed to
meet the salety toqulrements ectahlishad in:
-2019 ADA Standard
28`5` ASTM F1487
CPSC Pub 4325
r __ when the play structure is installed over a
properly maintained surFadng marenal
which is in compliance with:
r -ASTM F1292
' TRANSFERSTA71ON -ASTM F1951
f and Is ammprlale for the hlghast
[ designated play surface of the structure.
�r
r r
� L
+ SINGLE 4. -
GEAR PANEL
WAVE SLIDE
IRUSE IN
Cu IN WHEEL
TWO LEAF TOPPER
$LOTTED CLIMBER -—- �i
LIB RIGFrr TURN SiIOE
� r
POD CLIMBER O LEA TOPPER
7'
Ascent Subdivision unaw r'0 N°'KN1614 Structure Sim 16'5"x 16'2"x 11' HOPS 4W
Recreation Today
AID TALE t7ele: 2GKK1f2020 Recommended Ago mviv,rec[oday,ne[
Use Zone: 2WS"x 267' Gray. 6 t3U4,461,t17U5
Scale: ToFR Surface Area: 1i7A2`>4 ft Capedty 20.41a
Page 20
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 51 of 183
E. On-Street Parking Exhibit
I 4
I
i
ASCENT SUBDIVISION
4
ON—STREET PARKING
32 SPACES
41'
I A�
iG
N
sV
f .N
< �
I _
f Y_
a [V to [N
N Y N �
Cc o
N < N SV
a' 99' C cN 99 20 SPACE o
i
v q
N Y N J
D n 8 2'
eq ww 36 41'
cw a cV
I 37'
ATTACHED WALK/NO PARKING
i
I
N N
39' 25 25' 29' 29' 25' 25' 27' 27' 27' 32'
Page 21 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 52 of 183
F. Conceptual Building Elevations/Perspectives&Floor Plans—REVISED 5/21/20
■—
9Z
Front-Loaded Attached Homes .2
EXTERIOR COLOR 5CFB E IQ
,w�...n
■ cr
O
�3.EFf g2JATIONS COLOR-ASCENT
w
2 nEe_EVAiMU)LOA-ASCENT nuem a
A4.3
Page 22 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 53 of 183
.............
LU
LU
RNW ELEMTM
LU
LU
C)
co
<
2 U-W EMAMM
4.0
�2
.............
A4,
Page 23
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 54 of 183
d
I
O
r
A2.6
O
-
4
I
V
f� LP�H 7-PaLbfl PI.iW
A2 a
Page 24 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 55 of 183
EX ERPOR COLOR 5CHEME�M
■ 11
1 � ■� u+•s*�amar
';'1"1 1'`i:fl III1111 IJ iJ:111 ul.il ❑ "°°'",."� x
LLI
L1 Q
ELFJA-I-N _
cSaYwfnYl ��
�LL
L.d
- - -L-. �anc[asxw.n.e• --
ELE'JA70N
Front-Loaded Townhomes
:�EYAiIJJS
A4.2
W3
Page 25 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 56 of 183
--� - -- --- - ----- --- --- x
W
�- J
I �
IL
Cn
W Q
nNWELEVA,err
z
W
U
CO
"7117
41LiL'1 •i
77
.. - -
7---
2 nR BEVAION
A4.0
AA
AW
- --- - --I--•---•----1'=+
!�ny�rlfME11!yYtl.lA9�?
r¢
Page 26 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 57 of 183
G
o
M1
is
f�
i
LU
V '
LEAL r-RON FLAN
�F'lx
f
11
}b
I I W C
I
}iEEL7 �LOWVLAhl --- --
Page 27 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 58 of 183
EXTERIOR COLOR SCHEME Al
w
---- ----- - -=
T?WEIPJA7KM 7:7— Q
LU
CD
Q
El
- ® 7
_r
2 RFJ�R 9-EVAFICIJ - •n•,�-,: ""
�LCR
FAlley-Loaded Garage Units ""r
„�...,m..ra�a.�- A4.2
.c9+i3:7CICw
pppp—pwl,
i
SOL—
eL
in
L}
r
� 'mlNYd,7b1 r rr�
M3
Page 28 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 59 of 183
� F T
140
011,
LU
TWT]]
V)
IIf 4
` I A I _yy_ypp
0ED
— _—_—_ ----- --------_—_—_—_.—.—_—_—_—_— —_---. •i'rt} c L
IVIW*IW�
C�1P_�M ELEVATAN
x
--- ---------- -� -- --- —ter �
CIO
LU
a
� s�ELa=vATroNt O
H
z
w
f,7
to
® ED -
--- --------------------------
-
f�MEELEVATION2
Page 29 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 60 of 183
l
T
r
k — t_ r - •'
W
r rt
f
f :I,
I�Q
.. .. ._ .. .. .... . . .. .... . .. ..
I U I IXI IYI}
I �
cfi
h
r5 - .I k Q
LU
I
i� f '•
T' T�
L j
..._.............. ... .........-' .
.I
{ k�5Ek 2-Fkiai
rVAhnM
A2,1
Page 30 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 61 of 183
IX. 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, landscape
plan,qualified open space exhibit and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII
and the provisions contained herein.
b. Future development shall comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards
Manual and the design guidelines contained in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan
(TMISAP).An application for Design Review shall be submitted and approved for the single-
family attached and townhome structures prior to submittal of building permit applications.
c. The front yard of each individual lot shall be landscaped with a combination of lawn,
groundcover, shrubs and trees as set forth in the TMISAP (see 3-37).
d. The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping
within the development including that on individual homeowner lots as proposed by the
Applicant.
e. All structures in this development shall have pitched roofs with symmetrical hips or gables,with
a pitch between 4:12 and 12:12 and have an overhang of at least 12 inches up to a maximum of
2.5 feet beyond the facade of the building. Roof brackets and rafter tails are encouraged as set
forth in the TMISAP (see 3-41).
f. Where garages must be accessed from the front,the garages shall be located no less than 20 feet
behind the primary facade of the residential structure and shall be designed with two(2) separate
garage doors as set forth in the TMISAP(see 3-33).
g. Public art with a high quality of design shall be incorporated into the design of streetscape along
W. Franklin Rd. as set forth in the TMISAP(see 3-47).
h. The temporary right-of-way easement via W. Franklin Rd. over the common lot(Lot 9,Block 6)
shall be released when a local street connection is constructed to this site from a neighboring
development; at such time,the easement shall be released and access will be restricted to
emergency and pedestrian access only.
2. The final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Provide detached sidewalks with 6' (with root barriers)or 8' (without root barriers)wide
parkways along all internal streets in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E.
b. Zero lot lines should be depicted on the plat where single-family attached and townhome
structures are proposed to span across lot lines.
c. Include a note that prohibits direct lot access via W. Franklin Rd. other than emergency access
once local street access is available from an adjacent property.
Page 31
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 62 of 183
3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions:
a. Provide detached sidewalks with 6' (with root barriers)or 8' (without root barriers)wide
parkways along all internal streets within the development in accord with the standards listed in
UDC 11-3A-17E; landscaping shall be depicted in parkways in accord with the standards listed
in UDC 11-3B-7C.
b. Depict grass within Lot 1,Block 1 and Lot 1,Block 5 where the Purdam Drain is located, if
allowed by NMID. If not allowed, submit a letter from the Irrigation District to that effect.
c. Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the standards listed in UDC
11-3G-3E. Trees are proposed exceeding UDC standards; however,detailed calculations should
be included in the Landscape Requirements table demonstrating compliance.
4. The Applicant shall provide children's play equipment as an amenity for this development as
proposed per the detail in Section VIII.D.
5. All alleys shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. All alleys
shall be signed"No Parking Fire Lane"and have an address sign at each entrance to the alley; each
residence that has a back to an alley shall have an address posted on the front of the building as well
as on the alley side.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 Each individual townhouse unit shall be independently connected to sanitary sewer and water
services.
1.2 After consultation with the applicant regarding the Geo Technical investigation,it is highly
recommended that slab on grade foundations be installed within this development to avoid any
groundwater intrusion.
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 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.
Page 32
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 63 of 183
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface
or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat
by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation
and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per
UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207
and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service
per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering
Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of
Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures
and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,
road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision
shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy
of the structures.Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance
surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set
forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan
approval letter.
2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office.
2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H.
2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material.
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.
Page 33
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 64 of 183
2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or
drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district
or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed
in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a
certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project.
2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per
the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and
approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the
project.
2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan
requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy
of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272.
2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount
of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure
prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by
the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash
deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of
20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for
duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the
owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash
deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the
Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for
more information at 887-2211.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=186954&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=186904&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y
E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187799&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y
F. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD)
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187420&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioy
G. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ)
https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187573&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187588&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE
Page 34 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 65 of 183
I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)IMRAFT
city.org MebL cView.aspx?id=188430&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
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;
The Commission finds the proposal to annex the subject 4.97 acre property with R-15 zoning and
develop single-family attached and townhome dwellings on the site at a gross density of 8.65 units per
acre is consistent with the associated MHDR FLUM designation for this property. (See section V
above for more information)
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose
statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities
for the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and
welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and
future residential uses in the area.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to,
school districts; and
The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6)
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)
The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant
complies with the Development Agreement provisions and conditions of approval in Section VIII.
Page 35 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 66 of 183
2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be
adequate to accommodate the proposed development.
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's
capital improvement program;
The Commission finds the proposed plat is in 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;
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and
The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to
be preserved with this development.
Page 36 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 67 of 183
�E IDIAN�-- ITEM SHEET
IDAHO
Council Agenda Item -6.C.
Presenter:
Estimated Time for Presentation: 0
Title of Item - Public Hearing for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2020-0024) by Schultz
Development, Located at 675 W. Waltman Ln.
Click Here for Application Materials
Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at Hearing
Council Notes:
ATTACHMENTS:
Upload Date
Commission Recommendations and Staff Report Staff Report 6/19/2020
Planning and Zoning Minutes Minutes 6/16/2020
REVIEWERS:
Department
Clerk. Weatherly,Adrienne Approved 6/19/2020 - 10:04 AM
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 83 of 183
STAFF REPORT E
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING June 23,2020 Legend
DATE:
IffProject Lacfl-fiar
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton,Development
Services Manager --
208-887-2211 -
SUBJECT: H-2020-0024
Tanner Creek
LOCATION: 675 W.Waltman Ln., in the SE '/4 of - x
Section 13,Township 3N.,Range 1 W.
(Parcels: S 1213428050; Imo
S1213428301; S1213428010;
S1213427890; S1213427880;
S1213427872; S1213427860;
S1213428020; S1213427840)
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Applicant has submitted an application for the following:
• Modification to the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #108131100),which allows
commercial/office/hotel uses, for the purpose of replacing the agreement with a new agreement allowing
a mix of residential uses to develop on the site including single-family detached dwellings,townhouse
dwellings, and multi-family residential(apartment);
• Rezone of a total of 38.47 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (10.13 acres),R-15 (12.20 acres)and R-
40 (16.14 acres)zoning districts;
• Preliminary plat consisting of 142 buildable lots and 18 common lots on 37.87 acres of land in the R-8,
R-15 and R-40 zoning districts; and,
• Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 272 residential units on 16.14 acres
of land in the R-40 zoning district.
Pagel
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 84 of 183
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 37.87
Future Land Use Designation MDR(3+/-acre strip along west boundary)&MU-C on the
remaining majority of the property
Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land(pasture)
Proposed Land Use(s) Residential(Single-family detached,townhome,and multi-
family)
Current Zoning C-G
Proposed Zoning R-8,R-15 and R-40
Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 142 buildable/18 common
Phasing plan(#of phases) 4
Number of Residential Units(type 400 units[83 detached(16 alley-loaded&67 front-loaded),
of units) 45 alley-loaded townhomes&272 multi-family]
Density(gross&net) 10.56 gross(overall);4.17 gross&7.12 net(R-8);7.13 gross
& 12.68 net(R-15); 17.17 gross(R-40)
Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 3.14 acres(14.3%)
buffer/qualified)
Amenities Playgrounds,basketball court, swimming pool,clubhouse,
pathways
Physical Features(waterways, The Ten Mile Creek runs along east boundary,a small portion
hazards,flood plain,hillside) of the site is within the floodplain
Neighborhood meeting date;#of January 27,2020(9 attendees)
attendees:
History(previous approvals) AZ-06-063 (DA#108131100);PP-08-001;TE-10-028;TEC-
12-008;TEC-14-005;H-2016-0008 (PP exp.4/7/18);H-
2018-0023 (Tanner Creek CPAM,CUP,MDA,PP,RZ—
denied)
B. Community Metrics
Description ! Details Page
Ada County Highway
District
■ Staff repert ye3
(yes`no)
Requires ACHD Yes(approved)
Commission
Action(yes--up)
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)f Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP):
■ Linder Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from Overland Road to
Franklih Road with an undetermined date.This does not include funding for ITD's portion of
the 1-84 overpass.
