Loading...
2020-10-13 Regular WE IDIAN City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, October 13, 2020 at 6:00 PM Minutes VIRTUAL MEETING INSTRUCTIONS Limited seating is available at City Hall. Consider joining the meeting virtually: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88514804426 Or join by phone: 1-669-900-6833 Webinar ID: 885 1480 4426 ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Mayor Robert E. Simison Councilman Joe Borton Councilman Brad Hoaglun Councilman Treg Bernt Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener ABSENT Councilwoman Liz Strader PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion to adopt the agenda with an amendment to remove Item 11: Executive Session made by Councilman Bernt, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener PUBLIC FORUM - Future Meeting Topics The public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at meridiancit .00rg or um to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at Public Forum. However, City Council may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. PROCLAMATIONS [Action Item] 1. Cyber Security Awareness Month RESOLUTIONS [Action Item] 2. Resolution 20-2233: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Camden Hyde as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Arts Commission Motion to approve made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilman Bernt. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener ACTION ITEMS Public Hearing process: Land use development applications begin with presentation of the project and analysis of the application by Planning Staff. The applicant is then allowed up to 15 minutes to present their project. Members of the public are then allowed up to 3 minutes each to address City Council regarding the application. Citizens acting as a representative of a Homeowner's Association may be allowed up to 10 minutes to speak on behalf of represented homeowners who have consented to yielding their time.After all public testimony, the applicant is allowed up to 10 minutes to respond to questions and comments. City Council members may ask questions throughout the public hearing process. The public hearing is then closed, and no further public comment is heard. City Council may move to continue the application to a future meeting or approve or deny the application. The Mayor is not a member of the City Council and pursuant to Idaho Code does not vote on public hearing items unless to break a tie vote. 3. Public Hearing for Updates to the Citywide Fee Schedule 4. Resolution 20-2234: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener S. Public Hearing for Pearson Subdivision (H-2020-0075) by Melanie Pearson, Located at 175 W. Paint Horse Ln. A. Request: A Combined Preliminary and Final Plat consisting of 2 building lots on 3.98 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the development of the property with one additional residential lot and specify the requirements for the connection of city services to existing and future residential structures AND the extension of the future collector street consistent with the MSM. Motion to approve made by Councilman Bernt, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 6. Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman at Black Cat (H-2020-0022) by Baron Black Cat, LLC, Located in the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd.and W. Chinden Blvd. (SH 20/26) A. Rezone a total of 23.63 acres of land for the purpose of reducing the C-C zone from approximately 8 acres to 4.42 acres and increase the R-15 zone from approximately 15.1 acres to approximately 19.2 acres. B. Short Plat consisting of 2 building lots and 2 common lots on 21.59 acres of land in the C-C and R-15 zoning districts. C. Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 196 residential units on 20.13 acres in the R-15 zone. D. Modification to the existing development agreements (Inst. Ws: 106151218; 107025555; 110059432; and 114054272) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of previous agreements and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed development plan. Motion to approve made by Councilman Borton, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener ORDINANCES [Action Item] 7. Ordinance No. 20-1898: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-4- 2(A)(5)(d), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Mobile Sales Unit License; Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-2(C), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Vehicle Immobilization License; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 8. Ordinance No. 20-1899: An Ordinance (H-2020-0035 - Poiema Subdivision) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land as Shown on Record of Survey Number 2880, Recorded as Instrument Number 94050954, Records of Ada County, Situate in a Portion of Government Lot 3, Section 4, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment"A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 14.87 Acres of Land From RUT to R-15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 9. Ordinance No. 20-1900: An Ordinance (H-2020-0032 - Brody Square) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Situated Within the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment "A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho,and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 15.00 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 10. Ordinance No. 20-1901: An Ordinance (H-2019-0106 - Shelburne South) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Being Located in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 28 Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,as Described in Attachment "A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 29.01 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies if this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener FUTURE MEETING TOPICS EXECUTIVE SESSION 11. Per Idaho Code 74-206A(1)(a) To deliberate on a labor contract offer or to formulate a counteroffer; and 74-206(1)d To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1,title 74, Idaho Code Vacated from the Agenda ADJOURNMENT 8:48 pm Item#2. Meridian City Council October 13, 2020. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:06 p.m., Tuesday, October 13, 2020, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Jessica Perreault and Brad Hoaglun. Members Absent: Liz Strader. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Joe Dodson, Brad Purser, Berle Stokes, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault _X Luke Cavener _X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, I will call this meeting to order. For the record it is Tuesday, October 13th, 2020, at 6:06 p.m. We will begin tonight's City Council regular meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you all rise and, please, join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: Next item on our agenda -- and, please, note for the record that Councilman Cavener, who was in Executive Session, took a second to get to his device, has joined us. Our next item is the community invocation, which will be led by Pastor Rod Enos with the Southside Christian Center. Pastor Enos, if you would like to come forward and for all those in the audience if you would like to take this --join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence. Enos: Thank you, Mayor Simison. Father, we just thank you for the privilege of coming to you in your name and for the help that you desire to give us. Lord, we declare our need of you. Lord, we are living in extremely tumultuous times and we need your wisdom. We cannot rely upon our own understanding. So, Lord, come and let your spirit be here and anoint each one of these men and women as they would lead our city. We pray, Lord, that you would grant them wisdom and understanding and guidance. Lord, with each Page 23 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 2 of 50 ordinance and decision that they will make tonight we pray that you would guide them that they would make their decisions fairly and justly for all parties involved and, Lord, we pray, Lord, over our city. You know, we just pray a protection against this virus in Jesus' name and pray, Lord, for those who are suffering with it, that, Lord, your healing would be there and we just pray that you would give them strength and grace. Lord, we pray for our families, Lord, that are struggling with school and all of the disruptions and jobs and the like and we just pray that you would just be there with each one and provide for their needs. Lord, we thank you so much for this great city that you have allowed us to be a part of and just the blessing that we have experienced from you and we give you the honor for that. Now, Lord, just have your way tonight we pray in Jesus' name, amen. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: Next item up is the adoption agenda. Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I move that we -- sorry, Dean. Love you, buddy. Thanks for the reminder. I move -- Mr. Mayor, I move that we adopt the agenda as published. Simison: Councilman Bernt, would you like to remove anything off the agenda? Bernt: Oh, yes. Sorry. My fault. Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Third time is a charm. Item No. 11, Executive Session, we took care of all of our business in our prior Executive Session, so we will take off Item 11 with Executive Session. With that I move that we approve the agenda as amended motion. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda with that amendment. Is there any discussion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Mr. Clerk, did we have anyone sign on under public forum? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we do not. PROCLAMATIONS [Action Item] 1. Cyber Security Awareness Month Page 24 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 3 of 50 Simison: Okay. Well, with that we will do something we haven't done in a while, we will head down to the podium for a proclamation. Council, we just heard from Pastor Enos speak about a virus that we are all familiar with, but we are also familiar with other viruses that are out there. As this is Cybersecurity Awareness Month, I would like to take a few minutes and just recognize the hard work that our team does, but it's more important to make the community aware to -- to be vigilant. We are all here wearing masks and, quite frankly, our computers need to wear masks in everything that they do, so that we can help keep our economy and everything else moving forward. So, I'm going to go ahead and read this proclamation and, then, turn it over to our CIO Dave Tiede here in a second. Whereas, the City of Meridian recognize it has a vital role in identifying, protecting its citizens from, and responding to cybersecurity threats that may have significant impact to our community and whereas cybersecurity education and awareness is crucial for everyone, including large corporations, small businesses, financial institutions, schools, government agencies, a home user and anyone who connects to the internet, but whereas you can protect yourself by monitoring your accounts, being conscientious of what you share online, keeping computer software up to date, creating unique passwords and changing them regularly. Installing antivirus programs and firewalls and using mobile device safe -- mobile devices safely and whereas the stop, think, connect campaign serves as the National Cybersecurity public awareness campaign implemented through a coalition working together to increase the public's understanding of cyber threats and empowering Americans to be safe and secure online and whereas maintaining the security of cyberspace is a shared responsibility in which each of us has a critical role to play in awareness that computer security essentials will improve the security of the City of Meridian's information infrastructure and economy. Therefore, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim this month of October 2020 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in recognizing how serious cybersecurity is and the steps each of us can take to protect ourselves and our community, dated the 6th of October 2020. So, with that, Mr. Tiede, I will present this to you. I encourage you to say some few words to the community that is much more important than what I said. Tiede: Thank you, Mayor. So, I appreciate this opportunity we have to partner with the National Cybersecurity Alliance in recognizing National Cybersecurity Awareness Month. It's important to recognize that we all use technology, online resources, and mobile devices in our daily lives and this is an opportunity to reflect and look at what we are doing with those different types of technology to see how we can better protect ourselves, our families, our friends and our community. So, with that I will mention that staysafeonline.org has an abundance of resources available to the community and that is put together in conjunction with the various communities around the nation and the Department of Homeland. Thank you. RESOLUTIONS [Action Item] 2. Resolution 20-2233: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Camden Hyde as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle Page 25 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 4 of 50 as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Arts Commission Simison: Thank you again for that -- bringing that forward, Dave. Appreciate it. Next item on the agenda is Resolution 20-2233, a resolution appointing Camden Hyde as the youth commissioner to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle as youth commissioner to the Meridian Arts Commission. So, Council, these are the two last remaining commissions that don't have our youth members to them. We did put out a call to the community and there were interviews conducted with several well- qualified candidates. I do have to say that these two stood out amongst the applicants and I would be happy to answer any questions you have, but, otherwise, I would love a motion to appoint these two individuals to the commissions. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I move adoption of Resolution 20-2233 appointing Camden Hyde as youth commissioner to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle as youth commissioner to the Meridian Arts Commission. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Second. Simison: Second. Perfect. 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, absent; Perreault, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Simison: I do not see either of the two easily identified in -- in on the call. If either one of them are and if you would like to raise your hand and make a comment at this point in time, just do that on the zoom call with the -- with the icon at the bottom. And I did not see anything, so we will just go ahead and move on to the rest of the agenda. Bernt: Mr. Mayor, one second. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Page 26 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 5 of 50 Bernt: I just would like to say thank you to our youth of our city who get involved and care at such a young age and start learning the value of service over self and the foundation that creates for them and for those that they serve. So, thank you so much for the youth that have decided to be part of MYAC and for the youth that just -- that have the opportunity to serve on these commissions. ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Updates to the Citywide Fee Schedule Simison: Very eloquent. Next item under Action Items is a public hearing for updates to the citywide fee schedule. Turn this over to Mr. Purser from our Finance Department. Well, actually, I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Purser: Better? Okay. That's much better. Thank you, Mayor and Council. On October 2nd and 9th we published that we would be having a public hearing tonight for four fees, three of which are for -- from our Community Development Department regarding after hours inspections. The fourth is from -- a Republic Services fee that needed to be noticed and, you know, follow the process. That's why we are here today. I don't have anything further, other than we have noticed it and I will stand for any questions that anybody may have. Thank you. Simison: Thank you, Brad. Council, any questions for staff at this time? This is a public hearing. Do we have anyone who has signed up online to testify on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we had no signups online or in the room. Simison: Okay. If there -- if there is anybody who would like to come forward and testify on this item, I ask you to do so. Or if you are online use the raise the hand function and we will bring you in and allow you to provide testimony on this item. Seeing no one coming forward and no one raising their hand -- Council, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Resolution 20-2234. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second -- do I need to close the public hearing first? So -- Perreault- My apologies. Mr. Mayor, shall I try it again? Simison: That would be great. Page 27 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 6 of 50 Perreault: I move that we close the public hearing for the updates to the citywide fee schedule, Item No. 3 on tonight's agenda. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: Motion and second to close the public hearing. Is there 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. 4. Resolution 20-2234: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Resolution 20-2234, a resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian adopting new and increasing fees, authorizing city departments to collect such fees and providing an effective date. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Resolution 20-2234. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and the resolution is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 5. Public Hearing for Pearson Subdivision (H-2020-0075) by Melanie Pearson, Located at 175 W. Paint Horse Ln. A. Request: A Combined Preliminary and Final Plat consisting of 2 building lots on 3.98 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the development of the property with one additional residential lot and specify the requirements for the connection of city services Page 28 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 7 of 50 to existing and future residential structures and the extension of the future collector street consistent with the MSM. Simison: Next item up is a public hearing for Pearson Subdivision, H-2020-0075. I will turn this over to Joe. I will open this public hearing with staff comments and turn this over to Joe. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Good evening. First item before you tonight is for the Pearson combined preliminary and final plat application. The site consists of 3.9 acres of land, zoned RA located at 175 West Paint Horse Lane, which is at the very edge of our area of impact along Meridian Road. The subject application is proposing to subdivide one four acre lot into two lots for the purposes of allowing the current owner of the parcel to deed the new lot over to her daughter, so that her and her family are close by and this includes with helping her daughter with their newborn child. The subject property was annexed in 2015 as part of a larger annexation known as South Meridian Annexation. There is an existing development agreement associated with the original annexation in 2015 and this property and application constitutes development under city code. In reviewing the existing DA, the applicant was required to apply for a development agreement modification after the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and the applicant has done so per the conditions of approval in the staff report. The subject application has also received city engineer and Public Works director approval for a utilities waiver to not connect to city services at this time due to services being more than a half mile away. Staff finds that making a singular property owner pay for extending city services for a two lot subdivision is neither fair nor necessary. Central District Health has also approved of an additional temporary well site and septic system on this property -- on the new property. This fact further diminishes any concerns staff has with the applicant's application regarding water and sewer services. As noted there is an existing single family home on the subject property that is not connected to city services. This property, along with nearby properties, were annexed in 2015 and were not required to connect to city services at that time due to services not being available. The situation has not changed for this area of south Meridian since 2015. However, when services do become available in Meridian Road, the applicant will be required to connect to them as conditioned in this application and in the existing development agreement. Staff and ACHD find that the existing private access is sufficient for one additional single family home. Because other abutting properties are not redeveloping at this time, there is no feasible way for the applicant and owner to comply with those requirements in the UDC and take access from anywhere else other than the existing access. In addition, adding one home does not create sufficient traffic to warrant construction of a collector roadway as shown on the master street map. However, staff understands that should anymore intensive redevelopment occur on site or on the surrounding properties, the access will be evaluated for compliance with these requirements. Staff is recommending a DA provision to be added with the DA modification that requires a future collector street consistent with the master street map if or when this or adjacent properties redevelop with more intense uses consistent with the mixed use regional land use designation. So, a quick summary. The subject application is proposing to subdivide one four acre parcel into two lots for the purposes of allowing the current owner of the parcel to deed the new Page 29 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 8 of 50 lot over to her daughter. Staff does not find that the city loses anything by approving this application and understands that this area may not redevelop for quite some time. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval for the subject application and did not offer much discussion on the item, except for any kind of timeline for services that could be available, which is wholly dependent on development in the area and, then, ensuring that the applicant is aware of the potential future costs associated with connecting to city services. And there has been no written testimony since the commission hearing. So, after that I will stand for questions. Thank you. Simison: Thank you, Joe. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Okay. I do see that we have the applicant in the room. Ms. Pearson, would you like to be recognized for 15 minutes? Pearson: I don't have anything additional to add. Simison: Okay. Council, any questions for the applicant? This is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to testify on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not online or in the room at this time. Simison: Okay. If there anyone that would like to testify on this item I'm going to encourage you to come forward at this time or use the raise hand feature at the bottom of the Zoom call. And I do not see anybody wishing to do so. So, with that, Council, do I have any motions? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I move that we close the public hearing for Item No. 5. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. 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. Opposed nay. Ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Page 30 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 9 of 50 Bernt: I move that we approve Item No. 5, H-2020-0075. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second that motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve H-2020-0075. 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, absent; Perreault, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion passes. Thank you and good luck. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 6. Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman at Black Cat (H-2020-0022) by Baron Black Cat, LLC, Located in the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd. (SH 20126) A. Rezone a total of 23.63 acres of land for the purpose of reducing the C-C zone from approximately 8 acres to 4.42 acres and increase the R-15 zone from approximately 15.1 acres to approximately 19.2 acres. B. Short Plat consisting of 2 building lots and 2 common lots on 21.59 acres of land in the C-C and R-15 zoning districts. C. Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 196 residential units on 20.13 acres in the R-15 zone. D. Modification to the existing development agreements (Inst. #'s: 106151218; 107025555; 110059432; and 114054272) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of previous agreements and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed development plan. Simison: Next item up is a public hearing for H-2020-0022 and we will open this public hearing with staff comments and turn this over to Joe. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Again as noted this is the application for Modern Craftsman at Black Cat. The applications being heard tonight are a rezone, short plat, development agreement modification, conditional use permit and, then, on the staff side Page 31 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 10 of 50 private streets and administrative design review. The site consists of approximately 23.6 acres of land that's currently zoned C-C and R-15, located at the northeast corner of Black Cat Road and Chinden Boulevard. The adjacent land uses as noted in the -- the zoning map in the center is R-8 and R-4 zoning to the north, C-N zoning and the future church site to the east. Chinden Boulevard abuts the site to the south with a residential and small limited office zoning on the south side of Chinden across the street and North Black Cat abuts the site to its west with C-C zoning and future commercial planned on the west side of Black Cat north of Chinden. The Comprehensive Plan designation on this property is mixed use community. The application before you, as I noted, is for a rezone, short plat, DA mod, CUP and private streets. The subject site consists of approximately 23 acres of land zoned C-C and R-15. The requested rezone is to simply move the boundaries of the existing zoning, but not to change to any of the zoning designations. The future land use designation lists properties as mixed use commercial -- sorry -- mixed use community, which generally requires three distinct land uses and any residential use to be constructed at a six to 15 dwelling unit per acre density. Modern Craftsman is proposed with a gross density of 6 point -- or 8.7 dwelling units per acre. When analyzing projects within the MUC future land use, the approved and/or developed land uses nearby must also be taken into account. The proposed project offers an area of commercial zoning that should accommodate multiple future uses. The commercial area is proposing two building sites that have multiple suites, so there is potential that multiple distinct land uses will be available on site. Access for this development is proposed via private streets off of North Black Cat Road and West Tree Crest Way along the north -- the street abutting the site to the north. The two proposed access points of Black Cat have been approved byACHD, but typically access to Black Cat is limited by the city. Staff has written a DA provision in the staff report regarding this. After further discussion internally and with the applicant I'm okay with striking that condition, which would be DA provision 8.1 F and I'm sure the applicant will have more words to say on that as well. ACHD has approved the southern access to Black Cat as a limited right-in, right-out only. The applicant is also proposing an access in the northeast corner of the property that connects to a shared driveway with the Rock Harbor church site. Access via Chinden Boulevard is prohibited and not proposed. Private streets are proposed throughout the development and due to the nature of the proposed use staff believes private streets are appropriate in this development. Other than future commercial, the proposed use on this site is multi-family residential. However, it is not a traditional garden style apartment type of multi-family. It is a hybrid of single family style homes within a multi-family development, which, by definition, is just more than two buildings on one single lot -- two dwellings -- more than two dwellings on one lot. The proposed units are a majority of single story, one, two and three bedroom detached units with garages -- or without garages. The applicant is proposing traditional apartment style parking, but some units do have attached one car garages. Townhomes are also proposed and all these units have attached garages on their first floor. Largely the proposed residential units in this development look like detached single family homes, but have on-street parking and less private open space and a standard 4,000 or 8,000 square foot single family lot. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accordance with standards listed for multi-family and for commercial uses. The minimum amount of parking required for the multi-family portion of this development is 360 spaces, with 196 of those required to be covered. The total minimum Page 32 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 11 of 50 parking required for the development is 415, including the commercial space. The submitted and revised plan and conditional use plan shows 508 spaces for the entire development. The revised commercial area with a two story concept on the corner provides approximately 27,000 square feet of leasable commercial space. The minimum required parking for the proposed commercial is 55 spaces. Therefore, the proposed parking counts exceed the minimum UDC requirements. Open space requirements for this project are two tiered. The project must meet the general ten percent open space requirement and the common and private open space requirements in the specific use standards for multi-family development. In total the minimum amount of common open space to be provided should be 3.42 acres. The applicant has provided and proposed a total of 3.74 acres of qualified open space, of which 2.2 acres qualifies for the minimum ten percent and amounts to approximately 10.3 percent. The remaining 1.52 acres of open space meets the requirements for this specific use standards for common open space. In addition to this common open space, the applicant is required to provide at least 80 square feet of private usable open space per unit. On average the applicant is proposing 419 square feet of private open space for each unit, which is what separates this from traditional walk up garden style apartments. The applicant and staff have worked closely and diligently to design the open space in such a way to integrate the commercial with the residential as required in the mixed use community policies and goals. This integration and the proposed use allows for increased pedestrian connectivity as seen throughout the site. The open space meeting the requirements consists of a ten foot multi-use pathway within the Chinden landscape buffer, common lots with open space, and the required street buffers along adjacent roadways. There are also a number of proposed amenities within this development. The multi-use pathway is a qualifying site amenity that meets the requirements in standard 11-3G3 requirements. Other requirements -- other amenities are required to meet the specific use standards and what are proposed to meet those is a clubhouse with offices for rent by the residents, a tot lot, a swimming pool, picnic shelters with barbecue areas, a community garden and a plaza that is shared between the commercial and the residential. The proposed dog park area seen on the open space exhibit is not a qualifying site amenity due to it not meeting UDC requirements. In addition, the applicant is proposing 102 self storage lockers, each about 12 square feet spread throughout each of the garage parking buildings. This is also not a qualifying site amenity, but will likely be used regularly. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this twice and recommended approval. At the first hearing they moved to continue it and had a request for the applicant to add additional commercial square footage and commercial zoning to the property and the applicant responded by doing so and changed one of the buildings along Black Cat from a traditional townhome style unit to a live-work vertically integrated structure as seen on the left-hand side here and also changed some of the parking and dynamics of this commercial area. There were 49 written testimonies outlining the same issues brought up during the hearing, with an additional comment of a desire by a number of the neighbors to have this area developed similarly to Spurwing and not be a mixed use development. The main issues of the public testimony was regarding the amount of parking, the location of any public transportation or lack thereof, the affordability of the proposed apartment units and the amount of commercial on the property. The Commission discussed -- also discussed the amount of commercial acreage on the property as noted. They discussed the viability of Page 33 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 12 of 50 incorporating vertically integrated, which the applicant took to heart and added that to the property. They discussed whether parking is allowed along Tree Crest Way, which as an answer it is not, because it is a collector roadway. They discussed the design of the proposed commercial on the hard corner, specifically whether it should be one or two stories, and the potential issues and resolutions of the required 25 foot buffer between the commercial zoning and the residential buildings. The one change that Commission had to the recommendation was to update my staff report to include the provisions from the memo from the second meeting and add that to the -- to the application. The only outstanding issue for City Council is that they will need to request a waiver from the City Council to reduce the land use buffer between the C-C zoning and the multi-family units proposed on the R-15 portion of the project, specifically that area between the clubhouse and the smaller commercial -- yeah. These areas right here and the residential. Since the commission hearing there has only been one additional public testimony and it outlined the same issues as previously presented. I added some elevations here for the benefit of the Council. This is some of the vertically integrated buildings that they had shown and the corner commercial of the two story concept, which Planning and Zoning had discussed and would prefer the two story as would staff. These are the revised townhome elevations that added some additional materials and color palettes. And with that I will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Joe. Council, any questions for staff? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Quick comment, Joe. If you could comment on any discussion or change with regards to the location of the pool, it being adjacent to the commercial and that eastern end there, was there discussion of why it's somewhat on the outside of this -- this proposal, as opposed to being more internal and away from that commercial parking lot? Dodson: Councilman Borton, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, there were not discussions at the commission meeting, but there have been discussions between staff and the applicant regarding that. They have moved this further east from the original site plan and what we tried to do as a compromise was integrate the central open space area as a true vista that will connect all the way from the east to the west. I presume that the applicant can speak a little bit more as to why they would like it westerly, rather than centrally located, but I do know that that is one -- one reason why we really pushed to get the open space connected between the two areas. Borton: Thank you. Simison: Councilman Cavener, did you have a question as well? Page 34 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 13 of 50 Cavener: I did. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Joe, you know, I followed kind of the -- the history of the -- the change in C-C from the Planning and Zoning Commission, but can you just kind of give me a brief rundown as to what precipitated the first request to reduce the C- C zone down -- I think it was from like seven to like three and change. Dodson: Councilman Cavener, Members of the Council, yes, the existing zoning on the site, as seen in this, has a larger area on the western half that's approximately seven and a half acres of C-C zoning. The applicant is requesting to reduce that to now approximately four and a half. Originally it was only about one and a half and, then, we increased it a little bit more with some internal discussions with the applicant and, then, at the Planning and Zoning Commission it was approximately two and a half acres -- Cavener: Okay. Dodson: -- that the Commission asked them to increase it more and now we are to the four and a half acres. But the -- the acreage is not necessarily the important part, it's really the leasable square footage, which is now approximately 27,000 square feet with the two story concept on the -- on the hard corner. Cavener: Okay. Simison: Council, any further questions at this time? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: So, Joe, to confirm, how many acres of C-C zoning -- or how many acres of proposed commercial spaces? Dodson: Now the acreage is about four and a half acres. Bernt: So, you say about -- so, that is -- it is above four? Dodson: Yes. It's definitely above four. Bernt: Of the total. So, roughly a little bit more than half of the -- the currently zoned C-C area is proposed to be commercial? Dodson: Yes. Yeah. More than half of the remaining -- of the existing. I apologize. Simison: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Please state your name and address for the record and you will be recognized for 15 minutes. Nelson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Deborah Nelson. My address is 601 West Bannock in Boise and I'm here on behalf of the applicant. Here with me Page 35 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 14 of 50 tonight are members of Baron Properties, Jeff Riggs and Greg Hector, as well as some other members of our local development team and they are all available to answer your questions. Just briefly to introduce Baron Properties to you, it's a company that was founded in 1983 and they have developed and operated over 125 residential communities across the west. Their core business, among other businesses, is multi-family housing for rent and what's -- what I really want you to understand about their products that's so special is that these are high end developments, highly amenitized that they own, operate, and maintain, so that the residents that live there can have the quality of life that they are looking for, but without any maintenance or upkeep. I'm going to start with a fly through video just to give you an overview and introduce you to the Black Cat project -- Modern Craftsman at Black Cat. This is just a little under four minutes and, then, we will discuss some of the details. It's playing the sound, but not the video. Johnson: We are changing the Zoom share. Nelson: While we are waiting on that I will continue with a few points. As Joe mentioned, this site is already annexed into your city and it's already zoned C-C and R-15, the same zones that we are seeking now, and so we are not asking for any uses that weren't already contemplated when the city zoned this property and, in fact, the multi-use -- the -- the multi-family use is conditionally allowed in both of those zones and so we are not proposing anything that couldn't have happened without changing the zone sizes. That was already contemplated and so was this level of intensity of development here. Thank you so much. (Video played.) Nelson: Thank you. I hope that gives you a good overview of what it feels like to be in the development, to live and feel and see the architectural variety. I'm going to start by looking at some of the nonresidential uses with you. I think Joe has covered the -- the site plan well, but we are primarily going to start down here in the southwest corner. Talk about some of the mixed uses. Over 20,000 square feet of space is available for commercial uses and this will complement the Fairborne commercial that's directly across Black Cat and also some of the larger regional commercial developments, Costco, is just .7 miles to the east. The Central Valley plaza is just a half mile to the west. Focusing on the clubhouse first and the nonresidential aspects of it, we have over a thousand square feet of office space here, including three offices and conference rooms that can be reserved and used for meeting space by the residents. Also we will have our office space for our on-site leasing and maintenance staff, which are full time. We have added this commercial pop up space in discussions with staff and we are very excited about it. This is across the landscape plaza from the clubhouse and it creates an opportunity for some shorter term leasing in a variety of smaller commercial uses. We call it a pop up, because it allows that variety for shorter term leasing, but it is still a very permanent and beautiful building. We also added in discussion with staff and the commission this vertically integrated product that Joe described, with commercial on the ground floor, over 5,000 square feet, and residential upstairs with six units that will provide a nice opportunity, again, for a variety of different sizes, little longer term here looking at more like a year Page 36 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 15 of 50 lease. So, you get a different type of commercial users in here. Attractive on both sides, so that it fronts well on Black Cat and, then, opens up nicely to the site. This is the other side of that building. Very attractive on both sides. On our commercial corner we did provide two concepts, a single story and the two story. Both options will create a very striking presence on the corner, while opening up and integrating internally to the site. The amount of usable commercial does not vary significantly between these two because of the extra parking that's required when you add the two story. We do request some flexibility in the building height to be able to respond to actual market conditions. We want to make sure that we are able to attract compatible retail and office uses to this location and we want to make sure this corner is viable and activated. Turning to some of the residential homes here. The R-15 portion of Modern Craftsman is going to have a wide variety of housing types and sizes. We are primarily targeting millennials and baby boomers, who want an amenatized home without the maintenance responsibilities. We will have one and two and three bedroom offerings and detached homes and attach product, duplexes and six-plexes, some with attached or tuck under garages. All of these residential units will provide private outdoor space, most with private backyards. All of the buildings will use quality materials, including stone and stucco and wood tone sidings. The roof lines provide variety with some single slope and hip roofs. Three color palettes provide variety, but also create cohesiveness and complimentary color schemes. This slide shows a duplex on top, a detached two bedroom on the lower right, and a detached three bedroom on the lower left with different roof lines and colors. This slide shows a two bedroom with an attached garage on top, two bedroom on the lower left, and a three bedroom on the lower right, all detached units with different roof lines and colors. This is one of our six- plex buildings. Each unit is two stories, with a tuck under garage, in a townhome style with two and three bedrooms. The other side of the building. The site plan here shows you how these -- this great variety is distributed throughout the site to make it feel like a neighborhood where you have got intermixed unit types and so this -- these colors are just for illustration of the different types. Throughout the central part of the development the homes are detached and single story, which integrates well to our neighboring communities. On the western and eastern end we have more of the two story product with our live-work building and the townhome style six-plexes, which are adjacent to both Black Cat on the west and, then, the Rock Harbor church on the east. This slide similarly shows the architectural variety that's distributed throughout the community with all the different roof lines and color palettes. We have ample parking on the site, as Joe described, with 84 attached garages, 36 detached garages shown in the green buildings here, 134 covered parking spaces and that's the orange that's highlighted here. We also have 102 storage units that are located inside the garage buildings, which is a great amenity for our residents. Turning to amenities, these are distributed throughout the site. We do have a focus on having some of our activities concentrated together to integrate between the residential and the commercial. They create both buffering, but also create integration for people to join in the public aspects of this. We have got a dog park in the northwest for our community. The clubhouse with the fitness center and pool inside the clubhouse. We have got the workspace as I mentioned. The coffee bar and/or gathering spaces. A kitchen. And, Council Member Borton, you asked about the location of the pool and the -- and the clubhouse, so I want to touch on that. It's purposeful to -- it is -- it is centrally located in this location, but it's very purposeful to allow residents to Page 37 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 16 of 50 choose whether they want to be next to active amenities, as many of the residents will choose that very purposefully, but, then, also create some more private quieter spaces within the development. They are all connected with pathways. At staff's request we did add the western park and picnic shelter and barbecue so that there is a closer amenity but it also still is a quieter scale so that people who don't want to be next to a pool can choose not to be. We also have a tot lot. Publicly accessible plaza that integrates our residential amenities with the public facing commercial amenities. A community garden and that eastern park that I mentioned. The pathways are extensive and this really creates a very pedestrian friendly development here and Joe walked through the multi- use pathway. In the interest of time I'm going to move on -- quickly on the inside amenities. These are great living spaces with modern finishes, stainless steel appliances, in-unit washers and dryers, nine to 12 foot ceilings. These are very quality places. Looking at services, this is an in-fill development and so all of the services are available to serve the site. Police and Fire didn't have any concerns. ACHD has approved and we -- all conditions of approval are acceptable. All of the schools that serve this site currently have capacity. We asked for two changes in the conditions of approval. One is to delete a condition that is no longer necessary in our discussions with staff related to our access points that have been approved by ACHD and are consistent with your code. Secondly, as mentioned already, we asked to amend this condition to allow us the flexibility for a one story or a two story building, to allow us to respond to market conditions and still make sure that we can have an active and viable commercial corner here. We do also need a waiver, as Joe mentioned, from your code that requires a 25 foot landscape buffer between the C-C zones and a residential zone. The intent of this code requirement is to create separation between different and potentially incompatible zones. That's not the case here. We have a single owner and operator, a single unified community that is actually purposefully integrated and purposefully designed to be connected to have those uses adjacent to each other. The pool area, the tot lot, the community plaza and our community garden already do create the buffering that's appropriate, but it also allows us to have residents that can choose to be right next to that if they want to. So, with that I would ask for your support of this development, support of the waiver, and I would stand for any questions you may have. Thank you very much. Simison: Thank you, Deb. Council, any questions for the applicant? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Go over real quickly one more time what -- what Deb is asking for to be waived. Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Bernt, I would be happy to address that further. So, you have a code requirement that requires a landscape buffer in between a commercial zone and a residential zone, really contemplating that you have two different developers on those sites and we are asking for that item to be waived. Your code expressly allows it to be waived and -- and so we are asking for you to enact that waiver for the Page 38 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 17 of 50 circumstances presented here and to approve the setbacks that are shown in the site plan. Bernt: And to -- Mayor, follow up. And to also have the option of going from one to two stories in the commercial building on the corner; right? Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Bernt, that's correct. We asked you to amend condition 1-A sub I to allow either a one story or a two story commercial. Both concepts are shown there and you can see that they are similar and provide the same opportunities on the corner and internal. Bernt: Finally, Mr. Mayor, just the access -- Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Bernt, appreciate your question on that, since I did kind of race through that. I want to make sure it's clear. So, there is a condition that currently requires us to obtain Council approval for the access points along Black Cat. You can see we have two access points on Black Cat. In further discussions with staff we were able to demonstrate that we do comply with your code and so a waiver is not required there and, further, that the access points that are on Black Cat are directly across from the access points approved on Fairborne. I think there was some misunderstanding about that before and so as a result planning staff -- and they can speak for -- Joe can speak for himself, but we -- we understand that they support removing this condition of approval to restrict the access points on Black Cat. ACHD has approved both and there -- they help us internally with our site, both to support -- support the viability of this commercial corner and also to help us have a more pedestrian friendly internal circulation. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you so much for this detailed presentation. I want to touch on the -- I think it was commissioners requested some additional green space there on -- on the eastern side. Just curious, it seems to me like the -- the two story townhomes that are on the eastern side, that they would want to have more access to green space as they don't have any -- really any green space around them, like -- like the detached units do and so I -- it's -- it seems to me that's a pretty significant distance to get to most of the amenities on the western side. Can you tell us more about your -- you know, the thought process on that and why the -- the amenities wouldn't be more evenly spread out through the -- throughout the development? Nelson: Mr. Mayor and Council Member Perreault, I have pulled up a slide to try to illustrate I think what you are asking about here and -- and, yes, it is actually a very purposeful design to create different areas within the development, so that, you know, what -- what -- with all the experience that Baron has in developing these types of facilities, they have found that people will make choices based on their preferences and some people like to be right next to a pool and an activated open space area and others Page 39 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 18 of 50 would like to have a distance from that to have a quieter home and residents and they also enjoy the walking community. You know, keep in mind this is actually a relatively small site. We are talking about a 20 acre site. You look at these connections between the east and west and the pathway that runs east-west right through the middle connects directly to that pool area and so the other thing that went into our discussions with staff -- we did previously have the clubhouse up in the northwest corner and so we moved it down in discussions with staff. It also helps us create that integration that's called for in your Comprehensive Plan between residential and commercial uses and so in redesigning this we were able to add the new community plaza that is directly to the south of the clubhouse and directly north of the pop up area and that was made possible by having this in this location adjacent to the commercial. So, we felt like it kind of hit the best of both worlds where our residents get the access that they want, but it also allows us to integrate with the commercial better and kind of blend those uses. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Deb, a couple questions. I just wanted to touch on access again. The first access point is a right-in, right-out only. Is the second one, the main entrance, is that -- do they have access to a left turn or is that right-in, right-out only as well? Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, the second access -- the further to the north is a full access point. Hoaglun: Okay. And follow up, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Do -- Tree Farm Way, they do have access to that. Is there going to be a light there someday or is that just right -- right-in, left turn only? That's to the north of the development. Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, that's Tree Crest and there is no light or expected to be a warrant there. That's a pretty small intersection there. It does connect further over to the east to Tree Farm I think you are thinking of. Yes. Hoaglun: And, Mr. Mayor, one more question related to the commercial. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Deb, I think I read during -- in the Planning and Zoning there was -- the two story building was going to have parking underneath at one point in time. What -- is that still how a two story would be designed? Page 40 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 19 of 50 Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, that's correct. Atwo story building in order to, you know, accommodate the parking would be designed with some parking underneath and so if you look at the lower picture on this slide over on the left side, that lower level would be parking that's accessible. So, it's very tastefully integrated. That's also why there is not a significant difference between the one and two story on commercial space available. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: If we can dialogue about that, Deborah, a little bit. Yeah. I was trying to think, okay, if there is parking on that left side and it's a two story building, your actual footprint for -- for commercial is one story with additional parking. If you just go to one story we don't add parking. Is there sufficient parking for that commercial building if it is one story with just that surface parking? Just trying to see how that -- how that balances out. Nelson: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, they are great questions and we wrestled with that in a lot of detail with the commission, so I kind of had to quickly cover it here. They are good questions. And -- and to be clear, the parking that's on the -- the first floor of the two story doesn't cover the entire footprint and so there is two story, if you look to the -- to the right side, the western side of the building, it is two story integrated commercial use and so it's a -- it's a partial podium parking, you know, which is, you know, an expensive building, obviously, but that makes it look pretty nice. But the -- the commercial square footage on either -- whether you are looking at a single story or a multi-story building, does accommodate a variety of uses and spaces and so the range is from approximately 13,000 square feet to approximately 19,500 square feet and either way there is sufficient parking under your code and ample parking. As Joe mentioned, we exceed all of your parking requirements and so the parking here -- here actually was redesigned in discussion with the commission. That's part of what happened with the redesign of adding more commercial areas, they wanted a parking lot that you could pull in and out of that didn't have parking spaces that backed into the road and so it's actually a pretty good sized surface parking lot with internal spaces as well if needed for a two story. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, Deborah, thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Deborah, question either for you or for your team and you used a term that -- that I have to say I really agree with that this project is very deliberative, but I do have a little bit of a question as we see kind of the -- the elevations of these buildings I do have a little bit of a concern that they -- they all seem to look very similar. I like diversity of housing and both diversity in size and aesthetics and I just -- I'm Page 41 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 20 of 50 trying to visualize this as I'm driving down the road and we have got a couple of spots in Meridian where we have seen this where kind of all the housing looks alike and I'm just curious if you can help me understand why -- the thought process was around this particular type of design and why it all, for the most part, looks the same. Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Cavener, I would be happy to. I actually think there is a lot of variety here in the housing. Just on this slide alone you can see the different styles of roof lines and within each of the unit types -- for example, in the two bedrooms there are multiple layouts that create different frontage and -- and shapes and sizes of these products with the mix of attached and detached product. The three different color schemes are intentional to both provide some variety, but also I think -- and more specifically in response to your comment, Council Member Cavener, is about trying to create some kind of cohesiveness and you do see that and, you know, for owner single family residential as well and so you are trying to create something that doesn't look incongruous with -- with each other, but, then, also has enough variety that when you walk down the street you can see a variety of roof lines and a different -- and a variety of homes. I guess, again, I would ask you just to keep in mind we are --we are talking about a 20 acre site and, you know, what's so special and unique about this development is rather than having your kind of standard, you know, garden three to four story walk up apartments that could have -- were certainly contemplated by the zoning on this site, they are able to create more of a community neighborhood feel and -- and part of that is having that cohesive look together. The -- the Planning Commission did comment on this and really liked the architecture style. We got a large amount of praise from them. They liked the modern look and the clean lines. They thought it was a very attractive development, you know, for what it's worth, sharing their -- their comments with you. Cavener: Appreciate that, Deb. Mr. Mayor, a follow up if I can. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thanks. And, again, I -- I read through the minutes and I don't disagree, I just -- with what the Planning and Zoning Commission said, it just -- it does just all appear to be kind of one very similar style. But I guess my follow-up question was -- if you can pull up your slide on the impact of the schools, because -- Nelson: Yes. Cavener: -- I'm curious about where that piece of information that you shared about impact on the schools came from, because I think that is a different number than we have seen I think in our letter from the school district. So, I'm just trying to track where that data came from. Maybe the letter from Joe Yochum that we received was -- year 2019- 2020 and if you have got 2020-2021 enrollment that would be helpful to understand. Nelson: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Cavener, thank you for the question. I did have to race through there, but I would love to provide that explanation. Page 42 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 21 of 50 Cavener: That's okay. Nelson: And so since we received the letter from the school district we were able to update these numbers. As you know, the school district has a new facilities plan that's been issued and also we were in discussions with the school district to update this, because Star Elementary has been expanded and also they have the updated numbers for enrollment for Star Elementary in the new facilities plan. I would note, too, that 625 was the number we heard from the school district directly. Their plan actually believes that they have got a capacity of 650 there, but we went with the lower number and so that -- that is an update since the school district's letter provided many months ago on this project. There -- it's not different on the middle school or the high school, the only numbers that have changed is Star Elementary, which I think you guys are aware of went through a recent expansion. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, follow up if I may. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: So, Deb, the number for Star Elementary is for the 2020-2021 academic year. Correct? Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Cavener, that is my understanding from our discussion with the school district. Cavener: Okay. Thank you. Simison: Council, any further questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Nelson: Thank you very much. Simison: Mr. Clerk, I assume we had some people signed up to testify on this? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we do. None online, but we had six people sign in in the room, one wishing to testify and one as maybe testify. First we have Jessica Rieke. Simison: If there is anybody who is on the Zoom call that would like to testify, please, indicate by raising your hand at the bottom of the call and, then, we will bring you in. Thank you, Jessica. If you can state your name and address for the record and be recognized for three minutes. Rieke: Yes. My name is Jessica Rieke. My address is 6911 North Callery Pear Avenue. Good evening, Mayor, Members of the Council. Thank you for having me tonight and allowing me to speak. My name is Jessica Rieke and along with my husband Kenneth we are proud homeowners in the Spurwing Heights community. I also have the honor of serving as the vice-president on our HOA board. I feel it's important to note we chose our home based on the quality of amenities of our community that it offers, specifically the Page 43 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 22 of 50 clubhouse membership, the park in the center of our small community, the quality of our home and, finally, the understanding of a sound investment given the area and many more. I deeply hope you will -- you will seriously consider the testimony from myself and so many of my neighbors who have submitted their writing online previously, offering their strong dissent for this project as it is currently proposed, specifically with regard to the issue of the high density housing. I understand Ms. Nelson comment -- commented that this zoning -- and forgive me, I'm not completely clear, but she -- she commented that the zoning was already established for communities such as this. It may be permissible, I don't agree that it would be beneficial. As you are fully aware, a lot of the concern focuses around the encroach -- on the encroachment on my quality of life, as well as the neighbors. Ultimately, though, this developer may not agree, I will argue this is not the highest and best use of the land. It's easy to see that the Spurwing community in Meridian has a reputation of excellence and being slightly set apart from other neighboring residential developments. A high density, regardless of how nice -- and they do look nice. I don't disagree that they are beautiful. I just think that it would be better suited in a different plot of land. It will perpetuate -- perpetuate diminishing property values in our community. I don't know if any of you have had the opportunity to drive the area, but though ACHD may give their sign off, the area is quite small. The question by one of the members of the Council was about a light. A light will not fit there. The traffic will not fit on Black Cat on Tree Crest. And the question of the schools I believe is a good one. I believe that this will greatly contribute to the overcrowding of schools. And, then, the totality of the overall development and projects in our area makes this particular project as it is currently proposed essentially a square peg in a round hole. It's -- it's meeting development requirements, but I don't believe it will be sufficient for a positive quality of life for the adjacent Spurwing communities. And, ultimately, I don't agree that it would be for this proposed development. If this was a proposed development of say something like residences for those are -- those 55 and older, I'm certain this discussion would look much different, if at all, given it would substantially mitigate and to do several of the concerns around the parking, traffic, and -- and school enrollment. Simison: If you can summarize, please. Rieke: Yep. I, obviously, can't provide my support for this project at the current point and I propose this project be placed on hold until the developer -- developer can present a plan that serves the interest of the community, one with a significantly lower density and appropriately reflects the values that residents of this community hold dear. I understand these are very micro level concerns I have. However, I do believe there needs to be a higher, more macro level discussion about the way that we are building and handling -- dealing with this burgeoning growth within the Meridian city. Thank you for your time. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Page 44 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 23 of 50 Simison: Jessica, I think there might be some questions for you. Rieke: Oh, I'm sorry. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Jessica, first thanks for serving on an HOA board. I don't think there is any more thankless job in government than serving on the homeowners association board. So, thanks for doing that. Rieke: Yes. Cavener: But my question is about one of your comments towards the end about asking this project be on hold to lower the density -- Rieke: Uh-huh. Cavener: -- and I'm just curious kind of from your perspective how much lower do you think is -- is sufficient in your opinion as somebody who lives over in that area and you have, obviously, an opinion on that, I just-- I don't like open ended requests, I like to know specifics, so I'm just curious where you stand on that. Rieke: Sure. Thank you. I appreciate that clarification. You know, we have just east of this development along Tree Crest we actually have townhome type dwellings and they are -- they are dual -- I believe that if you were to significantly reduce these --what would it be six -- six dwellings within one building, if you were to significantly reduce those or even potentially eliminate that it would be significantly helpful, but I do -- I would ideally like to see these be single dwelling residences or townhome type -- townhome type residences. Does that answer your question? Cavener: I get to the point that you are trying to make. I don't think it necessarily specifically answers my question, but it just gives me additional insight into your thought process. So thank you. Rieke: I will say this, Mr. Cavener. I think that 196 dwellings here significantly increases the population and I would -- I would -- I would guesstimate that cutting that in half would be appropriate. Cavener: Okay. Thank you. Rieke: Thanks. Simison: I think Council Woman Perreault had a question next. Rieke: Okay. Page 45 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 24 of 50 Perreault: I do. Thank you, Mayor. And it is similar to Councilman Cavener's, but maybe in a bigger picture. I guess I'm curious if there was a bigger expectation that this -- there would be more commercial use and less residential use is -- just more as Councilman Cavener was saying, more clarification on -- on -- we always want to know specifics and what it is that the -- that you and the neighbors had anticipated would go in here. I know there has been changes made to the plans, the design, the amount of commercial versus residential since the Planning and Zoning Commission hearings have happened, so it -- was there an expectation of something different than what was presented and also, you know, it sounds like there is some idea of what should go here instead of what is presented and -- and more -- more detail on that. Sorry, if that's a bit of a duplication of Councilman Cavener, but I -- I'm still not a hundred percent, you know, understanding what the trade-off should be. Rieke: I appreciate the question. Though I can't speak for everybody in our community, I do think that, you know, additional commercial space would help mitigate some of the concerns that we have here. You know, to be completely honest with you, I think that -- I think that everybody is understanding that this is a beautiful piece of land, it's -- it's an amazing location, it's just simply the -- the high density, the amount of people they are planning on cramming on this -- this plot of land is very concerning. So, if it were to be something more like a single use -- single family household type development with more commercial say space -- you know, the fact that they are trying to bring the commercial space down is even more concerning. So, to answer your question, yes, it would be that there would be a greater addition or emphasis on commercial land and, then, obviously, mitigating the amount of multi-family dwellings in this -- in this place. Does that help answer your question? Perreault: Yes. Thank you. Rieke: Okay. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah, Jessica, if you wouldn't mind. I -- it sounded like to me your testimony -- the commercial you weren't concerned about, it was the R-15 zoning, which it has, and which allows that more -- that density; is that correct? Rieke: Yes. That is correct. Hoaglun: Okay. And, Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. And I think on the other side it -- if I recall seeing the maps correctly was R-8. So, that's -- that's the issue we have is if that was R-8 we could certainly, you know, Page 46 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 25 of 50 go lower and -- or if the developer came in, but if they are within that R-15 allowance it's -- it makes it a little more -- more difficult. We got a mix of R-4 there to the north of this property and, then, the -- the -- in the light yellow, darker yellow, is R-8. So, that's trying to -- trying to work our way around that to figure out how does that -- how does that flow and match. So, that's -- that's the -- if you would care to comment on that I will certainly allow that. Rieke: Sure. I think -- I think that is understood. I just think that it is prudent for all of us as homeowners in this beautiful community that we express our -- our concern despite zoning as it currently stands. Again, to my point about looking at this at a macro level and understanding -- thinking how this is going to impact the city and our community ten, 20 years from now, I think it's an important discussion. Again, I understand that the zoning is -- it exists as it is and that presents a very difficult topic of discussion for you. I don't -- I don't envy your jobs here in trying to work through that. However, as I said, I just feel it's prudent that we are clear and honest about our concerns. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: And, Jessica, I appreciate that. It's good testimony and we want that input. So, it's greatly appreciated and well done. Rieke: Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you so much. Dodson: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Dodson: If I may clarify for the record. The issue of density is not tied to zoning, it is tied to the future land use designation, which is mixed use community. So, the -- the use of multi-family is tied to the R-15, which is a conditional use in that zone, but the density for mixed use community is six to 15. So, in order to go -- my point being that a lot of the testimony, both written and public, were wanting to basically duplicate much of Spurwing here. That kind of density would have to go through a comp plan amendment and is not what Council has approved in the vision for this property. So, that's why this application is more to do -- at least the density side of it is more to do with the future land use than the zoning. So, I just wanted to make that clear for everybody. Simison: Thank you. Just -- if you want to come up and testify you are welcome to come up and we can have the staff answer any questions, but you have to do it on the record. Do we have -- we don't have anyone else who has signed up; correct? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there was no one else signed up. There was a Mr. Bennion was testifying if needed, so -- Page 47 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 26 of 50 Simison: Okay. Come -- come on up and state your name and address for the record and be recognized for three minutes. Bennion: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Thank you very much for hearing me tonight. My name is Karl Bennion. I live at 4566 West Sugar Tree Drive in the Spurwing Heights community just north of this planned development. I, first of all, want to echo Jessica's comments. We in the Spurwing Heights community and the Spurwing Greens communities feel very similar in that way in that we are just very highly concerned about this planned development here. I'm really concerned about dropping down in the commercial size going down from eight down to about four and a half. That includes probably approximately 36 more units get brought in. That's 36 more units that have two to three people per unit. That puts another hundred people and a hundred cars and everything in that area. So, the more commercial we lose the more residents we are going to have and more congestion we are going to have in that area. So, I'm greatly, you know, really concerned about dropping from eight acres down to 4.4 acres. I think that's going to be a real detriment to that. I worry, too, if they are only building single story on that -- on that commercial piece, there is going to be more traffic, more congestion in the whole property. I believe that will spill over -- over onto Tree Crest Drive. 1, too, echo the sentiment that I would love to see more single family homes, more in the hundred unit for that size, because Spurwing Heights has both R-4 and R-8 and, you know, if we add something in those ranges or -- or in there we would feel much more comfortable with what's going on. I agree it looks like a -- there is a lot of good planning going around this. I just believe the density is too high around that. I -- I'm really concerned about parking spilling over into Tree Crest. I know they have talked about it, said it won't, but we all know with residentials that are rentals sometimes people don't monitor that closely and it can spill over out onto Tree Crest and, then, we are going to have lots of congestion on our Tree Crest. Thank you very much. Simison: Council, any questions? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Clarification for me, if you would, Karl, and that was on commercial you would like to see commercial expanded --you know, kept at the eight, it would reduce, but, then, I thought you said something about commercial increases traffic. So, I didn't know where you stood on that, so if you would clarify, please. Thanks. Bennion: Yes. I'm sorry if I misstated that. I want to keep the commercial up as high as possible like it's -- like it's already zoned for with eight. I think that having more residences there -- is if we take those -- if you plan to have more commercial acreage there that's needed for that it will reduce the number of home units by about 36 units, which are 70 people, which, again, with 70 extra units out there that was where the increase would come. So, I probably didn't state that correctly. Thank you, Mr. Hoaglun. Page 48 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 27 of 50 Simison: And, Joe, I guess this question is kind of for you, but just so we all understand, increasing the commercial doesn't necessarily mean you would get less residents, because they have the ability to go up by a fair amount over what they are currently proposing. Dodson: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, that is correct. So, again, the density range is six to 15 dwelling units per acre. They are at 8.7. So, they are at the lower end of that. They could -- as was stated at the Planning and Zoning Commission, they could have proposed three or four story tall, you know, apartment complexes and get upwards of 400 units on this plot. That is, obviously, not what is desired and the applicant understood that and, therefore, proposed a majority of single story single family units, but on a multi- family plot, which just means more than three -- more than two dwellings on one lot. So, yes, that is correct. Simison: Thank you. I just wanted to make sure it was clear it wasn't an inverse proportional relationship necessarily. Council, any further questions? All right. Thank you. Bennion: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and Council -- Members of the Council. Simison: Sir, did you want to come forward and -- did you want to come forward and at least state your name and address and ask the question and we can get it on the record. Hammer: Joseph Hammer. I live in Spurwing Heights. 6922 North Agrarian Avenue. My purpose here is -- I didn't quite understand staff's discussion of zoning versus density. It made no sense to me. But I'm not an expert in it. So, I just wanted to see if that was clarified, because my understanding is is that the Council seems bound by the current zoning without amending the Comprehensive Plan. So, what's -- what -- what's the difference? I didn't quite understand what you were saying about future use versus density. Dodson: Yes, sir. Great question. It's a big question when we deal with these applications every time from the public. So, there is existing C-C and R-15 zoning. That dictates the dimensional standards, which is height, setbacks, all of those things. Parking ratios even. And the -- the uses. That's what the zoning is for. And with the recent update to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning is now tied to the future land use designation, which is separate of the zoning. It has a future -- every property, whether it's zoned or annexed into the city at this point, if it's in our area of impact it has a future land use on it. It's our way of planning for the future with everything in its full build out intentions at least now. So, that's where -- if you look at your screen on those maps in front of you, the brown area, this is the future land use map. This brown area is the mixed use community, which encompasses this property. This centerpiece has the zoning. So, again, density is tied to the future land use and not to the zoning. The zoning determines the uses and the dimensional standards. Hammer: An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, which is a future -- Page 49 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 28 of 50 Dodson: If they -- if anybody wanted to turn this property into a medium density residential, which is what Spurwing is under, then, yes, that would require a comp plan map amendment. Hammer: All right. Just one other kind of anecdotal comment. I bike a lot and -- and I agree with the applicant, it is a very small space. You know, it's all weeds right now or less, but you can bike around it in a matter of five minutes and so it is small and I know that the applicant has indicated it's a 20 acre site, but it raises some of those concerns of being crammed and a little bit too dense. But thank you. Simison: Council, any questions? Thank you. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I wanted to thank Mr. Hammer for his question. It's not uncommon for that question to arise sometimes. Most people have a question regard to the difference between future land use maps and zoning. So, thank you, Mr. Hammer, for clarifying that for your -- your other residents. Simison: Mr. Clerk, I see we have Denise LaFever wishing to testify. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, that's correct. She is joining the meeting now. Simison: Okay. Denise, if you could state your name and address for the record and be recognized for three minutes. LaFever: Hi. My name is Denise LaFever and I'm at 6706 North Salvia Way in Spurwing and everybody's asking what you want there. I want Bown Crossing over in south Boise. That's a beautifully integrated mixed use community. When you go back and you look at our future land use map, there is just -- there wasn't the commercial designation on the future land use, it's mixed use, and I'm seeing more and more people and developers wanting to turn them into apartments and residential. I would really like to see the commercial there. There is also some confusion -- the staff report says that it's going to be 2.26 acres of commercial is what they are asking for, but Kent Brown's memo says 4.23. So, I'm not really sure exactly how much of that commercial is actually being developed. I'm in more support of the commercial. This is like the trifecta of commercial. You have got access points -- a left controlled light at Black Cat and Tree Farm. You have trip counts and you have roof tops. This spells I love commercial all over it. Plus mixed use community is supposed to serve the community. A lot of what the amenities that they talked about in the first application and towards the second application is more about supporting the current residents that are in the development. The memo on Kent Brown makes it clear that it is one story, underlined, or two stories. The intent is really to be one story. If you look at the video it also shows a one story commercial on the corner. So, their intent is to be more residential and not that two story. It's underlined and it's in the Page 50 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 29 of 50 video. This is an all residential rental area, which isn't compatible with all the surrounding areas, which is a high end -- high end home ownership, a lot of pride, and the neighborhood off to the west has done a really good job on melding with the Spurwing philosophy of life. One of my biggest issues is the usable space. Although they need the usable space, when you actually look at usable space it calculates in buffers and other nonusable amenities that are actually usable. This puts a large constraint on the neighborhoods around them for these neighbors to be using the usable spaces throughout this Spurwing community. The nearest park is .8 miles, which is Keith Bird Park. That is not practical to go across four heavy lanes of traffic, soon to be six in the future, and coupled with a high density regional compact use of Costco. So, it really is a lack of usable park space when they put it into the calculations. Not only that, but over at Costco right to the back they already have proposed 196 bedrooms, 102 units of apartments in that area. This whole development is -- is basically done on private roads, with the whole concept of getting higher and higher density in there that's not commiserative to the surrounding areas -- Simison: Denise, your time has expired. If you can wrap up, please. LaFever: Okay. I would like to see it closer to a six density, but more open space, more commercial, and I would like to see the impact be respected to the quality of life of the people that live around it. Once again, I would like to see it being more of the spirit of a mixed use more like Bown -- Bown Crossing in southeast. Thank you for your time. Simison: Council, any questions? Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I have a question -- not for Denise. I have a question for staff whenever that would be appropriate to ask. Simison: I don't see anybody else wanting to ask Denise a question that I can identify, so this would be a perfect time. Bernt: Thank you. Joe, got a question for you, brother. Is -- are we counting the community center as commercial space? If so, is it made available to the general public? If not -- I guess I will stop there until -- I have a bunch more questions. Dodson: No problem. Councilman Bernt, Members of the Council, so one of the revisions from the Planning and Zoning was to increase the area of C-C zoning from the two acres to what is now 4.2. Yes, the clubhouse area is part of that, including the plaza. I understand that that -- well, first, let me say that the clubhouse has about a thousand square feet of office that is available -- from my understanding it is available or not restricted to the public, but it is the intent to use it more for the residents of the community. And my next comment to that is I understand the public's concern and any concern that Page 51 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 30 of 50 it might be just a token area of additional commercial acreage, which is why I was trying to harp on the fact of having this two story concept on the corner adds the actual leasable square footage of additional commercial space, which I find more important than the acreage of zoning, at least in this case. So, that's -- yes, to answer your question. Bernt: All right. Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: So, just -- so, to clarify. So, what you are saying is that you are -- they are considering -- or they are counting the community center as -- as -- as commercial space, mostly geared toward their own residents, not toward the public. That's true? Dodson: That is my understanding. Bernt: Okay. So, how many -- how many acres is the community center sitting on? Dodson: I honestly do not know, sir. I would say it's roughly -- Bernt: That's roughly. I don't need -- Dodson: -- an acre. It's got to be -- no more than an acre. With the plaza it's probably a little over an acre. Bernt: Okay. That's perfect. Thanks, man. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone else who is signed up to testify? If not -- Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. No one online or in the room. Simison: All right. Anybody else who would like to provide testimony, please, come forward to the mic and state your name and address for the record. Brown: For the record Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood. I have been before you many times. I have been real excited about bringing this to the City of Meridian as one of the first places and the part that I think is -- that's kind of getting overlooked is the -- these buildings -- these residential buildings. If we were trying to put the density that the neighbors are concerned about, my clients would have put a lot more townhouses. Numerous times in talking with staff they suggested maybe along Chinden putting some more townhouses. The desire has been to -- to bring this one story detached units -- detached -- some being duplexes, some being completely independent. Some have garages. So, the -- that they can -- or that are attached to the unit themselves and in doing the many multi-family projects that I brought before you before, we count specifically everything that's on the outside of the building that makes the open space higher. We keep the buildings 20 feet apart, so, then, that means that all of that area is counted. We have those spaces in here, but they are private. We have --we have homes Page 52 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 31 of 50 that are basically single story that is planned to an extent that they can be clustered in, but they -- the people have privacy and they have these -- these yards for their -- their -- their product and what I really liked about Jeff Riggs -- one of the -- the main people with Baron, he made a comment that if we were looking for property that we were trying to put density on we wouldn't do townhouses. We -- we do that product places, but we chose not to do that here and the single story really provides something that's needed in the market. They have done the research, they have found that people want that experience and many of us have parents that are elderly -- yes, the --the neighborhood has said that they would like 55 or older. Well, I see a lot of 55 or older living here, because they have no maintenance. They have parcel stuff, they -- they -- they have a service to take your trash to the dumpster for you. They -- they provide care with regards to parking that the neighbors were concerned about where they pay someone to go around and remove vehicles that aren't parked where they are not supposed to be and so that it makes this something that has not been seen in this valley. Yes, you are -- you are used to the two story and up, but this different -- this is a different product that you haven't seen and I'm real excited about it and there are with each building different roof styles, so that even though that they are the same building next to each other, they don't look like the same building. You can't even do that in a single family neighborhood when you have builder teams. Simison: Thank you. Brown: I will stand for any questions. Simison: Council, any questions? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Question for Mr. Brown. I did note that you are required to provide 80 square feet of private usable open space per unit and you are at 419, which is, what, five times the required, which we always appreciate when people do more than the minimum, but is that surrounding the unit? Is that how -- how that's counted? Brown: Yes. Hoaglun: Is it more in a back area, as opposed to front and the other is just -- Brown: One of the pictures has areas that are highlighted in blue -- Hoaglun- Okay. Brown: -- the one that's on the screen right now. Those are all private open spaces. So, they are fenced, they have yards, there is -- there was one of the slides that show people sitting there and so that's one of the reasons why having the clubhouse at the one end Page 53 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 32 of 50 -- you have the people having the ability to do stuff in their own yard, which is what we do in our single family neighborhoods and -- but what it all comes down to is having that privacy and something that is highly maintained and taken care of and -- and Baron's won awards for their maintenance. We area part of the DA for Spurwing, which called out that we do something similar to this, and staff told us in one of our pre-app meetings that we didn't have to ask for a rezone. They suggested that we do, because everything that we are doing we could do in the C-C zone if we didn't change it, so -- anything else? Simison: Council, any further questions? Brown: Thanks. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Kent, following up -- Brown: Yes, sir. Borton: Quick follow up on Councilman Bernt's question. If, you know, you had approximately eight acres planned for the current commercial C-C zone and at P&Z I think the rezone application had it -- had it much lower, perhaps that's where the two or 2.2 comes from, but at the P&Z continuance there was a request to put a little more commercial back into it and that was done to some extent up to the approximate four acres in the current application. What was -- back in P&Z hearing that allowed for the requested increase in commercial to the acres that we see now? Brown: One of the items is the live-work building. It -- it mixes both and as Deborah talked about early on, to have that mixed use -- one of the -- one of the difficulties about doing a mixed use product with the way that the city has the guidelines for it is that you have outdoor and you have plazas and so forth that the commercial takes advantage of, but that the residents also do. So, if they -- for example, in the pop ups, if-- if someone's got a fruit stand or they have got an ice cream thing there, they can, then, go to someplace that's close by and they can eat that outdoors type of scenario. And so that's what's making this all work in the same area and clustered close together is a part of the reason why we have to do that and moving those things further down diminishes from that, because we have to have those same elements for the commercial. Borton: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up. Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: So, Kent, was -- going into that second P&Z to -- to increase the commercial was removed such as a residence and converted to additional commercial space or was Page 54 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 33 of 50 something that was already on the proposal recharacterized to count as commercial, serving a dual purpose? It sounded like maybe the -- Brown: Like the clubhouse? Is that what you are getting at? Borton: Or anything else. I'm just trying to get a sense of-- did something come out and commercial went back in or was something merely recharacterized to count as commercial? Brown: No. We -- we put stuff in and the stuff that we put in was the live-work and they wanted a vertical integrated -- they wanted to have buffering against Black Cat and so they wanted a two story building there. We have always tried to be mindful of our neighbors that have been testifying to the north of us, because where we put our fence in against those neighbors they are not going to see any units and there isn't anybody that's looking over across Tree Crest at them. So, we have tried to keep everything that's taller against those roads and against buffering us from the large Rock Church -- Rock Harbor church building. We have always planned on having offices in the clubhouse, but we have changed that, so that there -- there is leasable spaces in that clubhouse and Deb has the numbers with that, so she can speak to that number wise. But one of the things early on with staff is Baron says that they like to have events and they like to support community type things and staff said that we couldn't do that in an R-15 zone. So, when we started talking about relooking at some of those, now we can do those kinds of things -- neighborhood events from that clubhouse, whether that's, you know, Blue Cross -- or not Blue Cross -- but Red Cross and other types of functions. Breast cancer and so forth. Borton: Mr. Mayor -- Brown: One of the things that didn't get discussed is our northern entrance ties in directly with the roadway that goes over to central village -- or Central Valley with plaza with the hospital and so forth. So, that's a straight shot out of our development over to the west for the hospital that's over there. Simison: Councilman Borton, did you have another question? Borton: Just --just one final question and, Kent, either you or -- or Ms. Nelson can -- for that clubhouse community center, is that available to the -- for reservation and use and, if so, is it -- Brown: I will let her speak to that. Borton: Okay. And the second question on that is it paid for and maintained and insured by -- or some other entity? Brown: I will let her -- Page 55 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 34 of 50 Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, I would like to offer some rebuttal points, but I would be happy to start with that last question, if that makes the most sense for you. Simison: Deb, I don't -- we haven't closed it to other people's testimony, so if you just want to answer that question, then, we can see if anybody else wants to testify -- Nelson: Okay. Simison: -- before we move into -- Nelson: I will handle it that way then. Thank you. Council Member Borton, your questions overlapped with what Council Member Hoaglun was asking as well and the answer is that the clubhouse is a residential amenity available for residences to reserve those office spaces and there is approximately 1,050 square feet of office space that is reservable by the residents. In addition there is office space for our full-time staff and that--that building could appropriately be located either in the C-C zone or in the R-15 zone. It would be allowed in either location under your code. It is appropriately in the C-C for the reasons -- for many reasons, one of which Kent just touched on was having that adjacent plaza that's open to the public that creates that integration there. The -- the building is only 4,500 square feet. You had asked, Council Member Hoaglun, about the size in particular of how much land. It's only a 10th of an acre. If you count the public, you know, open space, the -- the plaza that's really appropriately in the C-C zone, you might get up to a third of an acre. This is a small footprint. And when we display our square footage that we are describing without that office space, it's 27,000 feet overall and so it's -- and I -- when I presented I said over 20,000, because we would like the flexibility to go down to a one story building on the corner. So, I think that hits on all of the questions you guys asked about the clubhouse, but let me know if there is -- there is more that I missed. Simison: Okay. Borton: Sounds good. Thank you. Nelson: Thank you. Simison: We are still in a public hearing. Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this application? If you would like the come forward and state your name and address for the record, please. Parkinson: My name is Ray Parkinson. I live at 6925 North Agrarian Drive, just at that intersection that they claim on the north, that's how I leave my subdivision. So, it's directly adjacent. I understand that they have done a pretty good job and we understand that something's going to happen -- something's going to have to go there and it sounds like they have taken some consideration to make it a cohesive development. However, I just moved here in June of this year, I wasn't even aware of what was going on here and I don't know that it would have made an impact on whether I would have decided to live in the Spurwing Subdivision or not, but it definitely is concerning to me now not knowing Page 56 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 35 of 50 exactly how that's going to impact my property values and my quality of life here. I personally would like to see, as mentioned by the --some of the other Spurwing residents, a little less dense housing and a little more commercial there that would be maybe a little more compatible to what we currently have in that area. However, I think at this point I would really like to encourage the consideration of some of the requests that they have made and the green space on the west side on Black -- Black Cat. I think that we just need to make sure that -- that the residents there are being fairly represented by our -- our Council Members and I know some of the developers -- they are coming in to make their money and that's all fine. I appreciate that. And my day job's a banker and I have been involved in several developments such as this and I'm very impressed with their presentation, but I would just encourage you to make sure that us as residents are being considered in these decisions and I would prefer -- you know, like has been mentioned before, maybe even half the density, but I understand that the current -- they are allowed to do even more dense housing. So, I guess my whole point is I wanted to make sure that as you guys make the decisions here that you are considering us as residents of those neighborhoods in your decisions. So, thank you for hearing me. Bernt: Welcome to Meridian. Parkinson: Yeah. Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. I love it. Simison: And for Council, Ray has taken over the spot for Toni Smith, who has now retired, just for people's knowledge. Parkinson: Some very big high heels to fill, actually. Simison: Council, any questions? Is there anybody else would like to provide testimony at this time? Okay. Then the applicant will come forward to close. Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you and I appreciate the comments from all the neighbors and also from the -- the question and answer back and forth. I think it helps us get to a presentation that you can understand all the detailed aspects of this. A couple of specific points that were brought up. There was a comment about schools and we already just touched on that. I just want to point out that based on, you know, West Ada has changed their calculation and that's another thing that's changed since their original letter as well. They now calculate a .7 for every home, instead of .8. A .7 would bring us to 137 students. But this development is targeting millennials and baby boomers and so we actually expect that number to be significantly less and as we discussed we are within the capacities. Open space was brought up, that we should have more open space. We actually have 17 and a half percent of open space in this development, which is significant for its size, and we provide six qualified amenities, where only four are required. On the comment about traffic, all of the roads currently meet -- as they have been improved. I think everybody here is aware of all the improvements that have gone on in this area with the Costco development and widening Chinden and adding a signal at Black Cat and those roads meet the level of service with the trips from this development. The development will also be providing almost a hundred Page 57 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 36 of 50 thousand dollars in proportionate share mitigation to ITD. So, that's a significant contribution. Plus all of their impact fees to ACHD. The homeowner representative discussed it would be great if we could have more townhomes. Well, we do have a townhome. I mean that's what's great is we have that housing product. In addition to that, we have the detached product that I think truly is more favorable to what we are hearing from the Spurwing neighbors and so adding more townhomes would add more density here and we have really tried to limit that and find that right balance. There was discussion about the commercial size and questions from the Council Member about the commercial size and the evolution at the Planning and Zoning Commission. The -- the comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission were that it would be nice to have around a four acre site, because they thought that added enough opportunity for a mix of uses. But as Joe has pointed out, there is nothing magical about the acres, it's really about increasing the intensity of the available space and our original development came in with 12,500 square feet and so we have doubled that. So, that's really what the Planning and Zoning Commission was looking at where you could have that synergy of uses in one location with our six units and the live-work and our four units and the pop up, plus the corner commercial, we have a lot of opportunity for a mix of uses that people can walk to with pathways that connect, so that it doesn't just serve our development, it serves the neighbors, too. The testimony from the neighbors at the P&Z was that they wanted neighborhood commercial. They don't want an auto based commercial. They don't want more traffic. And I think that was, you know, flushed out again today, that, you know, retail trips generate much more traffic than residential and so I think we have tried to strike that right balance of getting enough commercial here that doesn't create an unreasonable amount of traffic. We also have the limitations of the site that have to be taken into account that were part of that balancing act. Chinden has no access and so with access limitations you can't really develop a larger regional based commercial. Instead that has happened on other sites around us with Fairborne, Costco, and the Central Valley Plaza. And this -- this discussion about it would be great if it were just half the units. I mean Joe answered that correctly that when we are looking at a rezone, the range of density that your plan has called for here -- your updated plan calls for six to 15 and so it's always been contemplated to be in that range. Even more importantly, we are currently zoned and so we are allowed to build something up to 15. We are only seeking the rezone to realign the zones as requested by staff and so somebody could come in and put 15 units per acre here and that is allowed under the current zone and so -- but I think even more important than that I think it's just important to keep in mind the context of what was planned when Tree Farm was approved, that this was supposed to be a little more of an intense site. They didn't want to have all of the same housing type in this area. This area was called for multi-family and for commercial and so we are fulfilling that vision that has been long held and we are creating an opportunity that's attractive and useful and functional on this in-fill site that's been waiting to be developed. Baron's really excited to be here. We think it's a great site. We think it's a great product for Meridian and they are excited to be a part of your city to bring that forward. So, I would stand for any additional questions you may have. Simison: Thank you, Deb. Council, questions? Page 58 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 37 of 50 Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Deb, I need some help on this -- this struggle I have and it's not about the overall development, this is mixed use community and there are some amenities and qualities here that -- Mr. Brown was right, we don't see in Meridian. So, thank you for doing that, because this is unique and I know the residents who live in Spurwing may go, oh, no, this is high density, this is terrible, but yet from our perspective when we see these developments coming in from all parts of the city, it's like here we go again, townhouse after townhouse after townhouse and apartment complex after apartment complex. To see something like this is refreshing and rather exciting. But I -- but I certainly understand the perspective of your neighbors. It's -- it's change and it's different than -- you know, it's just -- it's -- it's our human nature to -- you know, that unknown. But where my -- where my angst is right now is on that commercial portion, because in going through the minutes with the Planning and Zoning Commission, they talked about having something on the corner that stood out and I guess it really gets down to that is that single story, is that two story and what does that look like when you go by that, oh, there is -- there is something there and -- and you made a good point about its neighborhood commercial, as opposed to retail commercial, which -- I think it was -- I asked Karl Bennion about that--what would -- you know, his concern or was it retail driving that -- but it was the density of the housing. So, that -- that does give me pause going, okay, if it's a neighborhood, but is there still a commercial component to it that some want that visibility from that area to be seen -- if it's a real estate office, for example. They want to have their sign out front and know that's where -- where are they locate. So, help me understand why you think that one story would be -- would work still, as opposed to -- and I understand what you have the -- more than half of the building -- well, about half the building would be underground -- parking on that first floor, so it's not a complete two story structure, but help me understand why you think that one story is plenty. Nelson: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, I would be happy to. The -- the one story building -- and I -- and I understand the comments that you read from the P&Z. I recall specifically that they talked about, actually, that they felt like we had satisfied their desire to add sufficient commercial. They liked the architecture of the two story. You probably remember that comment. And -- and we appreciate that. It's a beautiful building. We have great architects. But they also designed a similar look in a one story to create that same striking presence and so because of the signal that's now gone in at Black Cat and Chinden you can get that visibility that you are talking about and so the commercial users can have visibility on that corner that's created by the signal. It's still got that same design. We love the design they put together with the corner and the L shape, so it creates a striking presence on the corner, whether it's one story or two. It's got the elevated kind of sloped modern roofline that creates that higher elevation look and so the P&Z became satisfied with the amount of commercial. Council Member Borton, you asked earlier about, well, what was taken out. Well, that live-work building was townhouses and so we added commercial through vertical integration there and, then, we expanded the footprint of that corner commercial area to allow a larger footprint of square footage and we would Page 59 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 38 of 50 love it if we could find the retail uses -- if we have the demand for two story -- we like the look of that, too. We would be delighted to have that. But a vacant corner that isn't viable doesn't activate the commercial area at all and so we have to be cognizant of that and make sure we get the right user that is compatible, that is neighborhood commercial, and that's all we are asking for is flexibility. We are not asking to have a one story building only, we are asking for the option. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor. Deborah, thank you. Simison: Council, any other questions? Okay. Nelson: Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, I will -- happy to let you all talk amongst yourselves or take a motion to close the public hearing, whichever direction you would like to go. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I would encourage Council to use as much dialogue right now before we go into -- or before we close the public hearing, if it's all necessary. Simison: Just real quick, since we have been going at this since 4:30, would Council like to take a break or just keep going? Okay. We are going to go ahead and take a ten minute recess. We will reconvene at 8.15. (Recess: 8:05 p.m. to 8:17 p.m.) Simison: Okay. I'm going to go ahead and bring this back from recess. Council, under your president's direction would anybody like to be recognized for comments at this time? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I will make some -- some brief opening comment to all the material that we reviewed up through today. The -- the considerations, depending on the type of application, annexations versus applications such as this where there is existing entitlements is an important distinction. The application starts with a vested right to do certain things on this property with the C-C and R-15 zoning. The rezone application, as I see it, is a moving of a line expanding one existing use to a certain degree and reducing another, all within the mixed use community. But the two zones that are within this application are consistent with mixed use community and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map, so all things considered it seems to me to be improvement in the existing entitlements. I think the -- the density vested existing Page 60 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 39 of 50 residential use could be much higher. I appreciate the fact that it's not. I think that the concerns about excessive residential traffic are well taken and the applicant stayed on the low end of that existing invested right, which I think is appreciated, perhaps in consideration of concern. I think the product is -- it's unique in that region. It is diverse. So, I appreciate that as well. Again, providing some diversity in an existing right to provide that type of mixed use residential. So, I think the -- the project is one -- excuse me -- the application is one worth approving. I think the rezone, having been really vetted well by Planning and Zoning and thanks to the Commission for doing that, I think that process with the citizens' input made this a net improvement on what was already an otherwise existing right and entitlement on this property. So, for those reasons that I'm supportive of it. Simison: Thank you, Councilman Borton. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. As I -- as I go through this and I kind of probably got ahead of myself a little bit when I talked about earlier that this is --this is new, it's different, it's kind of exciting to see something -- refreshing to see something that is different, that is not just maxing out the densities that -- that they could and, you know, like any project you look at it and you see things that, you know, why did they put the dog park there, I think I would move it over here and change things around. But, really, as I went through the two sets of Planning and Zoning minutes -- and Councilman Borton has pointed out -- they did an excellent job. They -- they put a lot of time and effort into this and the result of that is -- is a better project and that's --that's what we want to see and we certainly appreciate that work by them and the applicant and the neighbors who helped make that with their testimony to a better project and, you know, as we get into the waivers, you know, one of the -- one of the requests is allowing a one or two story building and -- and as I have gone back and forth on that -- and I think I understand that, it's not a retail destination. I know Ms. LaFever had talked about that -- like a Bown Crossing, which is unique and exciting, but that is not this and -- and not planned to be that and I can buy into the -- it's a neighborhood retail location and so going to allowing a one story or two story is something I can live with. I didn't have any problems with the 25 foot landscape buffer waiver. It flows well the way the concept is designed, that -- that is workable to me and -- and, of course, the access issue has been worked out, we just need to delete that condition. So, those things have been answered for me as -- as we went through the course of the discussion this evening. So, I think I can -- I can support those. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I think Council Member Hoaglun touched on something that is a good reminder for all of us on the Council. I think it's a -- it's an easy trap for us to fall into to, you know, Page 61 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 40 of 50 play SimCity and say, oh, I want this to be here and that to be there and I was pretty clear about my comments, I don't love the design and look of this. I just think it's very -- it just all looks the same. But I think we also know that I am not in the homebuilding business and I think it would be a challenge for all of Meridian if I was. So, I'm not so beholden to that particular piece that I'm -- I'm opposing the project. The one piece I do have a little bit of a hang up on -- and Council Member Hoaglun touched on it -- is the waiver for the two story. To me, again, going back to the comments in P&Z -- and Deborah, obviously, spoke about it in her comments -- is that was trying to capture some of the desire of the Planning and Zoning Commission to have that greater element -- I think Council Member Holland said time and time again the desire to go vertical on -- on that commercial piece. So, I'm not supportive of that particular waiver, but I think overall with everything else related to the project I can be supportive. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Oh, I'm -- I'm struggling with this one a little bit. So, I -- I agree with my fellow Council Members' comments about the uniqueness of this. I really think the applicant has put in an incredible amount of -- of well thought out effort and design, the uniqueness. I love the concept of the -- the -- the multiplicity of types of properties together and how they are intended to work as one development, but also be unique. I like the livability aspect of it. There is so many things about it I really like. The -- the challenge I'm experiencing is I don't love this location for this and this isn't -- we talked a lot in the past in general about we only have so many corners in Meridian to -- and -- and so many opportunities to get these developments right and this is a really important location because of its -- because of it being on Chinden and for the most part in my opinion all in all Chinden really lacks commercial, even with everything that's coming in -- considering the number of units that are along Chinden I don't feel like we have enough and so I would actually prefer to see a little greater use of commercial space in here than residential space in here. I wouldn't call this a hard corner per se, because Black Cat going north stops. There isn't traffic coming in from the north. So, there is that element there of -- of it not necessarily being a corner with two -- you know, two arterials or a highway and an arterial. But I just -- I really don't -- I don't love this location for this, as much as I really like the concepts and the residential designs and whatnot. I also agree with Councilman Cavener that I feel like there could be more variety in -- not necessarily the elevations, but the colors specifically. And I know -- and, sure enough, those renderings probably are not accurate as to what you are going to do, but I definitely think that with the proximity of the homes one to the other that there needs to be a significant variety among them. But I -- I -- what I don't have for you at this very moment is exactly what I would do differently and that's what I'm kind of wrestling with is we have asked the applicant and we have asked some of the -- the individuals giving testimony for specifics on what they would like to see differently and I would like to do the same. To say what -- you know, I can't plan this for the applicant by any means or for the city, but just in general I would really like to see a little more intense use here myself. Page 62 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 41 of 50 Bernt: Mr. Mayor, my turn. Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: To begin I really like the concept of this -- this project. This application. I don't think this type of development will attract big families. I really don't believe that. I think most -- most of those who will be interested in this type of a project will be younger professionals, those who don't want to --those who don't want to spend their time mowing lawns and -- and doing yard work and trimming trees and so on and so forth. I -- I -- if there are -- if there are going to be families I think they are going to be pretty small and younger families. Mostly retirees. And so I don't think that you are going to get a lot of density of people that--what's been expressed by-- by those who have given testimonial, albeit I appreciate the testimony given and respectfully understand where you -- where you come from with that concern. I -- I believe the amenities are great. Maybe add a pickleball court or something, but -- but for the most part I think that the amenities are great. One thing that I believe to be true and very important in any city, whether it's small, big, old or new, is a diversity of housing. I think what makes a strong city is a diversity in housing and sometimes when you get west and you get away from our-- our dear friends of the east I think that sometimes folks sometimes just sort of expect the same thing in every -- in every subdivision, you know, single family dwellings that -- that -- that aren't quite as dense, but at the end of the day I think in some places I think that that's important and we may agree to disagree and know that I love you for it if we do, but, you know, if there is one place where -- where density makes sense it's probably right here. I'm not -- I'm not a -- I'm not a guy with -- and I want to be clear, I'm not a guy that likes to plop, you know, multi-family projects in the middle of town. I get why that wouldn't be advantageous. But you have Highway 20-26 right there on Chinden. It's been expanded and it's going to create a nice thoroughfare for people to travel from --from point Ato point Z. To the west you are going to have Highway 16. And so you are going to have an area where traffic isn't going to be as big of a deal as if it were, you know, somewhere on Ustick, you know, off of Locust Grove for example. And that's just--that's just my thought that I have. With that said, I would -- this is where I struggle and it's with the commercial aspect. I don't like how it was sold as -- the community center as a portion of the commercial area of it and maybe I misunderstood that calculation. If I do I apologize. I just think that's a little bit fuzzy. We have been doing this for a long time and -- and I -- I wish you would have portrayed that differently, because I don't think that that was necessarily -- I don't know -- that's not commercial period. I mean that's residential. Hundred percent. I -- I would like to see more creativity in -- in the commercial aspect of this. I think it's just sort of blah and I -- and I -- we -- there is a lot of people that bring up Bown Crossing as an example. This for sure isn't Bown Crossing. Bown Crossing is a phenomenal area of Boise. But this -- this just isn't that. But with that said, I do believe it could have been more creative with the commercial aspect of it and with City Council we are not designers, we are not planners, I'm never going to get into specifics of what I like and what I don't like and what should be there and what should be taken out, that's not our purview, but I can tell you that we -- the commercial aspect of this could have been done better. I certainly am in favor of a two story building, as opposed to a one story building. I think going vertical is extremely important, especially on that hard corner. Page 63 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 42 of 50 Usually -- and I say this -- usually I believe it's in the city's best interest to not take away from the commercial aspect of -- of our -- of our zoning and give more to residential. I just don't like that. When it's commercial it should stay commercial and if right now it doesn't make sense for that development, because you feel like it needs to be more residential than commercial, then, maybe right now is not the right time. I don't know. I just -- I struggle with that and I -- and with that said I do believe that the applicant did a good job of changing and making it better. At the end of the day I don't like taking away commercial and giving it to residential, especially in the -- in the climate that we are in right now in our -- in our valley, so -- Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I -- I agree with Councilman Bernt and he said it much more eloquently than I -- than I did. I didn't specifically say that I am not in support of the waiver or in support of allowing a one or two story. I think a two story at minimum needs to be there and I just wanted to put on record that -- that I -- that I specifically believe that to be the case, along with Councilman Cavener's statement. So, I wanted to make it clear that -- that that's my opinion on that and I agree with Councilman Bernt, I think that this is a really important corner and that I would like to see the commercial expanded here and, then, I do believe that the clubhouse and the plaza, those are intended for the residents in that community and that they should not be considered commercial for public use. Simison: I was going to leave my suitcase packed tonight, but I -- so, I'm going to unpack a little bit of it, you know, because I love this project and I hate this project. You know, top to bottom, you know, I think it brings some great innovations and there is other things that I really don't care for. Again, not trying to redesign, but speaking to the commercial, because what I have heard -- and maybe Joe can confirm -- this two story is only talking about, in reality, a visual element. We are talking about -- not talking about adding more commercial, because what I have heard is the parking is really taking up what would be commercial on this element. Is that correct, Joe? Is there really a -- is there significant amount of more commercial from two to one? Dodson: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the one story is about 13,000 square feet of leasable space. The two story is 19,500. So, that's 6,500 more square feet, which -- yeah. I'm not a commercial expert, honestly, but I -- 6,500 is more. Simison: It's more. Yes. Correct. Bernt: Thanks, Joe. Dodson: Anytime. Simison: But -- but to go to my other Council Members' points, I -- I think the other two things you have for commercial are innovative in what they are. I would be really really Page 64 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 43 of 50 curious to know if they are successful at all and I'm like -- the only thing I can think of is the Hickory Farms coming in. I don't know about the rest of the pop up concepts or anything else, if that's really going to add, you know, long-term value and what-- and what that looks like. I'm sure some of it will, but, you know, a greater commercial in this corner is what I would really advocate for and even go as far as to say -- and I know that they are even saying don't do, you know, the flexibility, but you have plenty of parking. I assume this is all cross-parked. There is nothing specific to any of the zones not to have any parking under the first -- or under the second story on that property to make that all potential be commercial. That's just my two cents as it relates to the commercial aspect, because I think that there is -- more commercial is better in this location, rather than less. And that's really all I'm going to unpack. I will leave everything else in the suitcase. It doesn't really have much bearing on where Council has made comments. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I might ask Joe a question. Deborah had talked about the clubhouse and said whether it's commercial or residential it fits either designation. Is -- is that -- that clubhouse, is that something that is a flexible type of space that can be in either designation? Dodson: Councilman Hoaglun, Members of the Council, from my understanding, yes, because the multi-family project, which is a conditional use in either C-C or R-15 where that is zoning wise is really unrelated. I think the reason that Kent and the team push it into the C-C was because of my comments regarding if it was going to be used as an event center for people beyond this project, then, we get into needing -- maybe needing a conditional use permit for an indoor rec center or an event center and things like that, which is not part of this application. Unless it's in the C-C zone, which is -- then those indoor facilities are permitted by right. So, I think that that's where they kind of went with that. But it -- as a functioning clubhouse it could be either/or, because it's tied to the residential multi-family. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Joe. Appreciate that. Because I think the comments I did were that having Red Cross, if you do a blood drive or you have a group come in or something like that and -- and one of the things that concerns me is seeing some -- some of our small strip malls where a bar or a restaurant goes in and it's wildly popular, there is not enough parking. You just -- and something like that would -- would not fit and that would create the problems that residents talked about -- existing resident -- neighbors and it would cause problems for the neighborhood itself there, so having it a neighborhood retail, pop up space, it -- it's unique and I'm not sure what it looked like or how successful it will be, but it's a concept with live-work units that why not, I think there can be some good use out of that. So, we may see what happens. Having the -- not having the flexibility for one or two story is not a sword I'm going to -- willing to die on for this whole project. I can -- I understand the reason for two story and, then, having that commercial, it's -- it's -- it's something that -- while they wanted the flexibility, if -- if fellow Page 65 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 44 of 50 Council Members and the Planning and Zoning Commission want to see, hey, it really needs to be two story, I can certainly live with that, so -- Simison: Council, anything else before anyone wants to make a motion? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: It sounds very quiet, so I'm going to make a motion. I move that we close the public hearing on Item 6, H-2020-0022. 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. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Appreciate the good discussion. I, too, think hearing Council's comments on the desire for more mass and the two story -- the additional commercial space makes sense. So, having that requirement that it be two stories seems appropriate. So, that portion of the waiver would not be part of it. So, I'm going to make a motion that we approve H- 2020-0022, without granting the waiver on the height -- the height requirement on that commercial corner portion. So, it will be the two stories or -- or that height equivalent. And I think the other waiver was with regards to the land use buffer. We didn't hear any concern with that, so that would be granted as part of the application as presented. Dodson: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Joe. Dodson: Before -- just wanted to note the deletion of the DA provision A-1 S as well regarding the access. Borton: Thank you, Joe. That's included in the motion. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Page 66 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 45 of 50 Hoaglun: I would second that motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second. 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, absent; Perreault, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion is agreed to and approved. Thank you very much for being here this evening. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. ORDINANCES [Action Item] 7. Ordinance No. 20-1898: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-4-2(A)(5)(d), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Mobile Sales Unit License; Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-2(C), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Vehicle Immobilization License; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Council, next item on the agenda is Item No. 7, Ordinance No. 1898. 1 will ask our clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is Ordinance No. 20-1898, an ordinance amending Meridian City Code Section 3-4-2(A)(5)(d), regarding criminal history disqualifying applicants for mobile sales unit license; amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-2(c), regarding criminal history disqualifying applicants for vehicle and mobilization license; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date. Simison: Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anyone -- would you or anyone else in attendance like it read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 20-1898 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance No. 20-1898 under suspension of rules. Is there any discussion on the motion? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Page 67 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 46 of 50 Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I just wanted to thank police and clerk's office for their work on this particular piece. Sorry, my lights keep going off up here. I will get that fixed. I'm not quite sure that I'm supportive of these changes. I get what we are trying to accomplish. I think that the way this process has played out before I think is sufficient. I appreciate what Council is trying to achieve. I just -- I didn't want to catch anybody off guard if I'm -- if I vote in opposition to this. Simison: Thank you, Councilman Cavener. Any other comments on this item? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. Cavener: Nay. Simison: The ayes have it. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. 8. Ordinance No. 20-1899: An Ordinance (H-2020-0035 — Poiema Subdivision) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land as Shown on Record of Survey Number 2880, Recorded as Instrument Number 94050954, Records of Ada County, Situate in a Portion of Government Lot 3, Section 4, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment "A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 14.87 Acres of Land From RUT to R- 15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next item is Ordinance No. 20-1899. Ask the clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This ordinance is related H-2020-0035, Poiema Subdivision, for annexation of a parcel of land as shown on Record of Survey Number 2880, recorded as Instrument Number 94050954, Records of Ada County, situated in a portion of Government Lot 3, Section 4, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho, as described in Attachment "A" and annexing certain lands and territory, situated in Ada county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian as requested by the City of Meridian; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 14.87 acres of land from RUT to R-15 (Medium High Page 68 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 41 of 50 Density Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a waiver of the reading rules; and providing an effective date. Simison: Thank you, Chris. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anyone that would like it read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 20-1899 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance No. 20-1899 under suspension of the rules. 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. 9. Ordinance No. 20-1900: An Ordinance (H-2020-0032 — Brody Square) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Situated Within the Southwest '/4 of the Southwest'/4 of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment "A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 15.00 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next item is ordinance -- Item No. 9, Ordinance 20-1900. Ask the clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an Ordinance related to H-2020-0032, Brody Square, for annexation of a parcel of land situated within the Southwest '/4 of the Page 69 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 48 of 50 Southwest'/4 of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian,Ada county, Idaho, as described in Attachment "A" and annexing certain lands and territory, situated in Ada county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian as requested by the City of Meridian; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 15.00 acres of land from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a waiver of the reading rules; and providing an effective date. Simison: You have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anyone who would like it read in its entirety? Seeing none, Council, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 20-1900 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance No. 20-1900 under suspension of the rules. Is there any discussion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and the ordinance is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 10. Ordinance No. 20-1901: An Ordinance (H-2019-0106 — Shelburne South) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Being Located in the SW '/4 of the SE '/4 of Section 28 Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment "A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 29.01 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies if this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Page 70 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 49 of 50 Simison: Next item is No. 10, Ordinance No. 20-1901. 1 will ask the clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an ordinance related to H-2019-0106, Shelburne South, for annexation of a parcel of land being located in the SW '/4 of the SE '/4 of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho, as described in Attachment "A" and annexing certain lands and territory, situated in Ada county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian as requested by the City of Meridian; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 29.01 acres of land from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code; providing that copies if this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a waiver of the reading rules; and providing an effective date. Simison: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Is there anyone that would like this ordinance read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 20-1901 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: Been motioned and seconded to adopt ordinance -- or approve Ordinance No. 20-1901 under suspension of the rules. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and the ordinance is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, any items under future meeting topics? EXECUTIVE SESSION 11. Per Idaho Code 74-206A(1)(a) To deliberate on a labor contract offer or to formulate a counteroffer; and 74-206(1)d To consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 1, title 74, Idaho Page 71 Meridian City Council Item#2. October 13,2020 Page 50 of 50 Code Simison: Okay. Item No. 11 was vacated. So, we will move to the last item. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: I move that we adjourn the meeting. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. And we are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:48 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 10 / 27 / 2020 MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Page 72 C � WE N DIAN --- IDAHO 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: CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN - IN SHEET Date : October 13 , 2020 Prior to the commencement of the meeting a person wishing to address the Mayor and City Council MUST sign in and limit their comments to the matter described below. Complaints about individuals, city staff, business or private matters will not be allowed. Testimony or comment on an active application or proposal that is or will be pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council is strictly prohibited by Idaho law. Each speaker will have up to three (3) minutes to address the Mayor and Council, but the chair may stop the speaker if the matter does appear to violate guidelines, varies from the topic identified on this sign in sheet or other provisions of law or policy. Print Name Provide Description of Discussion Topic 7/tem 77 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Cyber Security Awareness Month Page 5 Item#1. E IDIA I - IDAHO The office of the Mayor WHEREAS, the City of Meridian recognizes it has a vital role in identifying, protecting its citizens from, and responding to cybersecurity threats that may have significant impact to our community; and, WHEREAS, cybersecurity education and awareness is crucial for everyone, including large corporations, small businesses, financial institutions, schools, government agencies, the home user, and anyone who connects to the internet; and, WHEREAS, you can protect yourself by monitoring your accounts,being conscientious of what you share online, keeping computer software up to date, creating unique passwords and changing them regularly, installing anti-virus programs and firewalls, and using mobile devices safely; and, WHEREAS, the STOP. THINK. CONNECT.TM Campaign serves as the national cybersecurity public awareness campaign, implemented through a coalition working together to increase the public's understanding of cyber threats and empowering Americans to be safe and secure online; and, WHEREAS, maintaining the security of cyberspace is a shared responsibility in which each of us has a critical role to play, and awareness of computer security essentials will improve the security of the City of Meridian's information, infrastructure, and economy. THEREFORE, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim the month of October 2020 as Cy ber Security Awareness N onth in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in recognizing how serious cyber security is and the steps each of us can takge rotect ourselves and our community. Dated this 6`h day of October, 2020 so , Mayor Treg Bernt, Council President Brad Hoaglun, City Council Vice-President Liz Strader, City Council i ° Joe Borton, City Council Jessica Perreault, City Council Luke Cavener, City Council Page 6 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution 20-2233: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Camden Hyde as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle as Youth Commissioner to the Meridian Arts Commission Page 7 Item#2. CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 20-2233 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT,BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN APPOINTING CAMDEN HYDE TO THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AND RAEYA WARDLE TO THE MERIDIAN ARTS COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Meridian City Code Title 2, Chapter 4 establishes the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission; WHEREAS,Meridian City Code Title 2,Chapter 2 establishes the Meridian Arts Commission; WHEREAS, Meridian City Code Section 2-1-1 establishes roles,responsibilities,membership and terms of appointment for all Meridian City Commissions; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian recognizes and values the unique perspective and input of the youth of the Meridian community as it pertains to arts within the City, and to that end Meridian City Code § 2-1-1(c)(2) states that a youth member may be appointed to Commissions; WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian deems the appointment of Camden Hyde as a Youth Member to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle as a Youth Member to the Meridian Arts Commission, to be in the best interest of the City of Meridian; and NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That,pursuant to Meridian City Code §2-1-1 Camden Hyde be appointed as a Youth Member to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission and Raeya Wardle be appointed as a Youth Member to the Meridian Arts Commission, for terms to expire on September 30, 2021. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, thisl3thday of October, 2020. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 13th day of October, 2020. APPROVED: ATTEST: By: Mayor Robert E. Simison Chris Johnson, City Clerk YOUTH COMMISSIONER APPOINTMENTS Page 8 7/tem 77 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Updates to the Citywide Fee Schedule Page 9 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE October 13 , 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3 Public Hearing for Updates to the Citywide Fee Schedule PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Item#3. CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at its meeting on Tuesday, October 13,2020, at 6:00 p.m., at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, regarding adoption of proposed new and increasing fees, as set forth below. Further information regarding these proposed fees is available in the Finance Department at Meridian City Hall,33 East Broadway Avenue,Meridian,Idaho. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing, and the public is welcome and invited to submit written comments and/or provide verbal testimony at the hearing. Verbal testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes per person. For auditory, visual, or language accommodations, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 208-888-4433. DATED this 24th day of September, 2020. CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK PUBLISH on October 2, 2020 and October 9, 2020. Fee Description Fee Amount Old Fee Amount Building Inspection Fees: After Hours Building Occasionally we receive requests to perform $52.93 Per New Fee Inspection Fee after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. After Hours Electrical Occasionally we receive requests to perform $57.41 Per New Fee Inspection Fee after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. After Hours Occasionally we receive requests to perform $56.51 Per New Fee Mechanical Inspection after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour Fee contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. Utility Billing Fee: Industrial Diversion 40 yd. Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.) $30.74 $21.20 Page 10 7/tem 77 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution 20-2234: A Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Page 11 Item#4. CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 20-2234 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW AND INCREASING FEES; AUTHORIZING CITY DEPARTMENTS TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,pursuant to Idaho Code section 63-1311A, following publication of notice on October 2, 2020 and October 9, 2020, and public hearing on October 13, 2020, the City Council of the City of Meridian did, by formal motion, approve new and increasing fees as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, certain fees charged by City are decreasing or are no longer necessary, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the new, and increasing fees set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted. Section 2. That the Community Development Department and Public Works Department of the City of Meridian, respectively, are hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of fees set forth in Exhibit A. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect on October 14, 2020. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 13th day of October, 2020. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, his13th day of October, 2020. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FY21 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 1 page 12 Item#4. EXHIBIT A Fee Description Fee Amount Old Fee Amount Building Inspection Fees: After Hours Building Occasionally we receive requests to perform $52.93 Per New Fee Inspection Fee after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. After Hours Electrical Occasionally we receive requests to perform $57.41 Per New Fee Inspection Fee after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. After Hours Occasionally we receive requests to perform $56.51 Per New Fee Mechanical Inspection after hours/overtime inspections due to Hour Fee contractor or owners needs to not disrupt existing business operations, or to help them maintain schedules. Utility Billing Fee: Industrial Diversion 40 yd. Disposal Fee (Clean Rock, Gravel, etc.) $30.74 $21.20 ADOPTION OF FY21 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 2 page 13 C � WE N DIAN --- IDAHO Planning and Zoning Presentation and Outline h2 City Council Meeting 2020, October 13 Slide 1 h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order: hoodc, 12/19/2006 AERIALPLANNED DEVELOPMENTZONING FLUMPLANNED DEVELOPMENT Changes to Agenda : N/A I i I Item #5 : Pearson Subdivision ( H -2020 . 0075) Application (s ) . ➢ Combined Preliminary/Final Plat Size of property, existing zoning , and location : This site consists of 3 , 98 acres of land , zoned R-4 , located at 175 W . Paint Horse Lane . Adjacent Land Use & Zoning : To the west and south is outside City of Meridian area of impact—uses appear to be county residential ; Meridian R-4 zoning and low density residential exist to the east and north . History : South Meridian Annexation ( H -2015-0019) Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation : Mixed Use Regional Summary of Request : The subject application is proposing to subdivide one 4 acre lot into two lots for the purposes of allowing the current owner of the parcel to deed the new lot over to her daughter so that her and her family are close-by, this includes helping her daughter with her newborn child . The subject property was annexed in 2015 as part of a larger annexation known as South Meridian Annexation . There is an existing Development Agreement (DA) associated with the original annexation and this property and this application constitutes development under City code . In reviewing the existing DA, the Applicant is required to apply for a Development Agreement Modification and the Applicant has done this per the conditions of approval in the staff report. The subject application has also received City Engineer and Public Works Director approval for a utilities waiver to not connect to City services at this time due to services being more than a half mile away . Staff finds that making a singular property owner pay for extending City services for a two lot subdivision is neither fair nor necessary . Central District Health ( CDH ) has also approved of an additional temporary well site and septic system—this fact further diminishes any concern Staff has with the Applicant' s application regarding water and sewer services . As noted , there is an existing single-family home on the subject property that is not connected to city services . This property, along with nearby properties , was annexed in 2015 but were not required to connect to City services at that time due to services not being available . This situation has not changed since 2015 for this area of South Meridian . However, when services do become available in Meridian Road , the Applicant will be required to connect to them as conditioned in this application and in the existing Development Agreement . Access to this development is proposed via an existing private lane , W . Paint Horse Lane . ACHD is not requiring any public road dedication due to the access not being changed—the subject application does not warrant a public road or road improvements at this time according to ACHD . In accord with the existing access , UDC 11 -31-1 -4 requires that if an existing state highway access has an increase in intensity that it is to be removed upon development or dedicated to ACHD and be constructed as noted on the Master Street Map ( MSM) . Paint Horse Lane is shown as a future collector roadway on the MSM but the addition of one single-family home does not warrant the construction of a collector roadway at this time . With the DA Modification the Applicant needs to apply for prior to City Council , new DA provisions will address this and ensure any future development meets the required development standards . Staff and ACHD find that the existing private access is sufficient for one additional single family home . Because other abutting properties are not redeveloping at this time there is no feasible way for the Applicant and owner to comply with those requirements in 11 -3H-4 and take access from anywhere else . In addition , adding one home does not create sufficient traffic to warrant construction of a collector roadway as shown on the MSM . However, Staff understands that should any more intensive redevelopment occur on site or on those surrounding properties , the access will be evaluated for compliance with these requirements . Staff is recommending DA provisions be added with the DA Modification application that requires a future collector street consistent with the MSM if/when this or adjacent properties redevelop with more intense uses consistent with the MU - R land use designation . To summarize , the subject application is proposing to subdivide one 4 acre lot into two lots for the purposes of allowing the current owner of the parcel to deed the new lot over to her daughter. Staff does not find that the City loses anything by approving this application and understands that this area may not redevelop for quite some time . Commission Recommendation : Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing : i 1 . Summary of Commission public hearing : a . In favor: Melanie Pearson , Applicant b . In opposition : None c . Commenting : Melanie Pearson d . Written testimony : None e . Staff presenting application : Joseph Dodson 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 . What is the timeline for services being available to the site ; b . Ensurinq the Applicant is aware of the potential future costs associated with developing the site . 4 . Commission change (s) to Staff recommendation : a . None 5 . Outstanding issue (s) for City Council : a . None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing : N/A Notes : i I Possible Motions . Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H -2020-0075 , as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 13 , 2020 : (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H -2020-0075 , as presented during the hearing on October 13 , 2020 , for the following reasons : (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H -2020-0075 to the hearing date of [date] for the following reason (s) : (You should state specific reason (s) for continuance.) Item #61 Modern Craftsman at Black Cat ( H -2020 .0022) Application (s ) : ➢ Rezone , Short Plat, Development Agreement Modification , Conditional Use Permit, Private Streets , and Administrative Design Review. Size of property, existing zoning , and location : This site consists of 23 . 63 acres of land , zoned C- C and R- 15 , located at the northeast corner of Black Cat Road and Chinden Boulevard , Adjacent Land Use & Zoning : R4 and R-8 zoning and residential to the North ; C- N zoning and future church site to the East; Chinden Blvd ( Hwy 20/26) abuts the site to the south with Residential and a small portion of L-0 zoning on the south side of Chinden ; N . Black Cat abuts the site to the west with C- C zoning and future commercial planned on the west side of Black Cat, north of Chinden . History : AZ-06-004 ; MI -06 -010/011 ; Mk07-004 ; MDA- 10-004 ; MDA- 14-006 ; ( DA #' s 106151219 , 107025555 ; 107141993 , 110059432 , & 2014-065517) Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation : Mixed Use Community ( MU - C) Summary of Request : ( Maps) The application before you is a request for Rezone , Short Plat, Development Agreement Modification , Conditional Use Permit, and Private Streets . The Private Street application is a Director level administrative review and is not I i specifically being voted on tonight . (CUP Plan ) The subject site consists of approximately 23 acres of land currently zoned C- C and R- 15 . The requested rezone is to simply move the boundaries of the existing zoning but not to change to any other zoning designations . The future land use designation on this property is MU -C which generally requires 3 distinct land uses and any residential use is to be constructed at 6- 15 du/ac . Modern Craftsman is proposed with a gross density of 8 . 7 dulac . When analyzing projects within the MU -C future land use designation , the approved and/or developed land uses nearby must also be taken into account. The proposed project offers an area of commercial zoning that should accommodate multiple future uses . The commercial area is proposed with two building sites that have multiple suites so there is potential that multiple distinct land uses will be available on -site . Access for this development is proposed via private streets off of N . Black Cat Rd . and W . Tree Crest Way, the street abutting the site to the north . The two proposed access points to Black Cat Road have been approved by ACHD but typically access to Black Cat is limited by the City ( note discrepancy in DA provisions) ; ACHD has approved the southern access to Black Cat as a limited , RIRO only . The Applicant is also proposing an access in the northeast corner of the property that connects to a shared driveway with the Rock Harbor Church site . Access via Chinden Blvd , is prohibited and is not proposed . Private streets are proposed throughout the development and due to the nature of the proposed use , Staff believes private streets are appropriate in this development . Other than future commercial , the proposed use on this site is multi -family residential . However, it is not traditional garden style apartment buildings ; it is a hybrid of single-family style homes within a multi-family development (multiple buildings on one building lot) . The proposed units are a majority of single-story one , two , and three- bedroom detached units without garages . The Applicant is proposing traditional apartment style parking but some units do have attached one-car garages . Townhomes are also proposed and all of these units have attached garages on their first floor. Largely, the proposed residential units in this development look like detached single-family homes but have on -street parking and less private open space than a standard 4 , 000 or 8 , 000 square foot lot. ( Parking Plan ) Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed for multi-family and for commercial uses . The minimum amount of parking required for the multi-family portion of this development is 360 spaces , with 196 of those required to be covered . The total minimum required parking for the development is 415 spaces . The submitted and revised plan named " Conditional Use Plan " shows 508 spaces for the entire development. The revised commercial area with the 2-story concept on the corner provides approximately 27 , 000 square feet of leasable commercial space . The minimum required parking for the proposed commercial square footage is 55 spaces Therefore, the proposed parking counts exceed the minimum UDC requirements . (Open Space) Open space requirements for this project are two tiered ; the project must meet the general 10 % open space requirement and the common and private open space requirements in the specific use standards for multi-family development. In total , the minimum amount of common open space to be provided should be 3 . 