■ The intersection of Franklin Road and Linder Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 6-
lanes on the north leg, 6-lanes on the south, 7-lanes east,and 7-lanes on the west leg,and
signalized between 2021 and 2025,
Page 2
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 85 of 183
Fire Service
. Distance to Fire 1.4 miles from Fife Station I
Station
• Fire Response The boundary of the site is within 5 minutes;the far writ edge near%W.Ruddv
Time Dr.is outside the goal of 5 minutes
a Resource 75%from Fire Station 41-dues not meet the target goal of 80%or greater
Reliability
i Rim Identification Risk factor of 2-current resources would not be adequate to supple sen ice to
this project(see comments in Section I=.C)
• Acceszibility Project meets all required access,read widths and turnarounds
speciab.resource An aerial device is required;the closest truck company is 4 minutes travel time
needs (under ideal conditions)-Fire D ept-can meet this need in the reguifed
timefrajne.
■ Water Supply Requires 1,500 gallons per minute for 2 hours
■ Other Resources IOTA
Police Service
. Distance to Police 1-5 miles
Station
a Police Response 3 minutes
Time
Calls for Service For time period of3i 1.12019-2 9. 020: 2.,513 calls within a mile of site
■ Accessibility No issues with the proposed access
Specialtyfresource No additional resources are needed at this time;the PD already services the
needs area
crimes. 328
Crashes For time period of 3/1I2019-2/29/2020: 55 crashed occurred within a mile of sit
West Ada School District
1.Distance(elem,ms,hs) Enrollment CapacitV es
`n,Y ULWIRO
3.#of Students Enrolled
2.Capacity Schools peregrine Elementary 556 550 216
Meridian Middle School 1200 1250 2,-4
Meridian High School 1978 24100 2.5
Page 3
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 86 of 183
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent
Services
• Sewer Shed Ten Mile Trunkshed
• Estimated Project See application
Sewer ERU's
• WRRF Declining 13.91
Balance
• Project Consistent Yes
with WW Master
Plan/Facility Plan
• Impacts/Concerns Flows Commitments have been added to the Declining Balance. As
preliminarily designed,SSMH A-2 is in an inaccessible area by being located
in a landscaped walkway area. There also appears to be separation issues with
the water main that is generally parallel through this area. At a minimum,
these utilities shall have a 14-foot wide compacted gravel roadways
constructed over top of them to make them accessible by a service truck. No
structures are allowed to be constructed within the easement areas for the
sanitary sewer mainlines.
Water
• Distance to Water Directly adjacent
Services
• Pressure Zone 3
• Estimated Project See application
Water ERU's
• Water Quality None
Concerns
• Project Consistent Yes
with Water Master
Plan
• Impacts/Concerns Meridian Public Works has modeled each phase per the preliminary plat
submitted. Currently each phase meets minimum flow requirements,but each
phase will need to be re-modeled at Final Plat application to confirm minimum
flow requirements are met. No structures are allowed to be constructed within
the easement areas for the water mainlines.
Page 4
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 87 of 183
C. Project Maps
Future Land Use Map Aerial Map
(fLegend " 0 Legend
Pra}ect Location 1 � 1 _� �Pfo;.a a- Lca TM>r
IdBnt1id
�7�� �!! -
■�L r.�
ti
h t V
W[-iq
Ily f'i ii
Resldir tlal � -
u ~r ram-
OVERLAND
i
East
Zoning Map Planned Development Map
(fLegend ` 0 0
Legend
Project Lacs=ar - Project Location
w
-O +_iC"al}r Limit
RUT — Planned Pa.veIs J
® Rl
RUT --
-L 6
RUT 11mrdLYL:. L
I �
RUT
t
M y d .4
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Applicant:
Schultz Development—PO Box 1115,Meridian, ID 83680
B. Owner:
Corey D. Barton— 1977 E. Overland Rd.,Meridian, ID 83642
Page 5
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 88 of 183
C. Representative:
Matt Schultz, Schultz Development—PO Box 1115,Meridian, ID 83680
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification 5/l/2020 6/5/2020
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 300 feet 4/28/2020 6/2/2020
Public hearing notice sign posted
5/7/2020 6/10/2020
on site
Nextdoor posting 4/28/2020 6/2/2020
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA)
A modification to the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #108131100), approved in 2008,which
allows commercial/office/hotel uses, is requested for the purpose of replacing the agreement with a new
agreement allowing a mix of single-family detached,townhome and multi-family residential uses to
develop on the site.
The existing DA includes two (2) different concept development plans for the site as shown in Section
VII.A. These plans depict approximately 400,000 square feet of professional office,hotel,big box retail
and smaller retail spaces.
The Applicant feels the proposed development plan with a mix of residential uses (i.e. single-family
detached,townhome&multi-family) is more appropriate for this site as it provides a transition in zoning
and uses to the existing single-family residential homes to the west and existing and future residential
uses to the north with multi-family as a transition to future commercial/office uses to the east(see
Section VII.D).
Because the development plan for this site has completely changed from the conceptual commercial
development previously approved and the terms of the agreement are no longer applicable, Staff is
amenable to the request for a new DA to replace the existing agreement based on the proposed
development plan. Staff s recommended provisions for the new DA are included in Section VIII.A.I and
the development plan for the overall site is included in Section VII.D.
The proposed project differs from the previous Tanner Creek project that was denied in 2018, as
follows:
• Previously, R-15 &R-40 zoning was proposed; now R-8, R-15&R-40 is proposed;
• The number of buildable lots/dwelling units have increased by one (1).
• The building lots formerly on the east side of the central park area in the single-family portion of
the development have been relocated to the north side of the common area (and one additional
buildable lot was added) to open the area up and transition better to the multi family
development to the east;
• A basketball court was added, a larger playground is proposed and amenities in the central
common area in the single-family portion of the development have been relocated to the east
side of the common area to open up the west side for a large open play area;
Page 6
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 89 of 183
• The access driveway from the single-family to the multi family portion of the development was
shifted to the north to line up with the new configuration of the park in the single-family portion
for better pedestrian and vehicular connectivity between the two uses;
• The common lot where the driveway connection to the multi family portion is proposed was
widened from 50'to 105' and 12 parking spaces were added with landscaped street buffers and
sidewalks on either side of the driveway;
• The detached sidewalk along W. Waltman Ln. was widened from 5'to 10'for the entire frontage
of the site;
• Added 5'wide detached sidewalks along the east side of the off-site Corporate Road extension
and along the north side of Waltman Ln. to Meridian Rd.;
• The concept building elevations for the multi family apartments and clubhouse have been
revised;
• North/south 5'wide sidewalks have been added between apartment buildings in the central
common areas leading to the amenities and sidewalks were added connecting breezeways to
perimeter sidewalks around buildings.
Also, the previous development application included a request for an amendment to the Future Land
Use Map (FLUM) to change the future land use designation of the property from Commercial to
MHDR. At that time(in 2018), the City was in the process of amending the Comprehensive Plan and
Council determined it was not in the best interest of the City to approve the application based on the
following reasons: 1) Concern that the property would not be maintained consistently due to
different ownership of the structures and associated areas;2)Desire for the Applicant to participate
in the Comprehensive Plan update that was in process at that time rather than requesting an
amendment to the FLUM outside of that process; 3)Preference for commercial employment type
uses to develop on the site rather than residential as the original plan proposed; 4) Concern related
to impact on area schools,proposed density and traffic (i.e. resulting safety hazards); and 5)
Conclusion that the timing wasn't right for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan and
development of the site as proposed.
The new Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted in December of 2019, included a change to the
FLUMfor this site from Commercial to MDR &MU-C which allows the proposed uses to develop
on the site without an amendment to the FLUM.
REZONE(RZ)
A rezone of a total of 38.47 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (10.13 acres),R-15 (12.20 acres) and
R-40(16.14 acres)zoning districts is proposed.
The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a mix of residential housing types including single-
family detached dwellings,townhome dwellings and multi-family apartments.
The Allowed Uses table in UDC Table 11-2A-2 for residential districts lists single-family detached and
townhome dwellings as principal permitted uses in the proposed R-8 and R-15 zoning districts; and
multi-family development as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district subject to the specific use
standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27.
A legal description and exhibit map for the rezone area is included in Section VII.A as well as individual
legal descriptions and a map for each of the zoning districts proposed.
The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho
Code section 67-651 IA. Because a DA already exists on this property,the Applicant requests a
modification to the DA consistent with the proposed development plan. To ensure the site develops as
proposed with this application, staff recommends the provisions included in Section VIII are included in
the amended DA.
Page 7
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 90 of 183
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(ht(ps://www.meridiancity.org/compplan):
This property is primarily designated MU-C(Mixed Use—Community) on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM)with a narrow sliver of Medium Density Residential(MDR) along the western portion of the
site consisting of approximately 3 acres.
Land Use:
The MU-C designation allocates areas where community-servicing uses and dwellings are seamlessly
integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to
avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas
have a tendency to be larger than in MU-N(Mixed-Use Neighborhood)designated areas but not as large
as in MU-R(Mixed Use—Regional)designated areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of
the variety that people will mainly travel by car to but also walk or bike to(up to 3 or 4 miles).
Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged.
The MDR designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre.
Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park,
school, or land dedicated for public services.
Because FLUM designations are not parcel specific, an adjacent abutting designation,when appropriate
and approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application,may be used but may not
apply to more than 50%of the land being developed(see pg. 3-9).
Transportation:
Access is proposed via Waltman Lane at the project's north boundary and via the extension of W. Ruddy
Dr. at the project's west boundary. Waltman Lane is currently classified as a local street but is being re-
classified with the proposed development as a collector street due to the increase in vehicle trips per day
generated by this development and the change in functionality of the street.
The extension of Corporate Drive, including construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek, from the
north to Waltman Lane is proposed with the first phase of development; such improvements are
proposed to be completed prior to issuance of building permits in Phase 1. The bridge across the Ten
Mile Creek on Waltman Lane is proposed to be replaced with a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets
prior to the third phase of development to accommodate the increased traffic.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https:llwww.meridiancity.o- /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):
• "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of
Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D)
The proposed single-family detached and townhome dwellings and multi family apartments will
contribute to the variety of housing types in the City as desired.A mix of alley-and front-loaded units
are proposed as well.
• "Improve and protect creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial,industrial, and
residential areas."(4.05.01D)
The Ten Mile Creek which runs along the project's east boundary is proposed to be re-vegetated and
improved with development on the west side that lies within the subject property. The creek should
also be protected during construction.
• "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and
urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for
public facilities and services."(3.03.03F)
Page 8
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 91 of 183
City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development
in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.
• "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for
diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G)
Three(3) different residential housing type are proposed in this development(i.e. single-family
detached, townhome and multi family apartments); a range of lot sizes are proposed ranging in size
from 2,400 to 10,824 (sf.)which will accommodate a variety of housing styles consisting of I-and
2-story units as proposed.
• "Limit canal tiling and piping of creeks, sloughs,laterals, and drains to man-made facilities where
public safety issues cannot be mitigated or are not of concern."(4.05.01C)
The Ten Mile Creek, which runs along the project's east boundary, is required to remain open as a
natural amenity and not be piped.
• "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."
(3.07.00)
The proposed single-family and multi family residential development and site design with larger lots
provided at the west, south and north boundaries as a transition to smaller internal lots and the
multi family development on the eastern portion of the site should be compatible with existing
residential uses to the west.
• "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections, easy
pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open
space with quality amenities." (2.02.01A)
Pedestrian pathways are proposed to the amenities in the central common area in the single-family
portion of the development, which connect to pathways in the central common area in the multi-
family portion of the development and extend to the multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. The
large central common area in the single-family portion and the linear open space in the multi family
portion of the development provide much usable open space with quality amenities as desired.
• "Encourage the incorporation of creek corridors as amenities in development design."(4.05.02C)
The Ten Mile Creek corridor is proposed to be improved as an amenity with a segment of the City's
regional pathway system along the west side.
• "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the
extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian
Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A)
The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems; services are proposed to be
provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans.
• "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels
within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02)
Although there are some County zoned properties to the north and east of this site, the larger area is
surrounded by properties that have been annexed and developed in the City. Development of this
infill property will result in more efficient provision of public services.
• "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter,
sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G)
Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with
development as proposed.
Page 9
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 92 of 183
• "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid-
mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B)
The MSM does not depict a collector street in this area; however, because the proposed development
will generate vehicle trips per day consistent with a collector street and serve as a collector street,
ACHD is changing the classification of Waltman Ln. with this development from a local to a collector
street.
• "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development;
encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits."(4.05.03B)
The proposed vacant parcels are within the City limits and the larger area is surrounded by
properties already developed in the City. The development of this property will result in better
provision of City services.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed Use
areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staffs analysis in italics)
• "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be granted for
smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high density residential
development alone."
The proposed development only includes one (1) type of land use—residential; although several
different types of residential uses are proposed(single-family detached, townhome and multi family
apartments).
• "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged 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."
Although employment uses are not proposed on the subject property, they may be developed in the
future on the adjacent property to the east; the subject property abuts I-84 to the south and is in close
proximity to Meridian Rd., which turns into SH-69 to the south.
• "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an annexation or
rezone request,a development agreement will typically be required for developments with a Mixed
Use designation."
An overall development plan is proposed for the MU-C designated site with the associated rezone
application.A modification to the existing Development Agreement is also proposed consistent with
the proposed project.
• "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the buildings
should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space."
No commercial and/or office buildings are proposed.
• "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and
existing low-or medium-density residential development."
The proposed plan depicts multi family residential apartments along the east boundary adjacent to
C-G zoned land to the east. The Ten Mile Creek, which lies within a 100 foot wide easement, and
associated pathway and landscaping will provide a natural transition and buffer between the
proposed residential and future 31+/-acre commercial development to the east.
• "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools,parks,daycares,civic
buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments."
No such uses are proposed in this development although they may be provided in the adjacent C-G
zoned property to the east when it redevelops in the future.
Page 10
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 93 of 183
• "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."
No such uses are proposed in this development although they may be provided in the adjacent C-G
zoned property to the east when it redevelops in the future.
• "Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-public
centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design elements and
amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play. These areas should be
thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking opportunities considered."
A mix of uses is not proposed within this development although the proposed mix of residential types
proposed within this development will contribute to the mix of overall uses in this area when the C-G
zoned property to the east redevelops in the future, which should include public and quasi public
centers of activity.
• "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both
vehicles and pedestrians."
The proposed development will be directly accessible to adjacent neighborhoods through extension
of streets and internal pedestrian pathways and the multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek at
the east boundary of the site.
• "Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between residential
densities and housing types."
Alleys and roadways are proposed within the development to transition between different housing
types as desired.
• "Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town,development is not subject to the Mixed Use
standards listed herein."
The subject property is not located in Old Town, therefore, this item is not applicable.
In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-C areas, per
the Comprehensive Plan(pgs.3-15 thru 3-16):
• "Developments should comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed Use areas."
See analysis above.
• "All developments should have a mix of at least three land use types."
The proposed development does not have a mix of land use types as desired; only residential land
use is proposed. Staff anticipates additional land use types will be provided in the overall MU-C
designated area when the C-G zoned property to the east redevelops in the future.
• "Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20%of the development area at gross densities
ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre."
Residential uses comprise the entire site at an overall gross density of 10.56 units per acre
consistent with the gross density desired in MU-C designated areas.
• "Non-residential buildings should be proportional to and blend in with adjacent residential
buildings."
Non-residential uses/buildings are not proposed in this development.
• "Vertically integrated structures are encouraged."
No vertically integrated structures are proposed.
• "Unless a structure contains a mix of both residential and office, or residential and commercial land
uses, a maximum building size should be limited to a 30,000 square-foot building footprint. For
Page 11
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 94 of 183
community grocery stores,the maximum building size should be limited to a 30,000 square-foot
building footprint. For community grocery stores,the maximum building size should be limited to a
60,000 square-foot building footprint. For the development of public school sites,the maximum
building size does not apply."
The building footprints for proposed residential uses are far below 30,000 square feet.
• "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 that comprise a
minimum of 5%of the development area are required. Outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not
count towards this requirement."
Public and/or quasi public spaces and places are not provided in the proposed residential
development; Staff anticipates these types of uses will be provided with development of the C-G
zoned parcel to the east.
• Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development above the
minimum 5%,the developer may be eligible for additional residential densities and/or an increase to
the maximum building footprint."
Public and/or quasi public spaces and places are not provided in the proposed development.
Based on the analysis above, Staff fords the proposed plan is generally consistent with the vision of the
Comprehensive Plan for this area in regard to land use,density and transportation. The exception is the
desire for at least three(3)different land use types to be provided within the MU-C designated area—
only one(1)land use type is proposed(i.e.residential).However, several different types of residential
uses are proposed consisting of single-family detached,townhome and multi-family apartments with a
mix of alley-and front-loaded garages which provides variety but does not meet the intent of this
provision.
As noted above,the Comprehensive Plan does allow for abutting designations to be applied. In this case,
the western portion of the subject property and the property to the north across Waltman Ln., a local
street,is designed MDR. Due to the existing and future residential nature of this area, Staff feels it's
appropriate for the western half of the MU-C designated area to develop with medium density residential
uses while the eastern portion develops with high density residential uses,which along with the 100-foot
wide creek corridor,will provide a transition to future commercial/office uses from the medium density
residential uses to the west and north. Commercial uses exist on the north side of Waltman Ln. east of
the Ten Mile Creek,therefore, Staff believes it would be more appropriate for commercial uses to
develop on the adjacent MU-C designated property to the east than on this property. For this reason,
Staff is supportive of the proposed development plan and associated zoning requested.
B. PRELIMINARY PLAT
A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 142 buildable lots and 18 common lots on 37.87 acres of
land in the R-8,R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. The plat is proposed to develop in four(4)phases as
shown in Section VILC with construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek and extension of
Corporate Drive from the north to Waltman Ln.with Phase 1,replacement of the bridge over the Ten
Mile Creek on Waltman Ln. prior to issuance of building permits in Phase 3, and the berm along 1-84
with associated Phases 3 and 4. Because noise from the freeway will affect future residents in this
area, Staff recommends the noise abatment in the form of a berm and wall as proposed is
constructed in its entirety with the first phase of development as a provision of the Development
Agreement.
Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There are several existing structures on this site that are required to be removed prior to signature on the
final plat for the phase in which they are located.
Page 12 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 95 of 183
Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the dimensional standards
listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district, 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-
40 district.
Access(UDC 11-3A-3):
One public street access is proposed via the extension of W. Ruddy Dr. at the west boundary and two
accesses(one public street and one driveway) are proposed via W. Waltman Ln., an existing local street
to be designated a collector street with this development. A stub street(S.W. 7'Ave.) is proposed to the
property at the northwest corner of the site for future extension and access.
Three(3)common driveways are proposed off internal public streets that are required to comply with
and be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. The setbacks,fencing,
building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures accessed by common driveways shall
be shown on an exhibit submitted with the final plat application. A perpetual ingress/egress
easement shall be filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for
maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment.
Three(3) alleys are proposed off internal public streets that are required to comply with and be
constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5.
Road Improvements: Waltman Lane is proposed to be widened on the south side adjacent to the site
with an additional 12 feet of right-of-way(ROW) (37 feet from centerline total), in addition to the
existing 25 feet of ROW on the north side of Waltman Ln.
The existing bridge on Waltman Ln. over the Ten Mile Creek is being replaced with a wider bridge; and
Corporate Drive to the north is proposed to be extended across the creek to the south to Waltman Ln.
with this development.
Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8):
A segment of the City's regional pathway is depicted on the Pathways Master Plan along the east side of
the Ten Mile Creek. The Park's Dept. recommends the pathway is constructed on the west side of the
creek instead with this development with a pedestrian bridge over the creek as proposed. A pedestrian
easement is required to be submitted to the Planning Division for this pathway in accord with
Park's Dept. requirements.
Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17 as
proposed. The UDC requires 5-foot wide detached sidewalks to be constructed along collector streets
(i.e. W.Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr.).
Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17):
Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E.
Landscaped parkways are proposed along W. Ruddy Dr./S.Kearney Ave. and W. Waltman Ln. in accord
with UDC standards.
Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided as set forth in UDC Tables 11-2A-6 for the R-8
district, 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district and planted in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. Street buffers are required to be placed in a common lot and
maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along W. Waltman Ln.,to be designated as a collector street with
this development. The buffer is proposed to have a 3-foot tall landscaped berm with a 10-foot wide
detached sidewalk. A 50-foot wide street buffer is required along Interstate 84 and is proposed to
incorporate a 9-foot tall berm with a 5-foot tall solid wall on top.
Page 13
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 96 of 183
Common open space areas are required to be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E.
Landscaping is proposed in these areas in excess of the minimum standards.
Landscaping is required to be provided along pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. A
landscape strip a minimum of 5-feet wide is required along each side of all pathways planted with
a mix of trees,shrubs,lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one(1)tree
per 100 linear feet of pathway; a 5-foot wide landscape strip should be added on the east side of
the pathway along the creek in accord with this standard.
Qualified Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3 :
The overall development is subject to the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC
11-3G-3. A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided based on the standards
listed in UDC 11-3G-3B and a minimum of one(1) qualified site amenity is required. The common open
space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2 7for multi family developments apply in
addition to this requirement(see analysis below under Conditional Use Permit).
A qualified open space exhibit was submitted for the single-family(R-8 and R-15 zone) and multi-
family(R-40 zone)portions of the development as shown in Section VII.E. A total of 3.14 acres(or
14.3%)of qualified open space is proposed in the single-family portion and a total of 4.07 acres (or
25.7%)is proposed in the multi-family portion of the development in excess of the minimum UDC
standards. The multi family portion is also required to provide common open space per the standards
listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C(see analysis below).
Qualified site amenities are proposed in the single-family portion of the development consisting of
children's playground equipment,pathways and a basketball court; and in the northern portion of the
multi-family development consisting of a clubhouse area containing a swimming pool,pergola shade
structure and a fire pit, internal pathways, a segment of the City's multi-use pathway system along the
Ten Mile Creek and a pedestrian bridge across the creek to the east, and children's play equipment in the
southern portion of the multi-family development in excess of UDC standards.
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.
A 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence is proposed to replace the existing fence along the west boundary; a new
6-foot all solid vinyl fence is proposed along the north boundary of the R-8 zoned portion of the site,
adjacent to internal common areas visible from the street, and between the R-15 and R-40 zoned portions
of the site; a 6-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed between the multi-family structures and the
pathway along the Ten Mile Creek; and a 4-foot tall stamped solid SimTek fence is proposed on top of a
9-foot tall berm along 1-84 in accord with UDC standards.
Because this site abuts 1-84 and residential uses are proposed, Staff recommends the noise abatement
standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D apply to this site as a provision of the amended DA. As mentioned
above, a 9-foot tall berm with a 5-foot tall faux concrete(SimTek)wall is proposed along the southern
boundary of the site parallel with 1-84(see exhibit in Section VII.D—the Applicant clarified that a 5-foot
tall wall,not 4-foot,is proposed). To avoid a monotonous wall along I-84,the color and/or texture of
the wall is required to be varied every 300 linear feet or the wall staggered every 300 linear feet as
set forth in UDC 11-3H-4D.3c.