42 acres . The Applicant has proposed a total of 3 . 74 acres of qualified open space ; of which 2 . 22 acres qualifies for the minimum 10% requirements and amounts to approximately 10 . 3% . The remaining 1 . 52 acres of open space meets the requirements for the specific use standards . In addition to the common open space , the Applicant is required to provide at least 80 square feet of private usable open space per unit. On average , the Applicant is proposing 419 square feet of private usable open space per unit . ( Pedestrian Circulation) The Applicant and Staff worked closely and diligently to design the open space in such a way to integrate the commercial with the residential as required in the MU -C policies and goals . This integration and the proposed use allows for increased pedestrian connectivity . The open space meeting the requirements in 11 -3G consists of a 10 -foot multi- use pathway within the Chinden Blvd . landscape buffer, common lots with open space areas , and required street buffers along adjacent roadways . There are a number of amenities proposed within this development. The multi -use pathway is a qualifying site amenity that meets the requirements in 11 -3G -3 . The following amenities are proposed to meet the specific use standard requirements : a clubhouse with offices for rent by the residents , a tot- lot, a swimming pool , picnic shelters with BBQ areas , a community garden , and a plaza that is shared between the commercial units and the residential . The proposed dog park area seen on the open space exhibit is not a qualifying site amenity due to it not meeting UDC requirements as such . In addition , the Applicant is proposing 102 self-storage lockers (each locker is 12 square feet) spread throughout each of the garage buildings . This is also not a qualifying site amenity but will likely be used regularly . Commission Recommendation : Commission recommended approval of the subject applications . Summary of Commission Public Hearing : 1 . Summary of Commission public hearing : a . In favor: Matthew Riggs Owner; Elizabeth Schloss Development Manager; Deborah Nelson , Owner Representative . b . In opposition : Joe Warchol , neighbor; Nancy Everard neighbor; Richard Gilkey , neighbor; Dave Jacobs , neighbor; f c . Commenting : Scott Freeman , neighbor; Joe Warchol ; Nancy Everard ; Richard Gilkey ; Dave Jacobs ; Lynn Southam , neighbor. d . Written testimony : 49 written testimonies outlining the same issues brought up during the hearing with the addition of a desire by a number of the neighbors for this land to be developed similarly to Spurwing and not a mixed use development. e . Staff presenting application : Joseph Dodson , Current Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application : Andrea Pogue , Deputy City Attorney 2 . Key issue (s) of public testimony : a . Amount of parking available for future residents and for commercial buildings ; specifically , will there be no parking signs placed along Tree Crest Way and how will the commercial parking be revised ; Added traffic of development and nature of apartment populations ; b . Location of any public transportation and any public park ; c . Cost of high -end apartments and affordability of proposed apartment units ; d . Amount of commercial and a desire for more neighborhood commercial instead of multi-family e . residential ; 3 . Key issue (s) of discussion by Commission : a . The amount of commercial acreage and why it is being reduced — this was the main reason the project was continued to a new hearing date with a request that the Applicant increase the commercial area . The Applicant did accommodate this request; Viability of incorporating vertically integrated development into the project to increase the commercial be and not lose any units ; Street type of Tree Crest Way and whether parking is allowed — Tree Crest way is a collector and there ca is no on-street parking allowed ; Design of the proposed commercial on the hard corner of Chinden and Black Cat — will it be one or two d . stories ; Is the intent of the offices within the clubhouse intended to serve the development or go beyond its e . borders ; Potential issues and resolutions of the required 25-foot buffer between the commercial zoning and the f, residential buildings . 4 . Commission change (s) to Staff recommendation : a . Update the staff report to include those provisions from the Staff memo following the Applicant' s changes to the commercial area of the site . 5 . Outstanding issue (s) for City Council : a . The Applicant will need to request a waiver from the City Council to reduce the land use buffer between the C- C zoning and the multi-family units proposed on the R- 15 portion of the project — specifically , that area between the Clubhouse and the smaller commercial building and the residential to its east. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing : " DL" — The same issues as formerly presented—school overcrowding , traffic, desire to use property for something other than residential . Notes . Possible Motions : Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H -2020-0022 , as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 13 , 2020 : (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number 1-1 -2020-0022 , as presented during the hearing on October 13 , 2020 , for the following reasons : (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H -2020 -0022 to the hearing date of [date] for the following reason (s) : (You should state specific reason (s) for continuance.) I i I I 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Pearson Subdivision (H-2020-0075) by Melanie Pearson, Located at 175 W. Paint Horse Ln. A. Request: A Combined Preliminary and Final Plat consisting of 2 building lots on 3.98 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the development of the property with one additional residential lot and specify the requirements for the connection of city services to existing and future residential structures AND the extension of the future collector street consistent with the MSM. Page 14 Item#5. E IDIAN IDAHO C� PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: August 6, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing for Pearson Subdivision (H-2020-0075) by Melanie Pearson, Located at 175 W. Paint Horse Ln. A. Request: A Combined Preliminary and Final Plat consisting of 2 building lots on 3.98 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district. B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to allow the development of the property with one additional residential lot and specify the requirements for the connection of city services to existing and future residential structures AND the extension of the future collector street consistent with the MSM. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the City Council Public Hearing Page 15 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE October 13 , 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 5 PROJECT NAME : Pearson Subdivision ( H - 2020 - 0075 ) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Item#5. STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 10/13/2020 Legend DATE: Project Location ; TO: Mayor&City Council ; s , FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0075 E , � Pearson Subdivision LOCATION: The site is located at 175 W.Paint Horse Lane,on the west side of S.Meridian Road approximately 1/4 mile south of Lake Hazel Road, in the SE 1/4 of the NE '/4 of Section 01, Township 2N.,Range - 1W. L PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a combined preliminary and final plat consisting of 2 building lots on 3.98 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district and a Development Agreement Modification,by Melanie Pearson. IL SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage _ 3.98(R-4 zoning district) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Regional Existing Land Use(s) Residential(one single-family home) Proposed Land Use(s) Detached Single-family Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 2 total lots—2 single-family residential(one new lot) Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase Number of Residential Units(type 2 units—detached single-family homes of units) Density(gross&net) Gross—0.5 du/ac. Open Space(acres,total N/A—Project size is below the 5 acre minimum. [%]/buffer/qualified) Physical Features(waterways, Rawson Canal—runs along eastern property boundary hazards,flood plain,hillside) adjacent to Meridian Road(area of minimal flood hazard). Neighborhood meeting date;#of August 5,2020—no attendees. attendees: Distance to nearest City Park(+ 1.6 miles to Discovery Park(76.8 acres in size,roughly 30 size) acres of this park has been developed at this time) Page 1 Page 21 Item#5. Description Details Page History(previous approvals) H-2015-0019(South Meridian Annexation);DA Inst. #2016-007442 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Letter received from ACHD • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via existing W.Paint Horse Lane,a Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) private drive.No access is proposed to S.Meridian Road other than via existing access of Paint Horse Lane. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Other properties use existing W.Paint Horse Lane;no need Access for stub street access at this time. Existing Road Network Yes;private lane is existing and no new road dedication is proposed or required. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ The subject property has a small area of arterial street Buffers frontage along S.Meridian Road.There are currently no improvements along this frontage.There is an existing berm and buffer. Proposed Road Improvements Applicant is not proposing nor required to improve any right-of-way along S.Meridian Road or Paint Horse Lane at this time. Fire Service No Comments—required turnaround is shown on property. Police Service No Comments West Ada School District No comments were received for this project. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services N/A • Sewer Shed MMML� South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 13.96 • Project Consistent with WW NO—Subdivision will be on septic until utilities are Master Plan/Facility Plan available in the area. • Additional Comments •Flow has been committed •Both units for this subdivision will be on septic. •No proposed changes to Public Sewer Infrastructure within Record.Any changes or modifications,to the Public Sewer Infrastructure,shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. Water • Distance to Water Services N/A • Pressure Zone 5 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns N/A Page 2 Page 22 Item#5. Description Details Page • Project Consistent with Water NO—no utilities are proposed with this subdivision as Master Plan they are not available at this time. • Impacts/Concerns There are no City utilities located in the area. The City Engineer will need to review and grant the utility variance request to not hook up to City water. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend Low Ride De Legend Resift Project Location • � Project Location High-Density Residential Med-Hi MJ— gh— MUI-RG Density es Rid ential Medium Density Residential u .Zoning Map .Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend Project Location aProject Location ------- R-4 ' y City Limits RUT R-15C-G Planned Parcels R-8 ' R-6 RUT I R4 ' R-4 - I ' RUT '1 I 1 RR --- 1 � 1 � 1 , 1 J � � I I RUTC=2 q -------��---- C[II R-4 ; -- 1 1 RUT Page 3 Page 23 Item#5. III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Melanie Pearson— 1717 N. 7t1i Street,Boise,ID 83702 B. Owner: Mary Taysom— 175 W. Paint Horse Lane,Meridian,ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 7/17/2020 9/25/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 7/14/2020 9/23/2020 Site Posting 7/25/2020 9/23/2020 Nextdoor posting 7/14/2020 9/23/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS To be concise,the subject application is proposing to subdivide one 4 acre lot into two lots for the purposes of allowing the current owner of the parcel to deed the new lot over to her daughter so that her and her family are close-by,this includes helping her daughter with her newborn child. The subject property was annexed in 2015 as part of a larger annexation known as South Meridian Annexation(H-2015-0019).There is an existing Development Agreement(DA) associated with the original annexation and property and this application constitutes development under City code.In reviewing the existing DA,the Applicant needs to apply for a Development Agreement Modification prior to the City Council hearing for this combined preliminary/final plat.Per the existing DA,the first modification is at no cost to the Applicant. The Applicant has submitted a concurrent DA Modification since being heard at the Planning and Zoning Commission; the new DA provisions are provided below in Section VIII.A1. The subject property has also received City Engineer and Public Works Director approval for a utilities waiver to not connect to City services at this time due to services being more than a half mile away. Staff finds that making a singular property owner pay for extending City services for a two lot subdivision is neither fair nor necessary. Central District Health(CDH) has also approved of an additional temporary well site and septic system—this fact further diminishes any concern Staff has with the Applicant's application regarding water and sewer services. Please see further Staff analysis below. A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridiancitE.or /�comQplan) Mixed Use Regional—The purpose of this designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together,including residential, and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate Page 4 Page 24 Item#5. supporting uses. For example, an employment center should have supporting retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The subject site is part of a large area in south Meridian with this future land use designation. However, much of these sites are already zoned R-4, medium-low density residential. This zoning does not allow or offer the Applicant the opportunity to develop the site in accordance with the future land use designation. Because this site is relatively small in comparison to most mixed use properties, Staff finds that the mixed use requirements and policies cannot be obtained at this time. These policies should not be aimed for at this time due to the fact that no other nearby properties offer any mix of uses and have not been redeveloped since their annexation in 201 S—Staffs review shows all of the nearby properties to still be low-density residential homes. There is always the chance that in the future much of this area in south Meridian will redevelop with larger parcels of land.At that time, it will be up to the property owners to determine if redevelopment is applicable. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "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). The main purpose of the proposed development is to create a new lot for the Applicant to build a home nearby her mother, the existing property owner. All of the surrounding homes lay on large undeveloped lots even though they are annexed into the City. This subdivision will not change the existing character of the surrounding development and will add an additional single-family home for the City of Meridian. "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water, sewer, police,transportation, schools, fire, and parks" (3.02.01 G). Staff finds that the existing and known development of the immediate area create conditions that do not allow for this property owner to connect to City water and sewer services as required by code. Public Works, Meridian Police Department and Meridian Fire have no objections to this small subdivision. No other services should be affected as the existing access is to remain. "Preserve,protect,and provide open space for recreation, conservation,and aesthetics" (4.05.01F).Due to the size of the subject property being less than 5 acres, there are no open space requirements. However, this application is only a two-lot subdivision where a majority of each parcel will be undeveloped and remain natural space for each property owner to enjoy. Although the proposed development does not align entirely with the current vision of the Comprehensive Plan, the predominate FL UM designation in the area is MU-R.Staff is of the opinion that it may be quite some time before City utilities are available to this area of Meridian and therefore supports the development of this property as it is consistent with the current R-4 zoning of the property.A mix of uses should occur in the vicinity with the redevelopment of the adjacent property to the north and east. For these reasons,staff believes the proposed development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject site currently holds a single family home on the entire 4 acre parcel owned by the mother of the Applicant. This property, along with nearby properties,was annexed in 2015 but were not required to connect to City services at that time due to services not being available. This situation has not changed and because this subdivision is only for the purposes of creating one additional lot, Staff does not find it appropriate to require this owner to provide public utilities to their property at this time.However,when services do Page 5 Page 25 Item#5. become available in S. Meridian Road,the Applicant will be required to connect to them as conditioned in this application and the existing Development Agreement. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is single-family residential; single-family detached dwellings are listed as principally permitted uses in the R-4 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The average lot size is 2 acres with the largest lot being 2.6 acres in size. The proposed use complies with all UDC requirements for the R-4 zoning district. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The submitted Preliminary Plat and Final Plat show lots that are 1.36 and 2.62 acres in size. These proposed lot sizes are vastly larger than the minimum lot size requirement of 8,000 square feet for the R-4 zoning district. The existing R-4 zoning district also requires a minimum dwelling size of 1,400 square feet with the first floor gross area being at least 800 square feet. The proposed plat meets the UDC dimensional standards for the R-4 zoning district. In addition, any future home built on the new parcel will be required to meet the minimum dwelling size requirements as outlined in UDC Table 11-2A-5. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access to this development is proposed via an existing private lane,W. Paint Horse Lane. ACHD is not requiring any public road dedication due to the access not being changed—the subject application does not warrant a public road or road improvements at this time according to ACHD. In accord with the existing access,UDC 11-3H-4 requires that if an existing state highway access has an increase in intensity that it is to be removed upon development or dedicated to ACHD and be constructed as noted on the Master Street Map(MSM). Paint Horse Lane is shown as a future collector roadway on the MSM but the addition of one single-family home does not warrant the construction of a collector roadway at this time. With the DA Modification the Applicant needs to apply for prior to City Council,new DA provisions will address this and ensure any future development meets the required development standards. As noted above, the subject application is proposing to subdivide one 4 acre lot into two lots and is proposing to use the existing access; there is no proposal to add an additional access to the state highway. Staff and ACHD find that the existing private access is sufficient for one additional single family home. Because other abutting properties are not redeveloping at this time there is no feasible way for the Applicant and owner to comply with those requirements in 11-3H-4. In addition, adding one home does not warrant sufficient traffic to construct a collector roadway as shown on the MSM. However, Staff understands that should any more intensive redevelopment occur on site or surrounding the property, the access will be evaluated for compliance with these requirements. Staff is recommending DA provisions be added with the DA Modification application that requires a future collector street consistent with the MSM if/when this or adjacent properties redevelop with more intense uses consistent with the MU-R land use designation. G. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): Per UDC 11-3H-4C.4,the Applicant is required to construct a ten(10) foot multi-use pathway along the frontage that abuts S. Meridian Road(SH 69). The Applicant is not proposing a multi- use pathway along Meridian Road at this time. The Parks Department has reviewed this application for the applicability of the required multi- use pathway along Meridian Road. Per the comments received by Parks (see Section VIII.Q, the Applicant is not required to construct this section of the multi-use pathway along Meridian Road. Page 6 Page 26 Item#5. The closest pathway that is currently under construction is adjacent to Prevail Subdivision and is located approximately-% of a mile north of this and is on the opposite of Meridian Road. Because of this, this short segment of pathway would be constructed and then lead to nowhere for the foreseeable future. Therefore, Staff is recommending that the Applicant grant a multi-use pathway easement within the required street buffer prior to final plat signature. This future pathway is the only required pedestrian infrastructure at this time due to Paint Horse Lane being a private lane that will likely be removed or redeveloped when other, larger nearby properties redevelop in the future. H. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): No sidewalks are proposed with this development. See pathway analysis above for further clarification. As noted above, the Applicant will be using an existing private easement for access and therefore no streets are being constructed with this application. Sidewalks will be required in the future with the extension of the collector street as this area redevelops. I. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to S.Meridian Road, a state highway and entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The landscape plan depicts a 25 foot wide landscape buffer instead of the required 35 feet. The correct amount of landscaping and a berm/fence combination at least 10'above the height of Meridian Road centerline height in accord with UDC 11-3H-4D is shown on the submitted landscape plans (see Exhibit VII.D). Staff is recommending a condition of approval to correct the width of the required landscape buffer along the state highway—the buffer width shall begin its measurement into the site at the edge of the ultimate right-of-way for Meridian Road/SH 69. In accord with UDC 11-3B-7C,the required street buffer is to be placed in a common lot and owned and maintained by a homeowner's association. The nature of this two lot subdivision will not create a homeowner's association and therefore that requirement cannot be applied in this case.In addition, the submitted plat and landscape plans do not show the street buffer to Meridian Road in a common lot. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to amend the plat prior to City Council to show this lot in a common lot to be owned and maintained by the Applicant, Melanie Pearson. Parallel to Meridian Road, the Rawson canal runs through the eastern edge of the subject site. The required buffer landscaping is shown to be outside of the easement for the Rawson Canal meeting the Boise Project Board of Control(BPBC) requirements. In addition, the Meridian Lateral abuts the property along its southern boundary but is not on the subject site. The Applicant is not proposing any landscaping within its easement per the requirements of BPBC. J. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-61 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. The existing fencing along the boundary of the subject site is shown on the landscape plans. This fence appears to be open vision fencing and is proposed to be protected in place. In addition,the Applicant is proposing a 6-foot tall vinyl privacy fence along the top of the proposed landscape berm. The existing and proposed fencing appear to meet those standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. K. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): The Rawson Canal runs along the eastern boundary of the subject site and appears to already be tiled. The Applicant has not proposed any improvements within its easement other than shrubs and grass as allowed by BPBC. Page 7 Page 27 Item#5. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested combined preliminary and final plat application per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on August 20, 2020.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject combined Preliminary and Final Plat request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Melanie Pearson,Applicant b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Melanie Pearson d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. a. What is the timeline for services being available to the site, b. Ensuring. t�pplicant is aware of the potential future costs associated with develop the site. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 8 Page 28 Item#5. VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(dated: April 30,2020) tz � � c q@ NO zz 1 �� o �9 f' a AAA -u-" - 4 - Pad ro zl �® as o g 3 & 'p"k 2•� '� �•i ���yL `J §FN 'cf'ae3�"e.: ii = 2 Nk egg �P �€ It _ Amy gz map 0 gT —• � p gip= ~ a B nN limn Page 9 Page 29 Item#5. B. Final Plat(dated: April 30,2020) S a m p° c° W a" UXPLA97SD Co�A T 9TRyy oz �m ,„gyp `}_•y��-(`a'�t E7Ngma wcaessrec ! O EEMENTT AS TI I �rV mm0 pn HO m nPU zoan�r8 - z °u ar O z dim`cz n ➢�'n g }n= O 41, ��� maoi�A m mom; 15 t 1 �rJ H m � tom �o �� ate'Oo °�a o z g HE C L m v T>m INGREss GRE55 1 2 N a �czm w•�� i Qo g og a " c mw rO _- .1320.9fi'--_—.- �-,ITAIFHIIIAIIG! . S.MERIO �d�j ro�NVhf ` PRofFSsa -T['] I � i � � ® ® J • � �� n8m $�5�00 m� Rio a1S a � >,� • � I I I � c�g� �� 21�I o m o o O m O m of o8c W�u� ❑ ti n z m x O c mrn� so 01 ao o `O_ y z a ry eee Ap H� ��5 m SG '� a � m o z i p N e ❑ ❑ A oz ,�Ano„ �_ b�lit, y m z i A ya �py� mym ct7 e 8'y'b'+ � n Em O � • C1 m �~ Page 10 Page 30 Item#5. t W�gg> 16, 3GOj� m � yo O u i u�i ; p2 n S c T m ' Smro onm ^ova p °RBA.$° oam Fa S. i. cps m z -v m m i 3 (!I z fD m� oA m S+ m � + n o vi sangm oa c` � o= N � cn P nrti xo o W� 0 In :ram. Q1 o n' fD _ tp A z =mo 0 RA s b 4M cA _axn � Z ig mn N�o A< Nmo nm • °>gx b m ° $�gti 3 W mtt ga ' s z og4.gs5H. 23 - o g g' r *w45 �c F Mtn >s< z d o n Y 7tl ztma_ I > m. F P � Page 11 Page 31 C. Landscape Plans(dated: 6/16/2020 9/21/2020) 2VTJ AUVNIVJRJUd NVId 3dVOS(INV-1 31, 9C9 OHVCII 'NVIC]18�1VI 'N_1 JSUOH iNIVd 'M NOISIAI(ienS NOSHV]d 11 IIH-1 LLJ z W �R cn I C, LU ;UM LU , 0 ui 34 H IR, ,Q- Kz "T ui' H 0 WOO m C, 'I IT5 " R )6888 G Bee@@ NE"NrjN� HI Co 'Wq ui Cc at Lu j LLI z <0 x:X LLI §8 C� < ij 0 A A �E) 4 ow"i 15-- V Z. '14N Lu LL E) z Page 12 iVjd AUVNIAPiNd MlVill 3dVOSCINVI Zt,968 OHVCI 'NVIGIUE]h 'NI IS80H iNlVd 'M NOISIAI(lonS NOSUV3c] U L i-H- 11 Ni lu, 4, hE 'All -M z V LLJ 1. - — I w gg C) T B LLJ 0- Razz iia r mA F.9 D aN Lu Z -q LL, Z CMCL 4 o 'g gq 2E rt . 1 114K W I% L n� P: o z T'A -5 M� LLJ tow lj� L(L) 5 PNIN N" W 0 10H.11 03 W, o Ld R4aZ71 T " LLI F- N�i ;q.-'11"Wo 6!, ff hS w w 0 P4 14", q-2 qj F- IN, Lu 0 '16 OPT NiN EL P= g�'e x! a cc N U, Z wP.5 MR N I w <CE CL (D Page 13 Item#5. D. Utilities Waiver Letter—City Engineer approval to delay utility hook-up (dated: July 30,2020) Mayor Robert E,Simison ETD AN � City Council Members: 1 1 1 Treg Sernf Brad Hoaglun Jae Berton Jessica Perreault Luke Cavener Liz Strader MEMORANDUM DATE: July 30,2020 TO: Mayor Robert Simison Members of the City Council CC: Warren Stewart,Joseph Dodson FROM: Dale Bolthouse RE: Waiver of water and sewer services connection for 175 Painted Horse Ln. The City of Meridian received an application to develop property at 175 Painted Horse Lane(see attached map). The property owner has requested a waiver to connect to the City's water and sewer systems. The requester is dividing their property to add an additional building lot. The property was annexed a.few years ago as part of the larger South Meridian Annexation. The existing property is served with well water and septic. City water and sewer services are likely several years away. Public Works has reviewed the application information for 475 Paint Horse Ln,along with other supporting documents.Based on the current distance to existing water and sewer infrastructure,and the fact the applicant is only requesting a two lot subdivision in order to build one additional home.the Public Works Department supports the request to waive the requirement to connect to the City's water and sewer system.However,we recommend the property owner enter into a Connection Agreement with the City of Meridian requiring them to connect to water and sewer services when those services are adjacent to the property.The following conditions should be included as part of that agreement: • Owner pays the applicable assessment fees required to connect at time of connection • Owner constructs the water and sewer service connections • All other required City of Meridian fees be paid • Development meets Planning and Zoning requirements Please feel free to contact Warren Stewart or me ifyou have any questions regarding this matter. ,�6a Dale Bolthouse Director of Public Works City of Meridian Public Works Attachment: Map of Request Location Public Works Department. 33 E_Broadway Avenue,Suite 200,Meridian,ID 83642 Phone 208-898-5500 .Fax 208-898-9551 .www.meridiancity.orq Page 14 Page 34 Item#5. _ `� serroa W Amity Rd T --- -_ ^ ; -awl Amity Rd 4-1--citadel Ne idran i e• ti =-• - S - llaw } +rr .C. ICI -'1II Elj ' 8 5 $k --i H?;eval1 Na —I __. l WIL•��'R����C_I�_�—L r.'r:�v,ii7.i•;o-Oi—y�_ T Fi'rITE 14 1 111 _ � Perc �'i Y . rr r y 24 Su6divisla - ... - -- .L Apex - Subdivfslon ■ W Lake Hazel-.Rd- E S fie. ...��f [ �' :. -. • F ■.{, .-.,.s y t t Page 15 Page 35 Item#5. VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant shall apply for a concurrent Development Agreement Modification application prior to this application being heard in front of City Council and at a minimum the following new provisions shall be added to the amended DA: a. This development is not currently serviceable by Meridian Sanitary Sewer or Water Systems. The parcel owners shall be required to cease using their wells and septic systems and connect at their expense,to the Meridian Sanitary Sewer or Water Systems when they become available per MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. b. Prior to City Engineer's signature on the final plat,the Applicant shall enter into a Connection Agreement with the City of Meridian in accord with the connection waiver letter attached in Exhibit VII.D. c. The applicant shall place W. Paint Horse Lane (a private road)in a separate 50-foot wide non-buildable lot for the construction of a public collector street in accordance with the Master Street Map. Timing for the extension of the roadway is predicated on the redevelopment of the parcel beyond two residential lots or with the redevelopment of the MU-R designated parcels to the north. At the time said roadway is constructed,the Applicant shall relinquish their rights to the use of said easement in favor of taking access from a future public street. 