Existing Easements:
There is an existing 100-foot wide irrigation easement for the Ten Mile Creek held by NMID along the
east boundary of the site as depicted on the plat, some of which lies on the adjacent property to the east.
A 20-foot wide City sewer easement also exists along the east boundary of the site as depicted on the
plat.
Page 14 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 97 of 183
Waterways(UDC 11-3A-A):
The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary of the site and is required to be left open as a natural
amenity and not be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.1 as proposed.
Flood Zone: A portion of the site along the east boundary lies within Flood Zone"A"per FEMA Map
#16001CO232H. This site is not within the floodplain.
Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21):
Connection to City water and sewer services is required 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.
An existing 15 inch sewer main lies along the east half of the Waltman Ln. frontage and along the west
top of bank of the Ten Mile Creek through the site. The 8 inch sewer main connection will be in
Waltman Ln. and will serve the entire site via gravity sewer. An existing 12 inch water main is located in
Waltman Ln. along the full frontage of the site. This subdivision will connect in Waltman at two
locations and also to the existing 8" stub located at the Landing Subdivision stub street(Ruddy) at the
west boundary.See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions.
Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-I5):
A regional pressure irrigation pump station is proposed to be constructed with this development to
NMID standards with a Ten Mile Creek takeout in the northeast corner of the site near Waltman Ln.
Pressure irrigation distribution lines and individual lot services will be provided to all lots in the
subdivision.
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 is proposed to be mitigated by
underground seepage beds and/or retention ponds in accord with ACHD design criteria.If retention
ponds are proposed in required landscape areas,they should be improved per the standards listed
in UDC 11-3B-11C.
Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures on the site as
shown in Section VII.G. One and two-story single-family detached and townhome dwellings are
proposed with a mix of front-loaded and alley-loaded styles in a mix of materials and colors. Single-
story homes are proposed along the southern boundary adjacent to I-84.
Two-story(Building Types 1 and 3) and three-story(Building Type 2) apartments and a clubhouse in the
multi-family portion of the development are also proposed with a mix of materials and colors. Two-story
structures are proposed along the north, south and west boundaries and three-story structures are
proposed along the east boundary.
All townhome and multi-family structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in the
Architectural Standards Manual; single-family detached structures are exempt from this requirement. An
administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the design of
all townhome structures in the development prior to submittal of building permit application for
those structures.An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be
submitted along with Design Review for the multi-family portion of the development.
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 272 residential units on 15.84 acres
of land in the R-40 zoning district at a gross density of 17.17 units per acre. A total of(14)2-and 3-
story structures are proposed consisting of a mix of 8-, 16-and 24-unit buildings.
Page 15
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 98 of 183
Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3):
The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staffs analysis/comments in italic text)
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
site plan 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
not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas
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 access ways 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 11-513-5 of this title. Floor
plans were submitted that depict porches or balconies for each unit,the Applicant states these
will consist of between 82 and 99 square feet per unit.
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. The 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. Seventy(70) 1-bedroom units, (136)2-bedroom units, (66) 3-bedroom
units and a 4,992 square foot clubhouse are proposed. Based on this, a total of 518 spaces are
required with 272 of those in a covered carport or garage. A total of 548 spaces are proposed
with 272 of those in a covered carport or garage. The proposed vehicle parking exceeds the
minimum standards by 30 spaces. Based on the number of vehicle parking spaces proposed,a
minimum of 22 bicycle parking spaces should be provided dispersed throughout the
development.
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)
Page 16
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 99 of 183
The property management office, maintenance storage area and mail kiosk are all depicted on
the site plan in the clubhouse. A directory and map of the development should be depicted on
the site plan at the entrance or convenient location for those entering the development as
required.
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.Not applicable
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. 206 units
are between 500 and 1,200 sf.; therefore, a total of 51,500 sf. (or 1.18 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. 66 units contain more than 1,200 sf.; therefore,
23,100 sf. (or 0.53 of an acre) of common open space is required for these units.
At a minimum, a total of 74,600 sf. (or 1.71 of an acre) of outdoor common open space is
required to be provided in the proposed development.A total of 4.07 acres is proposed to be
provided as shown in Section VILE, in excess of the minimum standards, which also satisfies the
qualified open space standard in UDC 11-3G-3B.
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 areas
depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VILE meet 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. The
multi family component of this project is proposed to be developed in two (2)phases consistent
with UDC standards.
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, ef£retroactive to 2-4-2009) The common open
space area is central to the development and not adjacent to any collector or arterial streets.
(Although the street buffer along Waltman Ln. is included on the open space exhibit, the area
qualifies toward the open space standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3)
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:
Page 17 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 100 of 183
(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, eff. 9-15-2005)
Based on 272 proposed units, a minimum of 5 amenities are required; City Council may require
additional amenities if they feel the proposed amenities aren't adequate for the size of the
development.A clubhouse with a swimming pool,pergola shade structure and seating area,fire
pit, internal pathways, a segment of the City's multi-use pathway system along the Ten Mile
Creek with a pedestrian bridge to the east, children's play equipment and open grassy areas at
least 50'x 100'in area are proposed from the open space, quality of life and recreation
categories in accord with UDC standards. Stafffeels the proposed amenities are adequate for
this development.
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(3')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.
Page 18
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 101 of 183
Landscaping is depicted along the foundation of elevations that face Waltman Ln. that appears
to comply with this standard.
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. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement.
If the Fire Dept. and Police Dept.want private streets to be provided for addressing purposes
within the multi-family portion of the development to better facilitate emergency wayfinding, a
private street application should be submitted with the final plat application for the phase in
which the apartments are located.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the existing Development Agreement,
Rezone,Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit per the provisions included in Section VIII in
accord with the Findings in Section IX.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on May 21,2020.At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Matt Schultz, Schultz Development,Applicant's Representative
b. In opposition:None
C. Commenting: Clair Manning;Nick Eller;Joe Lorcher
d. Written testimony: Michael Swenson; Bill Kissinger; Mark Heazle,Applicant's
Representative
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: None
2. Ke. ids)of public testimony
a. Concern pertaining to the density proposed(opinion that it's too high for this area,)and
the resulting traffic (opinion that Waltman Ln. and the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln.
intersection can't handle the amount of traffic the proposed development will generate;
b. Opinion that Ruddy Dr. shouldn't be extended with this development, concerns
pertaining to traffic and safety
c. Opposed to the project due to traffic concerns&doesn't feel Waltman and the
Waltman/Meridian Rd. intersection can handle the traffic generated from the proposed
development and the need for sidewalks on both sides of Waltman,not just one;
d. Concerns pertaining to emergency access to the site,overcrowding in area schools,
traffic,provision of sidewalks/bike lanes,preference for the property to develop with
commercial uses to bring more jobs to Meridian.
3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission:
a. Question to the Applicant if amenities in the multi-family development(i.e. clubhouse,
swimming pool)will be shared with the single-family portion of the development—the
answer was no;
b. Concern pertaining to the extension of Ruddy Dr. and the need for additional traffic
calming for safety on Ruddy Dr./Kearney Ave. to Waltman Ln.—concern that a lot of
traffic from the neighborhiniz subdivision to the west will cut through this development;
C. Concern that only residential uses and not a mix of uses are proposed on this site as
desired in MU-C designated areas.
Page 19
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 102 of 183
d. Opinion that the proposed layout provides a good transition between single-family
homes and future commercial development to the east.
e. Desire for a larger more concentrated open space area in the multi-family portion of the
sib
f. Concern pertainingto o the proposed phasing plan and bringing construction traffic
through the built portion in Phases 1 and 2 to Phases 3 and 4 at the back of the
development.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. Modify DA provision#A.1 c in Section VIII,to require all of the improvements to
Waltman Ln. west of the Ten Mile Creek bridge to be completed prior to issuance of
building permits in Phase 2 and the off-site reconstruction and widening of the bridge
across the Ten Mile Creek and associated widening of Waltman Ln., including the off-
site construction of a detached 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Waltman
Ln.to Meridian Rd.to be completed prior to issuance of building permits in Phase 3 of
the development, instead of Phase 2.
b. Include a new condition requiring traffic calming measures to be implemented where
Ruddy Dr. connects to the subdivision at the west boundary of the site as allowed by
ACHD (see condition#A.12 in Section VIII);
5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council:
a. The Commission directed the Applicant to consider and be prepared to discuss the
possibility of reconfiggrin the he open space area in the multi-family portion of the
development to increase the open space in that area;
b. The Commission requested the Council determine if the density is too high in the R-40
zoned portion of the site and if they feel comfortable with the number of units proposed;
C. The Commission requested the Applicant reconsider and be prepared to discuss with the
Council the phasing plan related to construction traffic going through the proposed
neighborhood(i.e. development of Phases 3 and 4 would require construction traffic to
go through the first two phases) as well as timing of roadway improvements and
whether or not that phasing should be reconfigured.
Page 20 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 103 of 183
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Conceptual Development Plans Included in Existing Development Agreement
&
f
fl
gi
.............
EZ:1 mmrurL'
Iff
Waltman Annex
Mwkfim Idaho
Page 21
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 104 of 183
B. Rezone Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Maps
DFSCRIPTION FOR
TANNER CREEK SUBDIVISION
ZONE R-8
A parcel of land located in the located in the NW 114 of the SE 114 of Section 13, T.W,
RAW- B M., Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the C114 corner of said Section 13 from which the E114 corner of said
Section 13 bears South 69`52'43''East, 2642.71 feet;
thence along the East-West centerline of said Section 13 South 89°52'43"East, 250,00
feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along said East-West centerline South 89°52'43"East, 539.49 feet;
thence leaving said East-West centerline South 00°00'00'' East, 195.56 feet;
thence North 90°00'00''West, 15.00 feet;
thence North 89058'05"West, 109.91 feet;
thence North 88°43'35"West. 59 52 feet;
thence North 89`52'43"West, 305.30 feet,
thence South 00°04'14"West,331,54 feet;
thence 199.11 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve to the right, said curve having a
radius of 125.00 feet, a central angle of 91*1653"and a long Chord which bears South
44°25'59"West, 178.72 feet;
thence North 89456'05"West,4E97 feet:
thence South 00001'30"West, 422.85 feet;
thence 84.04 feet along the arc of curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 53.50
feet, a central angle of 90`00'13"and a long chord which bears South 44°58'37" East, 75.66
feet;
thence South 89°58'43'' East,427.00 feet:
thence North 88°33'04"East.56 77 feet;
thence South 89°66'05'' East, 125.16 feet;
thence South OW00'00"East, 194.66 feet to a point on the North right-of-way line of
Interstate 84;
Page 22
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 105 of 183
thence along said!North right-of-way line North 89058'43"West, 791-00 feet to the SE
corner of The Landing Subdivision No. 11 as filed in Book 79 of Plats at Page 8528 through
8529, records Ada County, Idaho,
thence along the East boundary line of said The Landing Subdivision No.11 and along
the East boundary we of The Landing Subdivision No.9 as fled in Book 74 of Plats at Page
7058 through 7659, records of Ada County, Idaho and the northerly extension thereof North
00"03'55"East, 1,075-04 feet;
thence South 89'52'43"Bast, 250,00 feet,
thence(North 00°03'55"East,250-00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 10.13 acres. more or less.
e}
�
7729
Page 23
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 106 of 183
BASlS ,QF•B,�ARIMG
" 589'52'43"E 2842JI"
1
CENTER W WALTMAN LANE 59'S I'43"E .1/4
IRP0$ w
Ln I o o ie
p In o I u7
UNPLATTED� UNPLATTE'D O I ko N89'55'05`W p
`O o 109.91' '�
21 N89'52'A3"W
305.30
5$9'52'43"E� L1
250,00' ItoN88'43'3B"W
59.52' c
n I r? dv
I I3
y � I
a� I CD
10.13
I
V?. RUDDY DR.
M.
w: w OI I iJ$$'SG'05'IN � I
m• n I 46.97'
m U;
�: 3�sc l•j l cv a
LINE TABLE " o
I I UNE LENGTH BEARING
I IP
I L1 15.00 N90-00'00"W
• ��� � N8B'33`04"E �
I �
c I S89-58'43'E 56-77
y o I 427.004=
wix, 7729
SB8'S8'05'E a I
� I 125.1 fi' a I� � �� ��L(c✓��%'a ,��
rn
-- -- NSG'58'43"w � of
_
791.00' -- C 7?y G.r N
IM WD INTERSTATE 84
Ir
I�
CURVE TABLE
I CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD DIST. CHORD BRa, DELTA
1 5.13 01 53.50 84.04 75_66 S4458'37"E 90'00,13"
S.24 02 125.00 199.11 178.72 54425'59"W 91'15'S3"
i in ,y."
l'DAHO EXHIBIT -- DRAWING FOR
60TE Ix
E.VP TANNER CREEK R8 ZONE SHEET ND.
SURVEY MERIDI A
MERIAN,iDAgO a>6+!
ROE!A.E.EE76
GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN THE NW kS OF THE 58 h OF 5ECTIOH 13, t.3N„ RAW. 4.u., DWG_DATE
MERIDIAN.ADA COUNTY,IDAMD 1/24/TA7D
Page 24
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 107 of 183
DESCRIPTION FOR
TANKER C#ttAEK SUEDMSMN
ZONE R-15
A wrcel cd lend fduitod in 1ha'Iocatacd in the NW 1A at the SE 1J4 rrf Zeel.;Cn 13.T 3N,
R.1W., B.M.,Meridlort,Aida Cour4y.Idaho mor9 partrularly described it fU ows'
CortEhl6 aka at the CIA earner of bald Sec tom 13 from wni�M the E 1 A op"r at'W4
Sectkoh 13 bears South 59`5243"F;Qst,2642.71 laet,
lhance along the E=W-V*5t cardedum M 3ard Sadwn 13 Saulh OF52'4:r Ea91,789.49
I�et;
rheno lean-ng send East-WVeat cantedise SOW'l>a°64'00"EAEt, 196.50 feel loft FMAt-
POINT OF GEGINNINi3,
*mnce torA}nuing South 00'00'OT East.431.E6#set,
tlhenc�e North W59'05"West,104.70 fees
thence$north 0O"011Y East, W5 35feet;
thence$txittr W5&W East, 104 79leet;
11hance South fl0^f}f'11"VVasl_395 4R Ieet,
thence Wprlh t3E'S9'p5"Want, 125.115 fRHK
th@nca SCUM R'33'04"VVsst,89.77 feet:
Ih6nth Nj)rh 89`58'43'4V".427.04 rest,
1lhence-84.04 feel akng Ihs Wt UI curve ttt the ngtu,said cLrwo hoving a whus of 53.50
feet,a jAe1"i angm of W'Cw'i3"8n¢a IorM]chord which hears Ndrth 44`58'97"We-75.98
le-et:
tl't m*Nedh WOV30"Eaal,422 55 feet;
whence South 84'56'05'EaBL 48,97 fW,
Inence 199 11 Iflet apong the arc of curve to lfle 1el«,sake curva hawlre a rWlrie of 125A0
'.eet,a cahtrial angle of 91'15'53"wild a dprg chord whICM Mpm Narlh 44r2f45V E;st,178.72
iret.
thence Wrth Ot9 W14'East,391.54 feet,
11tience 54tih 89*52'4.3"Eeal,305.30 feel:
tner"SOLM 68'43'39"Eost,5S_52 feet:
thence 5ouhI4U"58115'East. 1P9.81 Feet,
ihenra North 90 OO'East.15 04 TsM 10 the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING
€.ar&wriw.p 17 V acres,more or Ica}
�I LAND
ye
i 7729
Page 25
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 108 of 183
BASIS.•QF.P ARING
589'62'43"E 2642,71.............
' I
CENTER L •-1 l4
1/4 7sa.4a' w 5,13 5.18
0
U,NPL3FTED 0 umpLATPED S$9'56'05"E (n RPCJB
589'S2'43
� "E 109.91'
_ 3Q5.30 L1
--, S88'43'3S"E laq
10
u'11
■ p
�
. � M
W
oaq VI Io
r u ❑ O Q
2 0
q� 0
� 1 a
y N89'S6'05"W
104,70' J L
r�y
W. RUDDY ❑R.
--S4'41'15"E
12.20 a,c. 105-35' o LIj
I 589'56'05"E N
s o 1 46.97' U
q a tG N I 104.79' Lj
1 q Q
I LO Ln
o t °w of LINE TABLE 1.
M 1�
' LINE LENGTH SEARING
DI
zI L1 15.00 N90'0a'ff0"E
•. I
op S68'33'04"W
q c C' _ N89'55,43'"W 56.77
ti 0 427.00' o
a 7729 w
y N89`5fi'05"W ��',��61LolO �0
125,16' F pp 1'O t4i
Y G.G�`�
10 WB INTERSTATE 64
I
I
CURVE TABLE
CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHORD DIST. CHORD GRG. DELTA
1/4�j13 C1 53,50 64.04 75.66 N44-58'37"w 90'00'13"
5 � C2 125.00 199.11 176.72 N44`25'59"E 91'15'53"
SOB NQ,
I�AH� m EXH1131T __ DRAWING FOR -13.3
145DE U"MR'°"FABT. TANNER CREEK R15 ZONE S+eea No.
SURVEY MMMAN%Q&HQ 074A8 1
i24brem-nsre nwc, DATE
GROUP, LLC LOCATEC In ]THE NW x Df tHE SE OF SECTION FS, TAN„ R.M.O.A.
MERIDIAN.!WR OIINTY, IDAM I/24/Z=
Page 26 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 109 of 183
DESCRIPTION rOR
TANNER CREEK SUBDIVISION
ZONE R-40
A parcel of land located in the located in the NW 114 of the 5E 114 of Section 13, T.3N.,
R,1 W„ B.M., Meridian.Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the C114 corner of said Section 13 from which the E114 corner of said
5ectlon 13 bears 5oith 89°52'43'' East 2642.71 feet;
thence along the East-West centerline of said Section 13 South 89°52'43"East, 789.49
feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along said East-West centerline South 89°52'43'' East, 531.98 feet to
the C-E 1116 corner of said Section 13;
thence along said East boundary line of the NW 114 of the SE 114 of said Section 1.3
South 00"9'35"West, 1281,39 feet to a paint on the North right-of-way line of Interstate 84;
thence along the North right-of-way line of Interstate 84 the following 3 courses and
distances,.
thence South 84°03'28"West,43.25 feet;
thence South 82°20'13"West, 275.70 feet;
thence North 59'58'43"West, 208.42 feet;
thence leaving said North right-of-way line North 00'DO'00"East, 589,86 feet
thence North 89°56'05''West, 104.66 feet;
thence North 00"0115"West, 105.35 feet;
thence South 89°58'05"East, 104.70 feet;
thence Norlh 00°00'00"East, 628.45 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING
Containing 16.14 acres, more or less.
�GEN3�C�` .p�
IL 7729 X
+2��lcft
QRYG,CR
Page 27 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 110 of 183
BASIS OF BEARING
589'52'43"E 2C42,71'� •...
_ CE 1/15 1/4
CENTER _ LTMIIf� SAME 5695243E 531-98 \�
1 I4 789.49' 1321.24 V 1 5.1 S
Yi -- ---
I FPOB I
E � I
1 `
I
N
cc !
+I � uNFr.ArrEn
L" fI W
a�z
I I
I`E` f
I W I
589'S&'05"E I � I
N --NO'01,15"W 1fi,1� G.C. I
- 105.35' 1
� o
N89'56'05"W Jv
104.88' I
I I
'v
� E �
mil �
1
UNPL47'TRJ7 rr
❑ I o1 I�
U) o
zl
,
E 1 i
E I ,
589 58'43"E N89'58'43"W 582'x —
275.70
791.0a' 208.42' S84"03'25"W
a
WB INTERSTATE 84 43.25'
I �`{ NSA$f/G
r 25 100 +10'Y
7729
I-1 14 — 0 5o 200 fsnn � I i�
SCALE: 1" 200' DORY G.0
tom„ .c, r,,•o: -:si ,p9 M0.
IQAHO m� EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR
s'w E,d reerowEns_ TANNER CREEK R 0 ZONE skeeT wo.
SURVEYY�IERIMAN.10M>0�,2
Qr
E7Q6}e 37[7 MWC. OAYE
j5GROUP, LLC LDCAfEO IN i}lE HW NZWDG NEADA CWNM IOA14Aa 13N.,R.1 w„B.AI., 1/�f/2G20
Page 28
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 111 of 183
C. Preliminary Plat(date: 02/11/2020) &Phasing Plan
ID
F IT
—_
F �' _rp Val
�• 4 � OISi F —
_ -_ it -- ■ � x-
r F#I �hr 1M • R itf c yr
ii'i1S�'S
y 7�ANNEIRCPHEEX
BDIVSHON
UUM
Egg-
Sri I --- — w+wrarf
_ ��'''•' x_Ts�i' m�F.
. I
T_
_ 1 Wk.
I RAm
+AIINGY
' ORCW.LTC
1-7IAINNER OWES[ :�UBEHYIWPJ
»tier• _r--�_ -- ---.
Page 29 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 112 of 183
D Lu
0 � WALTMAN
U m BRIDGE #2
In
WALTMAN LN
L I
leis 10 !a e 1 0 10 1 !b
BONNE TIO C
w
—0—
OD
63
1-84
PHASING PLAN
Page 30 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 113 of 183
D. Landscape Plan(dated: 2/5/20)
. I.R.. _ _ _._ - -''!f�
� - -
�, � 7 .. i.� .,
• � � •
i }
� � r 1 { ..�iy-f5
_ I �y �.-- � .�ii
�.y - � =rt.-- �i Ikr rfw�i
. _ _ �- ffull.dd � �� I
r_#5# _ ._ :� � i .. .
� - ��
_ _� .. 3
q� T.WIEV.f.1�9SSIJ6714151p% «nµi•ilr �`'����'1J
1 I+wVTWdrGANF L:I:L3�:d.-.:.e.�
+2FWOLhH.i0.hH6 =
�wr�x�- pTY OF LFJd�I/H ROE Y. l'E RE.B�IRE►IE.NTB
I alr'I .I .� . a �` sr�.. --Wr-�- I .-
--'--� 1.'. I
. r��
•- - - -
__. _' I Sr... .....
- � -
f _ i' ±LPL.. -_-- �
- � �.l.. 3
I � I ` r�
I I — I�I - :�Y_ � PNdiF{`I rY-Celu.flC�x �
i _ r I � ��a�,--.'a.=s~ � '-ram"-��.-w
��� r
.I � �;. �...�...
�'T
. ��.. IyIyii
r r r a r . ��, ..�� �Y
,JWIri'.iPG urrrclr a
�otX�'a XV.7r �rr�rr...s—�.... .�.-' ze CCtl YNSLL'IbLJr�7'�'�'�-•
-y SAT••_: 1_5_.Z'� �Z��� � U 'S4r 1Y S'
��rt . 4'.� .�i r �.:V.'#9!.2'JfZ1Cl _ �� �Zi� �
��L�t � ••_ $Ji. -��—}ti='r��' �---- cararmsm_r r� _V_
,? ' Taw-.smm,.�:r: s•r_,;�.t�},��.. '�ry - ���r�.:xsx .�x•* 3,��, �1A
Page 31
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020- Page 114 of 183
k WtiRUN Lmi r�L rvrr L cn:ur5
41
2-1
r }
.A: -IT
--— Cr.
w Rump Lla
--
lip+ kSrrE AM iaEA ONE ——
L�1
I CALLCU L r,EOM
�—
�O .y
sXUi
• $ — i — LY-"31,�,.. ,ZL- is SG O
LU
r Laas -utrrr. xar.