2. The final plat included in Section VII.B, dated April 30, 2020, shall be revised as follows prior to City Engineer signature on the plat: a. Revise the plat to add a 35-foot wide common lot along S. Meridian Road/SH 69 to hold the required landscape buffer starting at the western edge of ultimate right-of-way. b. Revise plat note#6 to add: "...; direct lot access to S. Meridian Road/SH 69 is prohibited." c. Add a 50-foot wide common lot along the northern property boundary over the existing W. Paint Horse Lane to reserve this area for future public right-of-way. d. Add a plat note that states the new common lot placed over the existing W. Paint Horse Lane is a non-buildable lot until such time that it is constructed as a collector roadway. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C,datedRine 19, 2020, shall be revised pr-ier-to City Engineer signature e the plat: September 21,2020,is approved as submitted. a. Revise the!a-adseape plan ie show a 35 feet wide landseape stfee!buffer-alefigs-. Mer-idian Read. b. Revise the berm/fenee eerrbe exhibit to meet UPC oPC 11 314 4 P requirements the r-eqttir-ed befm/fenee eembe aleng Mer-idian Read shall be at least ten(10) feet high as measiffed from the eenter-line ef the read a-ad not from the edge of pa-veme 4. Prior to City Engineer signature on the Final Plat,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the required multi-use pathway along Meridian Road/SH 69 within the required landscape buffer,wholly outside of the right-of-way. Submit easements to the Planning Division for Council approval and subsequent recordation. The easements shall be a minimum of 14' wide(10' pathway+2' shoulder each side). Use standard City template for public access easement. Easement checklist must accompany all easement submittals. Coordinate with Kim Warren from the City of Meridian Parks Department. Page 16 Page 36 Item#5. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-4 zoning district. 6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per dwelling. 7. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC I I- 3A-15,UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 8. Upon completion of the landscape buffer installation,a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 9. Approval of this combined preliminary and final plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the plat within two(2)years of the approval of the combined preliminary and final plat. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A future installation agreement for streetlights will be required for the required lights on Meridian Road. Contact the Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator for additional information. 1.2 This development is not currently serviceable by Meridian Sanitary Sewer or Water Systems. The parcel owners shall be required to cease using their wells and septic systems and connect at their expense,to the Meridian Sanitary Sewer or Water Systems when they become available per MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 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. 2.2 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. 2.3 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. 2.4 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.5 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.6 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC I I-12-3H. 2.7 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. 2.8 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. Page 17 Page 37 Item#5. C. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=191554&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty D. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=191386&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty E. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL(BPBC) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=190916&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ky F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=191398&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ky G. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=192079&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv IX. FINDINGS A. Combined Preliminary and Final Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Commission finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, is in general compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Water and Sewer services cannot be provided to the subject property at this time. The City Engineer and Public Works Director have approved a waiver for this requirement(See Exhibit VILD). Commission finds that all other services are available for the subject property. (See Section VIII 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 a later date as discussed above, 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; Page 18 Page 38 Item#5. Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section VIII for more information.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, 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. Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. The Applicant is not proposing any improvements along either waterway on or adjacent to the site other than landscaping outside of the applicable easements. Page 19 Page 39 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman at Black Cat(H-2020-0022) by Baron Black Cat, LLC, Located in the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd. (SH 20/26) A. Rezone a total of 23.63 acres of land for the purpose of reducing the C-C zone from approximately 8 acres to 4.42 acres and increase the R-15 zone from approximately 15.1 acres to approximately 19.2 acres. B. Short Plat consisting of 2 building lots and 2 common lots on 21.59 acres of land in the C- C and R-15 zoning districts. C. Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 196 residential units on 20.13 acres in the R-15 zone. D. Modification to the existing development agreements (Inst. Ws: 106151218; 107025555; 110059432; and 114054272) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of previous agreements and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed development plan. Page 40 Item#6. E IDIAN:--- IDAHO C� PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: October 13, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman at Black Cat (H-2020-0022) by Baron Black Cat, LLC, Located in the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd. (SH 20/26) A. Rezone a total of 23.63 acres of land for the purpose of reducing the C-C zone from approximately 8 acres to 4.42 acres and increase the R-15 zone from approximately 15.1 acres to approximately 19.2 acres. B. Short Plat consisting of 2 building lots and 2 common lots on 21.59 acres of land in the C-C and R-15 zoning districts. C. Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 196 residential units on 20.13 acres in the R-15 zone. D. Modification to the existing development agreements (Inst. Ws: 106151218; 107025555; 110059432; and 114054272) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of previous agreements and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed development plan. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the City Council Public Hearing Page 41 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE October 13 , 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 6 PROJECT NAME : Modern Craftsman at Black Cat ( W2020 - 0022 ) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 4 5 l� � v lC, s ✓ N s � 1 � 9 i i 10 ' 11 12 13 14 Item#6. STAFF REPORT C:�*%_ W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 10/13/2020 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 - _ -_--- SUBJECT: H-2020-0022 Modern Craftsman at Black Cat LOCATION: The site is located in the northeast corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd. (SH 20/26),in the SW '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 22,Township 4N., Range 1 W. L PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Rezone a total of 23.63 acres of land for the purpose of reducing the C-C zone from approximately 8 acres to 2.26 acres and increase the R-15 zone from approximately 15.1 acres to 21.37 acres; • Short Plat consisting of 2 building lots and 2 common lots on 21.59 acres of land in the C-C and R-15 zoning districts; • Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 196 residential units on 20.13 acres in the R-15 zone; • Modification to the existing development agreements (Inst. Ws: 106151218; 107025555; 110059432; and 114054272) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of previous agreements and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed development plan, by Baron Black Cat, LLC Note: The Applicant is also applying for private streets and administrative design review. These applications are reviewed and approved by the Director, Commission action is not required. Analysis of the building and private street design are provided below in section V. IL SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 23.63 (R-15—21.37 acres;C-C—2.26 acres) Page 1 Page 90 Item#6. Description Details Page Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Community Existing Land Use(s) Commercial(tree farm) Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential and Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 4 total lots— 1 multi-family residential; 1 commercial; 1 common lots;and 1 other lot. Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase Number of Residential Units(type 196 single-family,for rent units(single-family style on a of units) single lot). Density(gross&net) Gross—8.7 du/ac.;Net— 10.54 du/ac. Open Space(acres,total 3.78 acres of qualified open space overall(approximately [%]/buffer/qualified) 17.5%)—2.36 acres for 11-3G requirements (approximately 10.9%);62,061 square feet proposed for 11-4-3-27(Multi-Family)standards. 1.89 acres of private open space is proposed(82,170 square feet;approximately 419 square feet per unit). Amenities 5 qualifying amenities— 10' multi-use pathway;pool; clubhouse;picnic area;and tot-lot(a dog park is also proposed but does not meet UDC requirements to be a qualifying site amenity). Physical Features(waterways, N/A hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of January 13,2020—7 attendees; attendees: June 30,2020—4 attendees History(previous approvals) AZ-06-004;MI-06-010/011;MI-07-004;MDA-10-004; MDA-14-006; (DA#'s 106151219, 107025555; 107141993, 110059432,&2014-065517) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) No • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via private streets off of Black Cat Rd. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) and Tree Crest Way.There are two access points proposed off of N.Black Cat and one off of W. Tree Crest Way. Traffic Level of Service Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Applicant is proposing private streets throughout the Access development;a stub street connection is proposed to the eastern property in the northeast corner of the property (Rock Harbor Church site)and will connect with one of the driveway connections on that site.No other vehicle connections are proposed as the subject site is surrounded by streets on 3 of the 4 property boundaries. Existing Road Network No Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Chinden Blvd(SH 20/26)abuts the southern property Buffers boundary and is currently a two-lane roadway with no improvements along its shoulder.There are no existing sidewalks along the state highway;the Applicant is proposing a 10-foot multi-use pathway within a common lot landscape buffer that will lay outside of the future ITD right-of-way for SH 20/26. Page 2 Page 91 Item#6. Description Details Page Proposed Road Improvements Distance to nearest City Park(+ 0.8 miles to Keith Bird Legacy Park(7.5 acres in size) size) Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 2.2 miles from Fire Station#5 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#5 reliability is 80%. • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—residential with hazards(multi-family) • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access,road widths, and turnarounds;Fire has signed off on Private Street layout. Police Service • Distance to Station 8.5 miles from Meridian Police Department • Response Time Approximately 5 '/2 minute response time to an emergency. • Call Data Between 2/1/2019- 1/31/2020,the Meridian Police Section VII. Department responded to 258 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development.The crime count on the calls for service was 14. See attached documents for details. Between 2/1/2019- 1/31/2020,the Meridian Police Department responded to 5 crashes within a mile of the proposed development. See attached documents for details. • Additional Concerns None West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) Star Elementary—2.7 miles; Star Middle—5.0 miles; Meridian High School—5.3 miles. • Capacity of Schools Star Elementary—420 students Star Middle— 1000 students Meridian High School—2400 students • #of Students Enrolled Star Elementary—622 students Star Middle—704 students Meridian High School— 1995 students Water—Service will not be by the City of Meridian,as it falls within SUEZ North America service area. Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed North Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 13.9 • Project Consistent with WW YES Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns Design and number of units clustered together is of particular concern—staff is unclear as to how all units will be serviced.A utility layout depicting how all of the units will be serviced while still meeting design requirements will be required. Page 3 Page 92 Item#6. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend Legend „.� " 0 Low-Densi# Project Location Residential aI L Project Location j C phi , Mediluml - ® S tY P" tool Resident al0. WIN - >� ,cCrflllTn �TTTTT"�rrrn Ll � ~d�lY.�1.��- �,IG-�T1-r'r- .:. .Zoning Map .Planned Development Map Legend � 0 Legend 0 R-2 Project Location EDProject Location RUT R-4 8. 1 City Limits y �R-8 R 2� Planned Parcels � KT m C-G C R1 C-NLED L-O' ® RUT ® � R_-8 R-4 �0711 &3}' R-4 RA .. ® � PAM Mf ® � �❑� of III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Baron Black Cat LLC- 1401 17"" Street, Ste. 700,Denver, CO 80202 Page 4 Page 93 Item#6. B. Owner: Same as Applicant C. Representative: Kent Brown Planning—3161 E. Springwood Drive,Meridian,ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 5/l/2020 9/25/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 4/28/2020 9/23/2020 Site Posting 6/26/2020 9/29/2020 Nextdoor posting 4/28/2020 9/23/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Mixed Use Community—The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community- serving 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 Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU- R)areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to (up to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. The subject site is surrounded by existing City of Meridian zoning and development that is both existing and planned(the adjacent parcels are entitled but some have not yet begun construction). The proposed land use of multi family residential and commercial are consistent with the land use types noted in the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)designation definitions and preferred uses. The proposed product type is by definition multi family(more than 2 units on a single building lot) but the Applicant has designed the units so to emulate single-family attached and detached structures that share mews and pedestrian pathways rather than public streets. The proposed unit types also provide more private open space than traditional multi family development,furthering its feel of single family residential. In addition, certain densities are required to be met for residential projects within the MU-C future land use designation. The proposed project as shown is approximately 8 du/ac, meeting the 6-15 du/ac requirement(see community metrics above). Therefore, Stafffinds the density proposed with the short plat and rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designations of Mixed Use Community (MU- C). Mixed-use designations also require at least three (3) types of land uses. The proposed project offers an area of commercial zoning that should accommodate multiple future uses. The commercial lot is proposed with two building sites that have multiple suites so there is potential that distinct land uses will be available on-site. When analyzing projects within the MU-C future land use designation, the approved and/or developed land uses nearby must be taken into account. Therefore, Staff has taken into account adjacent land uses that can be traveled between with relative ease. Directly to the east of this site is the future Rock Harbor Church site, a Page 5 Page 94 Item#6. different use than proposed with this project. Within a half mile to the west and off of Chinden Blvd., a mixed use project(Central Valley Plaza/Pollard Subdivision) is approved and will offer multiple additional uses and employment opportunities that these future residences could use. Within a half mile to the east, the new Costco building has been approved and is in the process of receiving building permit approval. Directly across N. Black Cat, more commercial development is proposed within the Fairbourne Subdivision. Staff initially had concerns with the overall site design but the Applicant has worked diligently to take Staffs comments into account, specifically in relation to this mixed-use policy: `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 place-making opportunities considered." The Applicant added additional commercial area to the project and moved the open space to a more central location to help integrate the commercial with the proposed residential. Staff particularly finds the plaza area between the clubhouse and one of the commercial buildings as a great example of integrating the uses as the commercial building fronts on the plaza and would offer great pedestrian connectivity for residents in this project. Staff may prefer additional commercial on the subject site more in line with the existing zoning areas, but Staff also understands that nearby uses help mitigate the loss of commercial zoning on this specific parcel. Staff finds that the proposed layout generally meets the MU-C future land use designation policies and goals. The Applicant is also requesting to modify the recorded development agreements(Inst. #'s: 106151218; 107025555; 107141993; 110059432; and 2014-065517) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundary of the previous agreements and enter into a new development agreement(DA) consistent with the proposed development plan. Staff's recommended DA provisions are included in Section VIII.A1. The new DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting approval of the MDA by City Council and subsequent recordation. The existing development agreement and subsequent addendums relate to a much larger area than this specific corner on Black Cat Road and Chinden Blvd. (Highway 20126). One of the addendums (from 2007) does directly address the existing tree farm and allows it to continue its use as a tree farm until such time that the property is redeveloped. Because this new development is one of the last portions of the larger area governed by the original DA to redevelop, the Applicant wishes to remove this project site from that DA and its subsequent addendums and enter into its own DA consistent with the proposed development plan. Stafffinds a new DA will allow the subject site to develop in a more cohesive and clean pattern while also eliminating the need to amend the existing DA any further. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.orglcompplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "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).Modern Craftsman at Black Cat is offering a new type of development within the City of Meridian by proposing single-family attached and detached homes within a multi family setting. To both the north and to the west (across N. Black Cat Road) traditional detached single-family homes exist and are proposed. The Applicant hopes to add an additional housing type in this area that will delineate a new housing use in the City and add to the housing diversity available. Page 6 Page 95 Item#6. "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 proposed site design incorporates mews,private streets, common open space, and different housing designs within the same parcel. Much of the surrounding development, especially the closest subdivisions, is of lower density, detached single-family development. Because of this, a lot of the public testimony received has requested that this subject site emulate these subdivisions. The subject site does not share the same future land use designation as the adjacent subdivisions and therefore cannot be developed in the same way. Despite being a mixed use designation, the Applicant has chosen to propose a development that is made up of mostly single-story structures. The Applicant did this in order to be more compatible with surrounding residential development. In regards to site design, the Applicant is proposing two-story townhomes along the eastern and western boundaries; these townhomes will abut a parking lot for the adjacent Rock Harbor Church on the east side of development and abut Black Cat along the western boundary and landscape buffer.Also along the eastern boundary is a smaller landscape buffer(approx. 10 feet wide) that is approximately 520 feet in length and proposed with 5 trees and a vinyl fence. The Applicant has also proposed a few of their larger detached structures (3-bedroom units)next to the proposed townhomes along Black Cat to help with buffering along the busy collector. Interior of these townhomes is the main component of this project, attached and detached single-story homes mostly laid out in a detached four Alex configuration. Sidewalks run throughout the development and these attached and detached units making for great pedestrian connectivity throughout the site. In addition, the Applicant has proposed two sidewalk connections out to the proposed multi-use pathway extension along Chinden to help with interconnectivity between parcels. Further pedestrian and open space analysis is in other sections of the staff report below. The Applicant is not proposing any vehicular accesses onto Chinden Blvd. which is a welcomed proposition for ITD and Staff. Reducing access points to arterial streets and state highways is a major goal within the City's Comprehensive Plan and helps funnel traffic in appropriate manners. Staff believes placing townhomes along Black Cat offers an appropriate buffer between the busy collector roadway and the single-story structures that make up a majority of the development. In addition, the subject site is bordered on three sides by public roads that have or will have landscape buffers. These landscape buffers and the public roads should offer a needed buffer. "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water, sewer, police,transportation, schools,fire, and parks"(3.02.01 G).All public utilities are available for this project site due to the existing subdivision to the north,per Public Works comments. This project also lies within the Fire Department response time goal. Chinden Boulevard is currently being widened in multiple places along its corridor and will connect to the planned expansion of Highway 16. It is the intent of these road improvements to help with current and future congestion along Chinden Boulevard. To help mitigate this, the Applicant is not requesting any accesses onto Chinden but instead is proposing two access points to Black Cat and one access to N. Tree Farm Way, essentially the northern border of the property. West Ada School District has offered comments on this project and estimate an additional 156 school age children could reside in this community. Of the closest neighborhood schools, Star Elementary is the only school shown as currently over enrolled. West Ada also notes that future students in this area could attend the Owyhee High School and Pleasant View Elementary School—Pleasant View is scheduled to open in Fall 2020. Staff understands that school enrollment is a major issue to be dealt with but at least in the northwest Meridian area, some relief appears to be on the horizon with new schools opening up soon. Page 7 Page 96 Item#6. Staff finds that the existing and planned development of the immediate area create conditions for adequate levels of service to for this proposed project. "Preserve,protect,and provide open space for recreation, conservation,and aesthetics" (4.05.01F). The proposed project offers open space that meets and exceeds the minimum requirements in the unified development code (UDC). The Applicant has increased the amount of open space over the course of discussions with Staff which improves the overall project. There are three main areas of open space in this development but smaller, qualifying open space also exists throughout the project. These three main areas hold the proposed dog park, clubhouse and pool, tot-lot, a plaza shared between some commercial and the open space lot, and a central vista that connects both ends of the development with green space. This central vista is also anchored at each end with amenities making the open space flow and feel as part of the development. See further analysis in Section V.E and V.L. "Explore development and implementation of architectural and/or landscape standards for geographic areas of the City."(5.01.02F). The proposed project site is not within a specific area plan for the City but because it is a multi family product, it is subject to design review. The Applicant has submitted a concurrent administrative design review application that accompanies Staffs review of the conceptual elevations. The architecture proposed throughout the residential portion of the project offers modern design elements that include shed roof combinations that are combined with stucco and stone sidings,finished wood as a siding and accent material, and metal as an accent material. Staff not only finds the submitted elevations to be in compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual but also finds this type of architecture as unique and a welcome addition to the neighborhood. "Establish distinct,engaging identities within commercial and mixed use centers through design standards."(2.09.03A).As discussed above, the proposed product type and architecture would make Modern Craftsman at Black Cat a distinct area within the City. The Applicant has worked with Staff to offer a site design that provides some integration between the commercial and residential product types. In addition, there is a similar look and feel in the development created largely by the inclusion of the central vista and large amounts ofprivate open space for multi- family development.As noted above, Staff may desire more commercial on this parcel to offer more opportunity to be integrated, but Staff cannot and should not analyze this project without looking at the development around the subject site, without looking from a macro view of the surrounding area. When taking all of the surrounding area into consideration, Stafffinds that the proposed development meets a majority of the mixed-use policies and objectives. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent and in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and a majority of the mired use policies. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The site currently houses a tree farm that has a number of small mobile home type structures.All existing structures will be removed upon development of this site. In fact,under the terms of the existing DA,this use was to cease long before now. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is multi-family residential and commercial;the commercial area is relatively small when compared to the residential, approximately 2 acres compared to 21 acres, respectively. Multi-family residential is a conditional use in R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The commercial area is already zoned and there are currently no tenants in place for the proposed commercial building suites. Because no tenants are currently known of, Staff cannot review those uses for compliance in the C-C zoning district. Commercial buildings require Page 8 Page 97 Item#6. Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) and Design Review so at that time Staff will evaluate the uses for compliance. The multi-family development is proposed to be constructed in one phase and incorporate both detached and attached structures; of the 196 multi-family units,42 units are townhomes proposed along the eastern and western boundaries of the site. As discussed previously,the multi-family buildings are subject to design review and the Applicant has applied for this concurrently with the conditional use permit application. The Applicant did not provide elevations for the future commercial buildings;upon submittal of the required CZC,the Applicant will be required to submit concurrent design review for the commercial buildings. The Applicant has provided conceptual elevations of the Clubhouse and it shares in similar architecture with the proposed residential units as required by the specific use standards. The proposed use is not a traditional type of single family or multi family development, it is a hybrid of the two. The Applicant could have chosen to plat each one of these buildings individually; the Applicant could also have proposed traditional 4-story garden style apartments. Both potentials have their positives and negatives and the Applicant is proposing a different product type to the City of Meridian. The proposed units are a majority of single-story one, two, and three-bedroom detached units without garages. The Applicant is proposing more traditional apartment style parking but some units do have attached one-car garages. All of the townhome units also have attached garages on their .first floor. Largely, the proposed buildings in this development look like detached single-family homes but have on-street parking and less private open space than a standard 4,000 or 8,000 square foot lot. However, the Applicant is proposing vastly more private open space than is required by UDC for multi family development. UDC requires at least 80 square feet per unit and the Applicant is proposing an average of 400 square feet per unit via small private yards for every single unit. The design of this can be best seen on the open space exhibit(see Exhibit VII.C) and the fencing plan shown on the last page of the landscape plans (see Exhibit HID). To be clear, the main proposed use is single-family detached structures with on-street parking that all reside on one single building lot, making it a multi family development by definition. There are also traditional style townhome units but are also on the same building lot, making the whole residential product type multi family. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed multi-family development use is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3- 27 and below: 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe, interesting outdoor spaces for residents. Page 9 Page 98 Item#6. B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project complies with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas,outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. The private, usable open space provided for each unit varies with each unit type but each one provides more than the required amount.According to the Applicant, the minimum private open space provided is 288 square feet, the maximum for any one unit would be approximately 869 square feet, and the average is approximately 419 square feet. Again, this proposed design offers private open space that is more akin to single-family developments but is still a multi family product and the type of housing that Baron Black Cat is aiming to provide. 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. 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. See analysis in staff report below. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c.A central mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail)that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) Per the submitted plans, the Applicant appears to meet these requirements. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict these items. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: Page 10 Page 99 Item#6. a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. Note: Open space standards found in UDC 11-3G AND those found in these specific use standards shall apply to this project.Please see the applicability section of both code sections. Staff analysis for both open space requirements is in Section V.L of this staff report instead of splitting the analysis into two parts. 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').Proposed open space submitted as meeting this requirement has been reviewed.All area labeled as qualified common open space on the open space exhibit complies with this requirement. 3. In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. This project is proposed to be developed in one(])phase. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4) in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff.retroactive to 2-4- 2009). The buffer along N. Black Cat Road, a collector street, does not count toward the common open space requirements for these specific use standards. However, those areas along the arterial and collector roadways do count towards the minimum 10%required open space for the residential development as a whole. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1)Clubhouse. (2)Fitness facilities. (3)Enclosed bike storage. (4)Public art such as a statue. b. Open space: (1)Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100') in size. (2)Community garden. (3)Ponds or water features. (4)Plaza. c. Recreation: (1) Pool. Page 11 Page 100 Item#6. (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 195 proposed units, a minimum of four(4)amenities are required,however, the decision making body is authorized to consider other amenities in addition to those provided per the standards listed above in 2.d. The following amenities are proposed from the quality of life, open space and recreation categories:a clubhouse with offices for rent by the residents, a tot-lot, a swimming pool,picnic shelter with a BBQ area, a plaza, community garden, and a small fenced dog park area. Therefore, the Applicant is proposing 6 qualifying site amenities. The proposed dog park does not meet the UDC requirements to qualify as a site amenity due to it not being large enough and not showing the required trash receptacles or dog washing station.Even though it is not a qualifying amenity,Staff presumes it will be used often. Staff recommends that at least trash receptacles be added to the dog park area to ensure a clean and odorless experience is incurred.In addition to these amenities, the Applicant is proposing 102 self-storage lockers (each locker is 12 square feet)spread throughout each of the garage buildings so that residents may store small amounts of personal items onsite and near their units. This is also not a qualifying site amenity but Staff finds that these will likely be heavily used even though not all residents will be allowed to participate in it due to the difference in unit count and available lockers. 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 12 Page 101 Item#6. The landscape plan provided appears to meet these specific use standard landscape requirements. (see Exhibit VII.D) F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The commercial and multi-family residential lots appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted plat. In addition, all private streets appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted plans. In addition, all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3). The proposed short plat and submitted plans appear to meet the UDC requirements of this section. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is proposed via private streets off of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Tree Crest Way. The two proposed access points to Black Cat Road have been approved by ACHD but typically access to Black Cat is limited by the City. The Applicant may request from City Council to keep the two access points as proposed, in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. The Applicant is also proposing an access in the northeast corner of the property via a shared driveway with the Rock Harbor Church site. Private streets are proposed throughout the development,with two running east-west(W. Waverton Ln. and W. Caragana Ln.) and two running north-south(N. Spurwing Ln and N. Agrarian Ln.).Access via Chinden Blvd. is prohibited and is not proposed. Due to the nature of the proposed use, Staff believes private streets are appropriate in this development. Private streets are required to comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private streets are 25 feet wide with 5-foot or 7-foot attached sidewalks on both sides. Both open and covered parking is provided along most of the private streets. Further parking analysis is discussed in the next section,Section V.H.In addition,private streets are required to be on their own common lot or within an easementper UDC 11-3F-3B.3 standards. The submitted plat does not appear to show this requirement;Staff is recommending a condition of approval to revise the plat to show compliance with this requirementprior to the City Council hearing. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. The submitted and revised plan named "Conditional Use Plan"appears to have the most up to date parking counts and show 497 spaces for the entire development. 436 are proposed for the residents, 28 are reserved for the clubhouse, and the remaining 33 are for the proposed commercial. Of the 436 for the residential units, 179 spaces are uncovered, 134 are covered carport spaces, and the remaining 123 are garage spaces. Across the different unit types there are 641-bedroom units, 100 2-bedroom units, and 32 3-bedroom units. The 1-bedroom units require 1.5 spaces per units, with at least one of the spaces being covered; the two and three bedroom units require 2 spaces per unit, also with at least one covered per unit. Therefore, the minimum amount of parking required for the multi family portion of this development is 360 spaces, with 196 of those required to be covered. Therefore, the proposed parking count exceeds the minimum UDC requirements. The commercial areas proposed in the southwest corner of the site is shown as 12,789 square feet that would be spread across two building pads—the smaller pad, approximately 2,000 square feet, shares a plaza with the tot-lot and open space area near the west-central portion of the site. For commercial uses, the parking requirement is one space for every 500 square feet and the proposed commercial area requires a minimum of 26 spaces. The Applicant has proposed 33 Page 13 Page 102 Item#6. spaces for the commercial area, exceeding the minimum amount required by the UDC.A portion of the proposed parking directly abuts the street and those utilizing the commercial parking would have to back into or drive directly onto the private street in order to exit those spaces. This is not prohibited by code but is far from ideal. Staff believes this type of parking set up may cause additional accidents and therefore recommends a redesign of the parking for the proposed commercial area. This redesign should minimally include a 5-foot wide landscape island along the edge of this proposed parking area to eliminate this conflict. The Applicant shall still provide the required number ofparking stalls based upon the gross floor area of the proposed commercial area. A parking plan can be seen in Exhibit VILE. I. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed along the entire W. Chinden Blvd. street frontage and is proposed to be placed within the required arterial street landscape buffer. The proposed pathway will be approximately 60-feet from the existing edge of right-of-way of Chinden Blvd. due to future widening projects. The Applicant is dedicating a separate, 60-foot wide,non- buildable lot along Chinden Blvd. for the future benefit of Idaho Transportation Department. This section of multi-use pathway will allow further safe pedestrian connection along the SH 20/26 corridor and will directly help connect this development with the adjacent Rock Harbor Church site to the east and with development to the west and across N. Black Cat. The multi-use pathway is also proposed to connect to a new 5-foot detached sidewalk along N. Black Cat and to two internal connections from within the development. These sidewalk connections offer further pedestrian connectivity between developments along the SH 20/26 corridor. The proposed sidewalks in this development are essentially micro-pathways. These pathways connect throughout the entire development and traverse through every mew as well. They offer increased pedestrian connection and give future residents the opportunity to walk rather than drive within the project site. J. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Attached sidewalks are proposed along all internal private streets as part of the overall pedestrian circulation,in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Part of the sidewalk plan places one within a long vista that connects all the way from the clubhouse/tot-lot area in the west of the site to the barbeque and picnic area in the east portion of the site. This area is proposed with landscaping adequate to offer both shade and green space but does not appear to be so convoluted with trees as to offer line of sight issues for public safety. Staff supports the sidewalk and pedestrian circulation plan for this development. See Exhibit VII.F. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to W. Chinden Blvd., a state highway system (SH 20/26), landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35-foot wide common lot is depicted on the plat to the interior of the 60-foot wide common lot for future ITD purchase. There is also a required 20-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to N. Black Cat, a residential collector roadway. This required landscape buffer should also be placed into common lot(s)per UDC standards in 11-3B-7C.2; Staff is recommending a condition of approval to amend the plat to show the entire buffer along N. Black Cat within a common lot. Per UDC I I-3H-4D,and within the required buffer along SH 20/26,the Applicant is also required to build a noise attenuation wall or wall and berm combination at least 10-feet in height,measured from the height of the centerline of the highway. The Applicant is proposing a wall/berm combination that appears to Page 14 Page 103 Item#6. meet the height requirement. Staff notes that this wall is also required to modulate over the course of its length. The submitted landscape plans do not appear to show this modulation so the Applicant will be required to correct the plans prior to final plat submittal. On the submitted landscape plans,there are no proposed trees or shrubs shown within the required landscape buffer between the commercial lot and SH 20/26. This area of the landscape buffer is also required to be landscaped and Staff is recommending a condition of approval to include landscaping in this area beyond grasses. See Section VII.D for the submitted landscape plans. Landscaping is required along all pathways (including micro-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 are NOT included in the Landscape Calculations table on the submitted landscape plans, sheet LA. The addition of this data in the calculations table will be required as a condition of approval. Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E. The total square footage of common open space and the required number of trees to demonstrate compliance with UDC standards is NOT included in the Landscape Calculations table. The addition of this data in the calculations table will be required as a condition of approval. The City Arborist has also made comments on the subject application regarding its landscaping, specifically on the type of tree species proposed. Fraxinus "Ash"tree species attract a specific and invasive pest and it is the request of the City Arborist that projects start trying to replace these types of trees with other tree species. Therefore, Staff is recommending a condition of approval that the Applicant work with the City Arborist on an appropriate alternative to their proposed `Ash"tree selection. L. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-313 is required. Based on the proposed plat of 21.59 acres,a minimum of 2.16 acres of qualified common open space should be provided to satisfy this requirement. In addition,because this is a multi-family development within a residential zoning district,the common open space standards listed within the specific use standards,UDC 11-4-3-27, also apply. The Applicant's open space calculations do not accurately depict the amount of required and proposed open space for the multi-family specific use standards; Staff is recommending a condition to correct this prior to City Council.According to Staffs calculations, a minimum of 55,000 square feet (or 1.26 acres)of additional qualifying common open space should be provided. Combined, the required amount of minimum qualifying open space that should be provided is 3.42 acres. According to the open space exhibit(see Exhibit VII.C),the applicant is proposing a total of 3.78 acres of qualified open space. There are a number of small areas throughout the development that are still green space but are not qualifying open space. Of the 3.78 acres proposed,2.36 acres is proposed to meet the overall minimum 10%requirement(2.36 acres equates to 10.9%). This qualified open space consists of a 10-foot multi-use pathway,common lots with open space areas, and required street buffers along adjacent roadways. This area exceeds the minimum UDC requirements. The remaining 1.42 acres of open space is proposed to meet the specific use standards for multi- family development. These areas of open space consist of the mews between unit blocks (including the long vista that connects the east side of the development with the west side of the site), some end cap landscaped areas along streets, and smaller areas of open space that meet the Page 15 Page 104 Item#6. minimum 20' x 20' dimensions. The open space proposed to meet the specific use standards exceeds the minimum UDC requirements. As noted above, the common open space provided with this development exceeds the minimum amounts required by code. In addition, the Applicant is proposing much more additional private open space than is required by code. Staff and the Applicant worked diligently together to design the open space in such a way to integrate the commercial uses with the residential as required in the MU-Cpolicies and goals. The Applicant responded to these conversations by providing a community garden area that can be shared by the commercial building and the nearby residents. Perhaps a future restaurant as one of the commercial tenants could utilize this garden area for fresh produce in their daily operations. In addition, the Applicant proposed additional commercial space that shares a plaza space with the clubhouse and residents. There are a plethora of potential uses for this including a farmer's market style use or pop-up shops where tenants can utilize the sidewalk space for further interaction with customers. This plaza area is directly linked with the long vista in the center of the development via micro pathways and stamped/colored concrete across the private streets. Staff appreciates the additional delineation of pedestrian and vehicular travel ways but wishes the Applicant would have proposed more stamped/colored concrete throughout the development to add more character to the development and its pedestrian circulation. However, Staff supports the connection of open space from one end of the site to the other and the fact that the vista and open space areas are anchored by an amenity on the east end and amenities and commercial space on the west end of the site. All in all, Stafffinds that the proposed common and private open space are sufficient for a project of this size and proposed use. M. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): Based on the area of the proposed short plat(21.59 acres),a minimum of one (1)qualified site amenity is required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The applicant proposes one(1) qualified amenity to satisfy the requirements in this section of the UDC, a 10-foot multi-use pathway along SH 20/26. All other site amenities (analyzed in an above section) are meant to satisfy the specific use standard amenity requirements. The proposed multi- use pathway meets the minimum UDC standards. As noted above, the Applicant is proposing a small dog park in the northwest corner of the subject site (it is not a qualifying site amenity).Multi family specific use standards do not allow this area to count as open space if it up against a collector roadway(Black Cat Road) unless separated from the street by a berm or barrier at least 4-feet in height with breaks in it to allow for pedestrian access.According to the submitted landscape plan, there appears to be no such berm or barrier along this corner other than a fence meant to delineate the actual dog park. Therefore, the proposed dog park area is not qualifying open space or a qualifying amenity for the multi family requirements. However, it is qualifying open space under the general minimum 10%requirement. N. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-61 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as shown on the landscape plan and meets UDC standards as proposed. O. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): As discussed in the comprehensive plan policies analysis, Staff believes most of the submitted elevations meet the required Architectural Standards. The applicant has submitted a concurrent design review application and staff finds the submitted architecture of the residential portion of Page 16 Page 105 Item#6. the development complies with the ASM except for those elevations for the proposed townhome style units. Commercial elevations were not submitted with this application but future buildings should incorporate similar architectural features to ensure a cohesive design as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and ASM. A separate DES will be required for the Commercial portion of the development. The submitted elevations for the proposed townhome home units show only one field material, stucco. The ASM requires at least two field materials for multi family development for facades as long as those shown. Staff recommends the Applicant include more of the proposed lap siding along both the front and rear facades to meet the intent of the ASM goals. In addition, the ASM notes that no two multi family buildings should look the same. To ensure compliance with at least the intent of this requirement, the Applicant should create differentiation between some of the 6- plex, townhome buildings through differing architectural designs and color palettes. Staff is recommending conditions of approval to correct this. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit, short plat,rezone, and development agreement modification applications per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. The Director approved the private street and administrative design review applications. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on July 9,2020 and August 2020.At the August 20,2020 public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Rezone, Short Plat,Conditional Use Permit,and Development Agreement Modification requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Matthew Riggs, Owner; Elizabeth Schloss,Development Manager; Deborah Nelson, Owner Representative. b. In opposition: Joe Warchol,neighbor;Nancy Everard,neighbor; Richard Gilkey, neighbor; Dave Jacobs,neighbor; C. Commenting: Scott Freeman,neighbor;Joe Warchol;Nancy Everard; Richard Gilkey; Dave Jacobs; Lynn Southam,neighbor. d. Written testimony: 49 written testimonies outlining the same issues brought Lip during the hearing with the addition of a desire by a number of the neighbors for this land to be developed similarly to Spurwing and not a mixed use development. e. Staff presenting application: Joseph Dodson, Current Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application: Andrea Pogue,Deputy City Attorney 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. Amount of parking available for future residents and for commercial buildings; specifically,will there be no parking signs placed along Tree Crest Way and how will the commercial parking be revised; b. Added traffic of development and nature of apartment populations; c. Location of M public transportation and M public park; d. Cost of high-end apartments and affordability of proposed apartment units; e. Amount of commercial and a desire for more neighborhood commercial instead of multi-family residential; 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. a. The amount of commercial acreage and why it is being reduced—this was the main reason the project was continued to a new hearing date with a request that the Applicant increase the commercial area. The Applicant did accommodate this request; Page 17 Page 106 Item#6. b. Viability of incorporating vertically integrated development into the project to increase the commercial and not lose an,, units, c. Street type of Tree Crest Way and whether parking is allowed—Tree Crest wa,} is a collector and there is no on-street parking allowed; d. Design of the proposed commercial on the hard corner of Chinden and Black Cat—will it be one or two stories; e. Is the intent of the offices within the clubhouse intended to serve the development or go beyond its borders; f. Potential issues and resolutions of the required 25-foot buffer between the commercial zoning and the residential buildings. 4. Commission change, (s)to Staff recommendation: a. Update the staff report to include those provisions from the Staff memo following the Applicant's changes to the commercial area of the site. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. The Applicant will need to request a waiver from the City Council to reduce the land use buffer between the C-C zoning and the multi-familyproposed on the R-15 portion of the project—specifically,that area between the Clubhouse and the smaller commercial building and the residential to its east. C. City Council: Enter Summary of City Council Decision. Page 18 Page 107 Item#6. VII. EXHIBITS A. Rezone Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Maps EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION FOR MODERN CRAFTSMAN SUBDIVISION R-15 ZONING DISTRICT A portion of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of Puma Subdivision as filed in Book 71 of Plats at Pages 7263 through 7264, records of Ada County, Idaho and a portion of the SW 114 of the SW 114 of Section 22,TAN,, R.1 W., B.M., City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the SW corner of said Section 22 from which the S114 corner of said Section 22 bears South 89°1T18"East,2647.24 feet; thence along the South boundary line of said Section 22 South 89°17'18"East,287.86 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; leaving said South boundary line North 00°40'53"East, 359.40 feet; thence North 19'12'20"East,30,18 feet; thence North 00°40'46"East,227.75 feet; thence North 83°45'26"West, 300.46 feet to a point on the West boundary line of said Section 22; thence along said West boundary line North 00°30'42"East,253.71 feet; thence leaving said West boundary line and along the southerly boundary line of Tree Farm Subdivision No. 2 as filed in Book 114 of Plats at Pages 16914 through 16921, records of Ada County, Idaho and the northwesterly extension thereof South 78°03'14"East, 104.00 feet to an angle point on the southerly boundary line of Lot 2, Block 7 of said Tree Farm Subdivision No. 2; thence along said southernly boundary line of said Tree Farm Subdivision No. 2 the following 5 course and distances: thence 61.63 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 1,552.00 feet, a central angle of 02°16'31"and a long chord which bears North 10*48'30"East,61.63 feet; thence North 55°40'41"East, 10.27 feet; thence 151,39 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 700.00 feet, a central angle of 12°23'31"and a long chord which bears South 71*18'06"East, 151.10 feet; thence South 65°06'21"East,221.65 feet; Page I of 2 Page 19 Page 108 Item#6. thence 56.81 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve to the left, said cure having a radius of 850.00 feet, a central angle of 03°49'45"and a long chord which bears South 67'01'18"East, 56.80 feet to a corner common to Lot 2, Block 7 of said Tree Farm Subdivision No. 2,and Lot 1, Block 7 of Tree Farm Subdivision No. 1 as filed in Book 113 of Plats at Pages 16498 through 16505, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence along the South boundary line of said Lot 1, Block 7 the following 4 courses and distances: thence 135.28 feet along the arc of cure to the left, said cure having a radius of 850.00 feet,a central angle of 09'07'08"and a long chord which bears South 73°29'44"East, 135.14 feet; thence South 78°03'14"East,263.21 feet; thence 183.86 feet along the arc of cure to the left,said curve having a radius of 841.73 feet, a central angle of 12°30'53"and a long chord which bears South 84'18'41"East, 183.49 feet; thence 237.50 feet along the arc of a non-tangent cure to the left,said cure having a radius of 841.73 feet,a central angle of 16°09'58"and a long chord which bears North 81°20'S2" East,236,71 feet to the SE corner of said Lot 1, Block 7, point also being a point on the West boundary line of said Rockbury Subdivision; thence South 00°30'49"West, 720.31 feet along said West boundary line and the southerly extension thereof to a point on the South boundary line of said Section 22; thence along said South boundary line North 89°1T18"West, 1,036.05 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 19.39 acres, more or less. E A ' 7729 96 � . erc. Page 2 of 2 Page 20 Page 109 Item#6. �A L-1 \ N I� N N 25 100 400 0 50 200 80o SCALE: 1" = 200' ROCKBURY 04 SUBDIVISION SO'30'49"W 720.31' o Pt NDs �- - - Qf p GAG 1 � 1 772 Up S0 O U N Z W� 1 �< I Nw 0 w �a o 1330 W! al wV) rn 3 Nm l _ �� f�f N � h/ o I (D I /aon 0000 �v Z 00^ N U Q 2 2 O 2 � r S65'O6'21"E p o 221.65' -� J h A N0'40'46"E p� 227.75' N0'40'53"E 359.40' w nrr 10 N19'12'20"E V 30.i8' Doll co S78'D3'14'E I co L7 104.00. 1 zo `n l y` po cl co L NO'3D'42"E fi44.73' NO'30'42"E z N N � 253.71' - --- N. BLACK CAT RD. Croi�z+c+'9cron Cern t9—i�<a h+iNG u n Crehemen A—r5.d L� aa.r EXHIBIT __ DRAWING FOR JC0 NO. DAHO 19-144 9955 W.ElAFR MST. MODERN CRAFTSMAN SUBDIVISION SHEET NO. SURVEY �20a)841 "°' R-15 ZONING DISTRICT loft GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN THE SW h OF THE SW X OF SECTION 22.TAN.,R.lW.. DWG'DATE B.M.,CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 8/3/2020 Page 21 Page 110 Item#6. EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION FOR MODERN CRAFTSMAN SUBDIVISION C-C (COMMERCIAL)ZONING DISTRICT A portion of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of Puma Subdivision as filed in Book 71 of Plats at Pages 7263 through 7264, records of Ada County, Idaho and a portion of the SW 114 of the SW 114 of Section 22,TAN., R.1 W., B.M., City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the SW corner of said Section 22 from which the S114 corner of said Section 22 bears South 89°1T18"East, 2647.24 feet; thence along the West boundary line of said Section 22 North 00°30'42"East, 644.73 feet; thence leaving said West boundary line South 83°45'26"East, 300.46 feet; thence South 00°40'46"West, 227.75 feet; thence South 19'12'20"West, 30.18 feet; thence South 00°40'53"West, 359.40 feet to a point on the South boundary line of said Section 22; thence along said South boundary line North 89°17'18"West, 287.56 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 4.23 acres, more or less. 0 7729 � 613Iwzo OF 0 s_c Page 22 Page 111 Item#6. S8~�26»C 00.4&' �E 0 NI Ar � I d� 31 �i p of 00 II 1 S19'12'20'W 30.18' (n C / 18427979 s.f. p 4.23 a.c. � h o O N Q I� V ((p O Y Iw U � O 7729 p �I Nj,pj��IlldZU �O �r �I I I W. CHINDEN BLVD. 21 22 (U.S HIGHWAY 20/26) 22 1/4 N89�FT18"W 287.56' 1036.05' 28 27 S89'17'18"E 2647.24' 2/ POB BASIS OF BEARING Na— v�❑ tom ! 19--',H dW ZOnING Moeem IDAHO EXHIBIT __ DRAWING FOR S. IS% SURVEY 9955 W.EME RAID ST. MODERN CRAFTSMAN SUBDIVISION SHEET NO. S0ISE.PIDAHO53]09 C—C ZONING DISTRICT 1 GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN 734E SW OF THE SW OF SECTION 22.T.4N.,RAW., DWG.DATE B.M.,qTY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 8/3/2020 Page 23 Page 112 Item#6. B. Short Plat(dated: 3uffe September 2020) oo� LY [� E° a ti N g= €�`e$�° age m i V tV '__ y o8d Nnm E the a _ 2 i i N � 8= cc awe Z00 ZQ Ea �Epc p_,b �SFIr "N �;a� R•6z� s-11 '7�ww IOM< Z~ate a"55 '3-� o:24 : 3:�0w z i°. 6�ro8o 6g§E - �mS m'C E 8a Y - O O Z Q N 0O Z V . - w n a n r m w _ _ _ _ _ _ I y � NosN oens.tlneatl c . +�V100 - I.��W Z w M.BY,OfAOS i9Y9S M.Bi,OL005 0Zd ' ' x 11 w w o00 Afz j 0 O 3 I I 9 � % .07 z�1Wd I � w8gg 88886 c - - - a + - R g ` e e = = m ----.y N n E 02 u nl(ad aLuLywm9 52. Page 24 Page 113 Item#6. E o = a •L Z�% a rev oh o?�r� dg9 - E� d ., aY � i�' d.,bl •� c�y . � aw ELM '0d 4LL'NO 9 _ bl N0151A10GnS kNn@5oom U ti 96'bB L�' M,9Y OE. Y9Y99 M.BY,00005 NbPhWf'N = w oaf III, 'NJd9135 .Ol Oh.ON- /= J.Z �Lrrm m m e!J \"�Sy33 � , Off+ _ - _���>U LLZ 9'LLZ A.K. EN 3„ZY,O£.00N� w w. 80T9Z 3.Li,OC.WN n 'GN 1V0%]b19'N L 3N alUVIdNO $ - Page 25 Page 114 Item#6. C. Open Space Exhibit(date: ',L'�20 9/29/2020) - r -E uv woau uurrs ,I ®Ir f - a' f I / �- I 1 I. i M F 1 I i J r j xA Jr a ff �z.`1—i f It I � • � 1 • �. e m a d i I � I • „ f [� I . i t ate:: I _ —I, v$, IT Gk 3-1 I a' 1 � `s � �" �� I ���I�I•�� �'I. � .� � n3 L L` � mn S 2 y I I Fs'e:s's':s'scse � Ctl'e 1L ��-xax��-•ate � WM CX ego k, CONCEPTUAL OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT „ .+o I' ,€� Ilex En�neering,Inc. e DETACHED BARON BLACK CAT SUBDIVISION ,,Rm, sK cMi[ncmrrxue 1p.,-cl�oo ~ .,m,.•.���..o.. r BARON PROPERTIES LLC Page 26 Page 115 Eil D. Landscape Plans(date: 6/18/2020) IMM ME D Z 00041 - I Z MY i In s - < c R O, r �I Il ,a � a I .f Z -� 41 r , T n g .R z - n IF - D - i r � - nn n i n /�\1 m • ♦ i ---� s I KID r =� g I a I .- II III rA m 11 r , II n ® I _ I m zl Page 27 Page 116 Item#6. / f � C J' Ma l Xly =., 1 v P tm 1 y Wq A d r a i -r II f t 7 M I �v ' rw P _ a F� MODERN CRAFTSMAN u r = 3 AT BLACK CAT la aE �► = =a BARON DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN k =� Page 28 Page 117 Item#6. --- _ - —y N.oLaac car ro- h � 7 f -A �1 -- U_ FLJ S II � � ji, I �P � I. Tim II c —— - MATCHUNE LS In y . m a MODERN CRAFTSMAN r = 3 AT BLACK CAT a € e ,_.� z 9 BARON DEVELOPMENT �� € "' =N CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 29 Page 118 Item#6. MATCHLINE L2JWAr HL tj I; r a I I I. I + I Y K I r T a � i III' I I -=tee H 'N rn NMgu it j{ # ��k{fi'F� s ��_ k€ rn u A a P MODERN CRAFTSMAN �o ° AT BLACK CAT his = a BARON DEVELOPMENT °y m CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN & =� Page