Lt7
Page 32 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 115 of 183
UMMNOLUSIM r i r/MLcac`_n I
IIy7}II Wr���..�
I �
_ �•.� L fe
WK
}tF1rl4-A"HXAC - -1
I LiA
5
N RL86ti'OR IT
n
uffmmamr—
ow
4 ,
t m
a
R_
01
F—T I —F'—T
MAP Lk IN Pk1L
FZ
I
I Lt9
4
Page 33 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 116 of 183
a v a.xs�cm- t tt !ei � , ate
sir��s�:�z�= acaxs !'..,r.,_ yrv ?� •g _ _.. 31 :i=-
+4W7Y � mvre¢r�ac� .a i�x���.i��� �'��'��3'i -Y�'�_•i_i` ;�I
••1-�Wirr�cyr 't'+•�'_ Trip PpowqK710H F1Jlrt¢ .. �
-
EL it
ii
i2
ZM=M-1
, EEfY+S? ?r _
gill
E
�.'Yr: i.1i'gaa�'� I s �r•li'�
--ns&s
-
^_�.___"-------- t t _-_-
sav rimer rw m ea i zm
��_,�`.� L,I�y��•+WI.��}�^��,�,.�. JI'I L7II {7IIIe ZJLL
1 3HFi U�l�LJ4H 11 Ci paE •. �rR�k11A�i�"-
.�'FT I p.Q47, y. }
LU
� 'T141T�"""' S 9YC�RAG7f �� R AHTIkC
P atr r. �E
El.
xt „
MMYLPENCFPANEL
sr,x�r�euma.�.R�R.,....,.
Lit
Page 34 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 117 of 183
Ian
- - y
lIF-
® '
1
MCA
STUNNING BEAUTY
LIFETIME
* r
Y-
� i
DURABILITY
Page 35
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 118 of 183
-
r "s O
r� -
T
rrs-rr w arws rum Fva v-=' D
15 MO GF!I -km'T P 6bm ro SSA IF MEN S-]m T+..a la Faq�uan w
15
0
WLU
Q�
<W .
s I LU Q
l ��W
r�olrmwnrnI t Ld
mZ
W
rA-►+n�a I ��W
tr au.�
7a7
H'_i15'iYl6Y.lJ lil!_{ F YRIS IIX PFfXiYS :IX-:5' •itll UAL
4rS nt Maas II
m,Q a
Tm MLIL
rrtrk NEWMAr�r d1x6wYftm'r
q �rwnar.wo waprwaajWJj§% T=
I `
u
1
{ I I
tj
S,"41e�i+n�Ali WI�Nliull
Iannar Ema
Monaan.lcahaJ- 5}
Page 36 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 119 of 183
E. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 2/5/20) & Site Amenities
CITY OF MERIDIAN
SINGLE FAMILY (R-8 AND R-15) OPEN
SPACE REQUIREMENTS
QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE
M OPIN 5PA=Rii�Y'JIFF To TA.Aw. ]t!wgu,['h FRQVI=.
�ZYJ/4�IFIER 5PAor) gNAZf 5P -M563 t2.2aAc.P 136_g2 0_i-f AG}
=100 AC3 IQq, 143$
LANDSCAPE LEGEND
OVALIFIED OPEN SPACE
W WALTMAN LANE —
18,912 SQ-FT.
I W BROWN TROUT❑R.
:.REA=2,B3®SQ.FT. �7�.AREA=
w jujujul .
} ARE4=2,735 SO.7.
I W EIDER DR.
Ia
f W RUDDY_F:. ®D
AREA--7$,448 SC.FT.
r El
} r
3 . W BACKWOODS DR-
i
N
1 w LLl r
Uj
� 4 r
Z
W
W
I a
3
fn AREA='7973Q.FT-
3
W JAGKSNIPE DR-
i
II1 ' II
1
s
NOT TO SCALE
i
TANNER CREEK 'S°�°
WALTMAN LANE, MERIDIAN PROJECT#:172U3
R _ _ OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT
Page 37
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 120 of 183
42.
■ ■ unnilIRo
NIHON
w N
m
p w 1 1
u
1 � 1' 1 ■ � w 1 1 ��
w w uu
� Y w • 'I
�1 1 1 li
-
;r
aOil C it
TANNER CREEK PROJECT it-1720
Y � R
w �
w
ryi 1 1
w
`IiNf 1 li w w 1 �
II 1
�Irs as rat r � ■x*
r t
r � �
WALTMAN LANE, MERIDIAN
OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT
IRECKONL
. . . . �.- .. 1 1 .m
Playground Equipment in Single-Family Portion of Development:
a
Ly -
r +F
a t
#.4
.° sk•° Tan ner Crew k
k J sonar
�ilillll f
Ara M
s
Ir
Page 39
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 122 of 183
Playground Equipment for Multi-Family Portion of the Development:
Pedestrian Bridge over the Ten Mile Creek:
1
w
Page 40 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 123 of 183
F. Site Plan for Multi-Family Portion of Development(date: 1/14/2020)
TANNER CREEK
t APARTMENTS TAO
V WrILTMJLK LANE-hFLRolAil_I11J11IU
i WKIIbL WE NOTES ^•�•• ten,
I T'` MN06 ituARf 11hbPMfI$I!---------t-4'i-4i1
MT14 WV..................t 1W AWES
—� r oEYwry PIDOPOM: ...........17.17 LUJ=RE
OPF�#P10E' 25.7%
--_J N44RER OP DHEL11110 UNITS PROP41M,,,,,173 nrrS
19E0R1MUNITS R6•W ,....................74
• 2 JI11 H iINFrS r31�°Gl.....................in
- 3 RFPRGnu ICY rrg PM .....................56
TYPE'J<'ACCESS1111E lArr%JrM,...............6
I-0ISPERA6d IK UNIES YOYq
— — 'ARI MO CRACf#E16QUIRE0t
------� JIFAWFI11EHn,,,,,,,,,.....................5rA TANIIFR QPM
CLURBOLml--------------------------------10 AFAUNENTi
— 1 TOTAL PARKING SPAMPrEDWREo-............. 511
I P&ARINO VAUS PROVIKO.....................548 WALTLL"L_*T
MRS.RER.HT PR6POH9.....................4u'-W'
------ 4PENt0WW9b RwO
rTnTM _- REYTHRiR CKALLEYCiR REVELOPMEF
lilloHl 117?{.99ER1.N 10AD
U RIDIEN.WHO B3642
tfYILLIMDSt.4PE: 9RECKON LAND DESIGN
fi"I q U tmymuo sr.
A3tW_IDAI+u I
i � m
2
_ MWFsr
_ 1 I w
.. ... TA
dir�rser �
�r�*� a �rTE MJW II�fRik'.
it-i-.hAw
Page 41 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 124 of 183
LJ
— �� II r 1}�f •s�t7�Y
� � Tu.el cue
F
NMI 4 7
— I i
mor �
4 �
1'
_ J '
- - � -• � �.Inenv
JIL L
It
f' I f
— ' - --- SU1.2
casaba r t �
Page 42 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 125 of 183
Z=W TWO
4.,
�'S� ��� I I�� '•'— 3T7PR11 iriEL OOfl1A!
• IYI�ILJI#�11 PIRIR .. .. W"
CM.Il.11 CMIb7L ANM •-_�s
_ . _ __ C�TRIEH HIGWEIIIE ITiCTgM
TMNStMEEN
YIR6lF
•VIM KTKKTK BcurC RN 111L11 IRLI 431TFKY Ci11Y1R9Ol DIYl11m
yy�cORFF�e.l ruoxiw li y+� lilaM511Llruuxsu■ tUjRtNSL4iM1iER_ ��T&WWPIM�MOl11Wf U .
-
irr
f _ �rrOOIOiWO�I BG�E SLF. ��
SD1.3
G. Building Elevation Photos for Single-Family Dwellings
Alley-Loaded Detached Units:
Page 43 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 126 of 183
Townhome Units:
now � � � ■ x
AM
poll - - ,
Front-Loaded Detached Units:
iF
Page 44 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 127 of 183
aw
I �71'1
1 G -
p gag
&TK6-vmilm .0.
n
Page 45 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 128 of 183
H. Building Elevations &Renderings and Floor Plans for Multi-Family(date: 01/14/2020):
M-NNEFt CREEK APANTMEN75
EXTEA1OR PAINT SCHEME
!{{1[TTA I rrUMt ELtvAlb04%
4t UGGVl4 MARID 111ATUN AZMT FPANU 4 10111 IY4FGIA+�11�#Xitf
$146O9Y SYl64�� faMN IFIXOMum ONT
5147674
WAFish Writ 5W6116 PepprimI,
Txlaml Tau 5W71)44
3rwrteund 'P71POg iA I-e&.Rrx
NOR
A ,
wa Q Q 0 Lij
t l_ la, Q _ I ter• LJkJLR GLIL
� �FAII�kJ IY
=!/r e8n�•iM r1Ri
orb, rr
ti _- �
OM
Page 46 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 129 of 183
T
A 0
r .
I rEt
a
1AIF:7YFLl5
IUIGIN:I7R1 i!
y FNS.'•1¢ll 11W �
I L
G rI� Lr
F..
_ cm
1UL1d PK 71Y i Isicl Y
,Waif T1rE 7 +A/�
1 Fe�oFonw�rui_ {
wives
TAIkNER CREEK APARTMENTS COH H4w�5
EXTERIOR PAINT SCHEME
Sta4 TYPE A TOGNT ELEVATION
ST occe:h00Y 8DAM1I AMAT IEft AEC bmt 90Llma 0 FASCUUSk1kGIlETS
Sw6U01 5W54ffJI BATTE14 fl Mirt.f6wt. SW75Pk
Grayio-h M,n4 SW5115 Pepperc&n
Ta1amlTan SINIGUA
SA Wmbild 'BalI,ng to ho®LACK
IRON
Page 47 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 130 of 183
A-'
.PXIM
- i^ �-yy r T --
--- •'-� W I la L.
�rmrem�ec-r�amc x
+�ccrr�wwm�a,rw�wamre �gH�nwnwn-w„rwrnc c
s8.1
TA
: ' �
T4
7 J 1
ff
i
i -
112.1
liil/hxr
Page 48 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 131 of 183
TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS CBFI w Es
EXTERIOR PAINT SCHEME
11.06 UWE]€R4NT ELEVATION
ww af a
S I I7r;.CEFrroov BodRb b 9ANTIN AcrUT 134i1RO 41 TRtM FRSOMPA- US
SY16601 SW5004 BITTEN wlwows.aaafas, SW7534
eAmw
Grayish Mink SW5115 PUPPOII13M
TaiamiTin SWIO04
Snowboard 'RallLngto!beBLACK
IRON
TA�E54I AI=.
ifr t—
RUA"
�� dru rr
i°d. + dcM +
•a
ate--•• .. _ - --- R'sw}- — ___
2IF F1 EW"EVIn I B4ILPIW rYPF# 3 Hk1Kr EN EDI qHI-4HLH NO# ¢ 2
oml.rwim
Page 49
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 132 of 183
i
r _ -
- I �p
-{
■rrry� � �� 1 a..
�' J+ r1KMER CREEK
"1+ - rPU17ME415
WLP
- n
.s, � r a a•,
i RAII#LMI S G L.i
TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS CBM
EXTERIOR PAINT SCHEME
Glv6liur:S[
STUCC0786DY 9921M E Ci7TE11 ACCE MT E89R6 a TRIM FASCWBRACKETSi
51Y51041 51Y 444 MAYtEN k1kaows 1.1& FIE4NIT aoUN
Grayish Minh SW6116 a•a�, SW7674
T.at4miTin paMMOrp
Snawhoun,d
Page 50
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 133 of 183
I
rd�T++�lrotl�elEairlu.-Cu iNouu
4,f. f+YYYII ceYn
WUNEttd
.� • Ffl [D
rs � rLD
��r• a�rne.-a.rgrxE
i - ,
wu��yuu1e 11nlw-wwau� S0 .3
alu`w'�
M„
LE
0 0
I i Y�if 1N:Mf4
YY���III .1
H
$02.3
1A�111rt11
Page 51 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 134 of 183
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Development Agreement Modification:
1. The subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the existing Development Agreement
(DA) (Inst. #108131100)upon the property owner(s)entering into a new agreement. The new DA
shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the City within six(6)months of City
Council granting the subject modification. The new DA shall include the following provisions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual site plan,
conceptual building elevations,preliminary plat,phasing plan, landscape plan, and qualified
open space exhibits included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein.
b. The off-site construction of the bridge across the Ten Mile Creek and associated extension of
Corporate Drive from the north to Waltman Lane and detached 5-foot wide sidewalk along the
east side of the street shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits in Phase I of the
development.
c. All of the improvements to Waltman Lane west of the Ten Mile Creek bridge shall be completed
prior to issuance of building permits in Phase 2 of the development. The re-construction and
widening of the bridge across the Ten Mile Creek and associated widening of W.Waltman Lane
including the off-site construction of a detached 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of
Waltman Ln.to Meridian Rd. shall be completed prior to issuance of building permits in Phase-2
3 of the development.
d. Noise abatement shall be provided for residential uses adjacent to Interstate 84 in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. A minimum 9-foot tall berm and 5-foot tall wall on top
of the berm shall be provided parallel with I-84 along the southern boundary of the site;the
height of the berm/wall combination shall be a minimum of 10 feet higher than the elevation at
the centerline of the freeway. To avoid a monotonous wall along I-84,the color and/or texture of
the wall is required to be varied every 300 linear feet or the wall staggered every 300 linear feet
as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4D.3c. The berm and wall in its entirety shall be constructed with
the first phase of development prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for
the development.
e. All townhome and multi-family structures shall comply with the design standards listed in the
Architectural Standards Manual; single-family detached structures are exempt from this
requirement. An administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted for
approval of the design of all townhome structures in the development prior to submittal of
building permit application for those structures.An application for Certificate of Zoning
Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for the multi-family
portion of the development prior to submittal of building permit applications.
f. No building permits shall be issued for this development until the property has been subdivided.
Preliminary Plat:
2. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, shall be revised as follows:
a. Depict zero(0)lot lines where townhome units are proposed in Blocks 6, 7, 8 and 9.
3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.D shall be revised as follows:
a. Depict a 5-foot wide landscape strip along the east side of the pathway along the creek with
landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.
Page 52
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 135 of 183
b. Correct the height of the SimTek wall along I-84 from 4-to 5-foot tall as proposed by the
Applicant.
4. Address signage needs to be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways
for emergency wayfinding purposes.
5. All alleys shall be constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5.
6. All common driveways shall be constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.
7. The setbacks, fencing,building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures accessed by
common driveways shall be shown on an exhibit submitted with the final plat application as set forth
in UDC 11-6C-3D.7.
8. A perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveways shall be filed with the Ada County
Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of
supporting fire vehicles and equipment as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D.8. A recorded copy of the
easement(s) shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the final plat for City Engineer
signature.
9. All existing structures on this site are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat for
the phase in which they are located.
10. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway shall be submitted to the
Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation.
11. If private streets are determined to be needed for addressing purposes by the Fire Dept. and Police
Dept. for emergency wayfinding in the multi-family portion of the development,a private street
application shall be submitted with the final plat application for the phase(s) in which the apartments
are located.
12. Traffic calming measures shall be implemented where Ruddy Dr. connects to the subdivision at the
west boundary of the site,as allowed by ACHD.
Conditional Use Permit:
13. The multi-family development shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use
standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27.
14. For each of the multi-family units, a minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open
space shall be provided for each unit as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3. This requirement can be
satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Floor plans with square footage
noted for patios and balconies shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application that demonstrate compliance with this standard.
15. The multi-family development shall record a legally binding document that states 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 document shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance
of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.
16. The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised
as follows:
a. Depict a minimum of 22 bicycle parking spaces in bicycle racks dispersed throughout the
development.
Page 53 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 136 of 183
b. All transformer and utility vaults and other service areas shall be located in an area not visible
from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street in accord with
UDC 11-4-3-2713.2.
c. Correct the width of the berm within the street buffer along Waltman Ln. from 20-to 15-feet
wide on Sheet L1.5,Detail#1,per the Applicant.
d. Depict landscaping along the foundations of all street facing elevations adjacent to Waltman Ln
as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2.
e. Include a detail of the pergola shade structure and fire pit.
f. Depict a directory and map of the development at the entrance or convenient location for those
entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-2713.7.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.1 A portion of this project lies within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. Prior to any
development occurring in the Overlay District a floodplain permit application, including
hydraulic and hydrologic analysis is required to be completed and submitted to the City and
approved by the Floodplain Administrator per MCC 10-6.
1.2 As preliminarily designed, SSMH A-2 is in an inaccessible area by being located in a landscaped
walkway area. There also appears to be separation issues with the water main that is generally
parallel through this area. At a minimum,these utilities shall have a 14-foot wide compacted
gravel roadways constructed over top of them to make them accessible by a service truck. No
structures are allowed to be constructed within the easement areas for the sanitary sewer
mainlines.
1.3 Meridian Public Works has modeled each phase per the preliminary plat submitted. Currently
each phase meets minimum flow requirements,but each phase will need to be re-modeled at
Final Plat application to confirm minimum flow requirements are met. No structures are
allowed to be constructed within the easement areas for the water mainlines.
1.4 Applicant shall be required to submit up to date geotechnical information and recommendations
for the project site with the final plat application. The abbreviated report from SITE Consulting,
LLC that was submitted with this application is dated February 20,2018,and it indicates that
groundwater monitoring effort began in June of 2017. It is also noted in the report that"The
Ada County Soil Survey, (US Soil Conservation Service) indicates the onsite groundwater may
be as shallow as 1.5-3.0 feet in the northeast half of the site along Ten Mile Creek and greater
than 80 inches deep in the Southwest half." The SITE report in part also states that"Measured
and reports depths to groundwater indicate this development can be constructed but will require
either substantial filling or shallow/high groundwater methods for storm water disposal.
Groundwater will require pumping during installation of deep utilities but will not impact
construction of future homes or right of ways on the property." The design engineer and
developer should consult heavily with the geotechnical engineer to ensure that homes can be
constructed free from intrusion of groundwater. The developer/builder should consider slab on
grade construction methods.
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
Page 54
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 137 of 183
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 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.
2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface
or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
prior to receiving development plan approval.
2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat
by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation
and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC.
2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting,
crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per
UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207
and any other applicable law or regulation.
2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service
per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering
Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of
Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190.
2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures
and inspections(208)375-5211.
2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,
road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision
shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits.
2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy
of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance
surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set
forth in UDC 11-5C-3B.
Page 55
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 138 of 183
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.
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.
Page 56 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 139 of 183
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=184671&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
D. POLICE DEPARTMENT
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184716&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=185135&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City
F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID)
https://weblink.meridiancity.orQ/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=184911&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD)
https:11weblink.meridianciby.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184500&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ)
https://weblink.meridianciN.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184889&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
I. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=185552&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
J. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org,/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=185863&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org,/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187106&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=187105&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=187484&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
Traffic Impact Study:
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187102&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
Traffic Trip Generation Study:
https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=187103&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
IX. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. hi order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Commission finds the Applicant's proposal to rezone and develop the subject 38+/-acre property
with a variety of residential uses is consistent with the associated MDR &MU-C FL UM designations
Page 57 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 140 of 183
for the property and applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as noted above in Section V.B.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the
purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development complies with the purpose
statement of the residential districts in that it will provide for a range of housing opportunities for
the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing
residential properties to the west, north and east.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school
districts; and
The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. Area schools
are currently under capacity but this may change if boundaries are adjusted.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed rezone is in the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6)
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)
The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant
complies with the Development Agreement provisions and conditions of approval in Section VIII.
2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed
development;
The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be
adequate to accommodate the proposed development.
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital
improvement program;
The Commission finds the proposed plat is in 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;
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or general welfare.
Page 58
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 141 of 183
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005,
eff. 9-15-2005)
The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to
be preserved with this development.
C. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-5B-6E)
The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit requests 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 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.
The Commission finds that the proposed use is consistent with the future land use map designation of
MU-C and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2A-2 in the R-40 zoning district.
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 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.
The Commission 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 Council 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.
The Commission finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will
be adequately served by these facilities.
Page 59 —
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 23,2020— Page 142 of 183
Public Testimony
Clair and Carrie Manning - Tanner Creek Project
Tanner Creek Clair and Carrie Manning
Area View Future DevelopmentExtensionRoadApartmentsHigh Density (30 Houses)R4 (27 Apartments + Clubhouse)R40(45 Houses)R15 Ruddy Drive EntranceredniL
Entrance to 515 ft320 ft Waltman
Future Bottlenecks on Waltman 485 ft turning lane accessCar LimitsBackward View:herecar in turning lane Only room for one taneNo turning
Current 7:30 AM Commute
Conclusion work and raise a family. premier community in which to live, : By 2035, Meridian will be the West’s City Visionto the stewardship of our community’s resources. dedicated community
by developing service through committed, equipped employees We love Meridian; It’s our town and our mission is to cultivate a vibrant City Mission: Please preserve our city vision and
keep meridian a premier community !•proud of. Please deny this application so we can leave a legacy our grandchildren can be •overloaded system. adjacent subdivision for R4 zoning
to minimize traffic impact on an already R15 and R40 zoning is inappropriate for this area. We recommend matching •
Thank You
Backup
2018 Traffic Impact Study the new development. Traffic study does not include estimates for •3,000 for a new collector–ACHD guideline for collectors•Trips per day estimate: 2,928•
Corporate Development
WaltmanLn
Corporate Extension expenserelocated at developers Request Irrigation be •construction. privacy fence be responsible for •
Recent High Density Apartments
Public Testimony
Joe Lorcher - Tanner Creek Project
Destination: Downtown Vision and Master Plan retail, will create jobs in Meridian.Mixed Commercial Activity of new restaurants, businesses, and specialty •environment.use urban -The
Downtown Vision is primarily focused on creating a mixed•Meridian community and the Treasure Valley.opportunities and strategies for strengthening Downtown’s role in the The Downtown
Master Plan is intended to help identify potential •
Southern Gateway Entertainment DevelopmentResidential ZEROand use commercial -with mixwhich foresees this area Southern Gateway District Waltman Lane is within the As you can see on
the map, and Hospitality District
Southern Gateway Framework Examples different methods of enhancing the southern entry into the downtown. Locate and emphasize gateway features and explore Gateway Features:•downtown
will support other businesses and stimulate new development.community amenity for the downtown area. A facility close to the core of purpose center in this district to serve as a major
anchor point, and -multiLocate a Purpose Events Center/Sports Facility:-Locate a Multi•impression and beautifies the gateway to the city. Ensure this area projects a positive first
Extensive Landscaping:•the district.restaurants, and entertainment venues that reinforce the hospitality function of Introduce facilities like hotels, Hotel and Upscale Restaurant Uses:•
Focus Areas
In Conclusion development will bring to Meridian and deny this development.Please carefully consider the negative impacts and missed opportunities this •Dense residential is highly inappropriate
for this area.-High•Let’s not waste that opportunity!progressive development. We have a real opportunity here to make this area unique and create innovative and •attract both local
residents and visitors resulting in economic growth.This area could potentially promote entertainment and gathering places which would •-that will contribute to a mixedto meet the downtown
elements strategicallyThis area of land needs to be developed •Downtown Meridian is running out of land and we need to preserve open spaces.•A wall does not give a positive first impressionGateway.
84 and it needs to be developed to enhance and beautify the -Meridian from IThe Southern Gateway entrance is the first impression visitors will have of Downtown •
Gateway to the City Tanner Creek Development
Sources https://www.meridiandevelopmentcorp.com/sites/default/files/imce/Vision%2BDocument_052510.pdf–Destination Downtown: Vision and Master Plan •
Slide 1
Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 2 and 3
Slide 4
Slide 4
Slide 4
Slide 4
Public Testimony
Joseph Lorcher – Tanner Creek Project
Greenhead St(Stub Street)Ruddy Dr.(Stub Street)
•access point ONLYRuddy Dr. will be the •Therefore, Greenhead St will not be a second access point to distribute traffic from the west neighborhood•I will not give written permission
to annex my land•I do not use City water or City sewer•04My land is devoted to agriculture as defined in Idaho Code section 63•I am the owner, and my land is more than 5 acres
1 around the corner.and using the park. Especially on a curve where you can’t see safety risk for the children and bicyclist living in this neighborhood HUGE 700 homes of traffic coming
in and out next to the park is a 1 Access Point4 Access Points VS x 1432
•829 Ft= Distance of no sidewalk= proposed sidewalk No Crosswalk! Not Safe!•south sideNo sidewalk for 829 ft on •No Bike Lanes•No Crosswalk
In Conclusion a gathering spot for Entertainment and small businesses.this gateway to the city be more than high density apartments. It should be I have lived and worked on Waltman Lane
since 1975 and would love to see •that will follow Meridian’s comprehensive plan.use development -density mixed-residential development. We need a lowdensity -fire hazard that this
land is currently at. I am opposed to the highI am not opposed to developing these 36 acres. I am tired of the weeds and •proposed park and the crosswalks or lack there of.traffic going
through Ruddy and onto Waltman Ln. Especially by the Safety issues for pedestrians and bicyclists are a main concern with all this •traffic on Waltman Ln. and Corporate drive.will be
concentrated at Ruddy Dr. and then add to this development’s own traffic coming from the west neighborhood ALLWith only one access point, •
Sources 222/-CT50https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title50/T50CH2/SE•&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCityhttps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=183999Development’s
Application: •
Public Testimony
Kelsee Lorcher - Tanner Creek Project
Missed Opportunity for Mixed Land Use meeting. We have no idea what he’ll actually do.Therefore, Hawkins land should not have any influence on the decision today in this •Hawkins will
develop his land into commercial. A personal conversation between Shultz and Hawkins is not a guarantee that •sold it off to Conger who developed that land primarily with residential.Hawkins
owned a piece of land, said he was going to develop commercial, but then We have seen a situation before with Hawkins and the Stapleton Subdivision where •use as a whole.-so their combined
developments result in a mixMatt Shultz is relying on Hawkins's land to the East to be developed as commercial •
Future Land Use Map Not 100%should be residential. of the development 20% Use Community Zones states that only -In the Comp Plan, Mixed Motion 2040 VisionCommunities in –COMPASS
“My Meridian Vision” Themes Goals-How This Development Fails provide the most efficient transportation and will create more problems.Interchange will HIGHLY be impacted with increased
congestion. This does not the west neighborhood, the Waltman/Meridian Intersection and the Meridian With 3,019 car trips per day AND the amount of cars that Ruddy Dr. will bring from
-City6.01.00 Facilitate the efficient movement of people and products to and from the -Connected Community84.-and bicyclist. Does not promote the city’s character or identity from
Icross the street to the north sidewalk, and it compromises the safety of the children This Development does not include bicycle paths, a crosswalk at the bridge to safely -livability
and high quality of life for all Meridian Residents5.01.00 Sustain, enhance, promote, and protect elements that contribute to -Vibrant Community residential.use development, this goal
could be met, but this development is 100% -With mix-3.06.00 Ensure a variety and balance of land uses within the Area of City Impact-Evolving Community contribute to economic growth.
But this development is 100% residential.use development, this goal could be met which would create more jobs and -With mix-2.08.00 Proactively recruit and attract new business to the
area-Premier Community Failed Goals
How This Development Fails Provide the most efficient transportation network possible (6.01.03)•(5.01.01B)Provide Crosswalks that encourage safe, physical activity for pedestrians and
bicyclists. •(3.06.02)Plan for an appropriate mix of land uses that ensures connectivity, livability and economic vitality. •(3.03.01A)along key transportation corridors. pecial areas,
areas with specific plans, and desired vision in sContinue to develop and implement the •(2.09.02G)infill of activity centers. Develop concept plans of potential destination activities
and promote appropriate development and •(2.09.02A)Destination: Downtown Master Plan Actively implement action items in the •(2.06.01)service economy. -sustaining, full-Diversify Meridian’s
economic base to establish and maintain a self•Fails to:Objectives and Actions-
In Conclusion dense housing is extremely inappropriate for this area.-High•and needs to be protected to reflect those visions.Master Planfrom the specific plans with special area Is
located in a •use development.-Fails to uphold the Comp Plan’s spirit for mix•Fails to create economic growth or tourism. •use development.-Fails to maximize use of infill land by utilizing
mix•Will overcrowd our public schools•Harms the City’s traffic flow at the gateway of the City•Fails to provide safe pathways and bicycle lanes to Downtown Meridian•This development…
•Please deny this development.•growth. Comp Plan hold no meaning or value to Meridian’s future years of hard work and the $200,000 spent creating the do not matter. That the last two
Communities in Motion, and Destination: Downtown Master Plantools like the , and its Comp Planfuture developers and citizens that the If you approve this development today, you will
set a tone to •This is irresponsible growthcreates them. Responsible growth solves problems, irresponsible growth
“In 2019 the city completed a nearly 2 year process of updating our June 22, 2020 Quote from Mayor’s State of the City address Meridian Mayor Robert Simison-.”It should not be changed
much for the first 5 yearssomething.It needs to mean engaging the community about this plan. have spent over $200,000 and countless hours of staff time We any changes can be looked
at in the context of the full plan. the plan be our guide and limit how often it should be amended so Comprehensive Plan. This is the growth plan for our community
Sources https://www.compassidaho.org/documents/prodserv/CIM2040/Map_Final.pdf-COMPASS: Communities in Motion 2040 Vision •https://gis.meridiancity.org/portal/apps/PublicInformation/index.html?appid=0
05c965dd3104770a8740628cc033493-Future Land Use Map •print.pdf-Plan-Comp-https://meridiancity.org/planning/files/compplan/Adopted-2019 Comprehensive Plan •
CIM Vision Map Slide 2
Mixed Use Slide 2 C)-(MUCommunity
Comprehensive Plan Slide 3 Themes-
Premier Community Slide 3 + 4 2.09.02G2.09.02AComp Plan Failed Action2.08.00Comp Plan Failed Goal
Premier Community Slide 4 2.06.01ObjectiveComp Plan Failed
Evolving Community Slide 4 3.03.01AActionComp Plan Failed
Evolving 3.06.02ObjectiveComp Plan Failed 3.06.00Goal Comp Plan Failed Community
Vibrant Community Slide 3 + 4 5.01.01BActionComp Plan Failed 5.01.00Goal Comp Plan Failed
Slide 3 Comp Plan Failed Goal Connected Community
Connected Slide 4 6.01.03ObjectiveComp Plan Failed Community
Extra Info
Quote
Extra Info on Communities in Motion
Extra Info on Destination: Downtown Master Plan
Public Testimony
Sondee Watts – Tanner Creek Project
ACHD Policy Manual:secondary access.subject to fire department requirements for the provision of a allowed at any point on the local street access is 1,000 and is the maximum forecast
ADT to be the public street system, from existing development with only one local street access to , or if it proposes to extend public streets local streetthat is a to a public street
one access If a proposed development only has 7207.3.3 Maximum Traffic on One Access: .Local StreetsTechnical Requirements:-Section 7207
Local Street Kearny AveMuscovy AveKearny Ave Ruddy Drive connects Waltman LaneLocal StreetConnecting
•Trip Generation Estimation for Tanner Creek Dr.through Ruddy West Bound (301 trips) 10% •Waltman.East Bound using (2,717 trips) 90% •Per Day3,019 Vehicles
700 homes x 9.52 trip rate = 1,332 Total VPD20% of 6,664 = 3,332 Total VPD50% of 6,664 = 5,997 Total VPD90% of 6,664 = in the west neighborhood:family homes that are located -singlebe
generated from the number of number of Vehicles Per Day that will Creek used, we can estimate the By using the same formula as Tanner 6,6649.52700HousingFamily Detached -Single Weekly
Daily (Vehicles Per Day)Total TripsUnitTrip Rate per SizeLand Use Trip Generation Summary for West Neighborhood Total Vehicles Per Day6,664
3,633 Waltman LaneVPD 6,049 East Bound2,717 VPD East Bound3,332 VPD 6,664 Total VPDsecond access point in futurebe Annexed and used for a Greenhead St will not be able to West Bound301
VPD Ruddy Dr alone3,633 estimated VPD on = Tanner Creek’s 301 + 3,332 •Per Day on Waltman Lane6,049 estimated Vehicles = Tanner Creek’s 2,717 + 3,332 •Drive and Waltman LaneVPD to
Ruddy additional add an estimated East Bound, that alone will neighborhood use Ruddy Dr If only 50% of VPD from the •Ruddy Dr is only one access •
In Conclusion these reasons, please deny this development.street connection is irresponsible and does not contribute to smart growth, for -This stub•children, pedestrians, and bicyclist
using Waltman Lane and is unacceptable.The sheer volume of additional vehicles is shocking and will compromise the safety of •connection would create an unsatisfactory service level
D or E for Waltman Lane One of the commissioners from the last meeting expressed their concern that this •84 Interchange. -the Waltman/Meridian intersection, and at the Meridian IRuddy
Drive connection will substantially increase traffic and negatively impact Waltman Ln, •Waltman Lane’s Infrastructure cannot sustain the estimated 6,049 vehicle trips a day•secondary
access. This connection should be subject to the fire department requirements for the provision of a •The estimated 3,633 Vehicles Per Day vastly surpasses the maximum 1,000 ADT allowed•access.nd
Ruddy Drive only has one Access Point, Greenhead St. is not an option for 2•Ruddy Drive is a local street connecting to another local street •
SOURCES&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr=1https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=187103•&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCityhttps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=187102•000/Secti
on7200_TechnicalRequirements.pdfhttps://www.achdidaho.org/Documents/ACHDpolicyManual/7000to9•
ACHD Policy Manual : Slide 1 RequirementsTechnical –Section 7200
Slide 3 Page 11 •Submitted 4/30/2020•Development Traffic Impact Study for Tanner Creek
Slides 4 Page 1•Submitted 4/30/2020•Traffic Impact Study for Tanner Creek
Traffic Trip Generation Study for Tanner Creek Slides 3 and 4 Page nd 2•Submitted 4/30/2020•
Public Testimony
Steve McCarthy - Tanner Creek Project
As you can see here, residents from 3 different directions will be coming home by using one left hand turn lane into Waltman Lane’s Entrance.
Drivers have .14 miles to safely get from the off ramp to the left turn lane. That equals to one minute.
1 From the Meridian off ramp, you have to cross 2 lanes to reach the left turn lane.2
You have one minute to try and cross over 2 highly congested lanes to get into the left turn lane during PM peak are trying to get to the left lane and will cause traffic to back up.points
safely. Plus, this will disrupt and could stop the through traffic lanes going into Meridian because drivers traffic hours. This does not give the driver the adequate amount of spacing
and time needed to execute conflict
•Additional items to consider…vehicles per day.50,889 The Meridian/Waltman intersection receives •Not intersection, not interchange, but road.Ada County. in segment of roadmost congested
th 5 84/Meridian Eastbound On Ramp is considered the The I
Eastbound On Ramp receives Annual Weekday Traffic Volumes61,182Westbound On Ramp receives Annual Weekday Traffic Volumes62,182
•will have on traffic, the gateway to the city, and public safety. Please deny this development.I hope you all carefully consider the detrimental impact and dangerous risks this development
•of the day. and alleviate traffic during the peak hours and distribute the daily traffic throughout the hours By doing this, it will reduce use development.-dense mix-protected with
open space and lowThis area needs to be Added traffic will not attract new businesses or desired communities. •intersection and interchange.and will add a substantial amount of new
traffic to the already very highly congested This development and the Ruddy Dr. connection will create 3,000+ new traffic conflicts daily •with the complex driving situations created
by numerous conflicts. Drivers make more mistakes and are more likely to have collisions when they are presented •conflicts that impair the function of the affected facilities.can cause
serious traffic Access connections too close to intersections or interchange ramps •appropriate lane to stop or complete a turn.are responding to the intersection or interchange by
decelerating and maneuvering into the This area is critical to the interchange and intersection function. This area is where motorists
Sources F1G/2018_Congestion_Management_Annual%20Report.pdffile:///C:/Users/Internet/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/IE/8GSRICOMPASS: Treasure Valley Annual Congestion Management
System Report, 2018: •https://www.achdidaho.org/Departments/Engineering/Traffic/trafficCounts.aspxACHD Traffic Count: •
Slide 5ACHD Traffic Count
Slide 5
Slide 6
E IDIAN
I DA 0
H tl*
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Item Title: Future Meeting Topics
Meeting Notes: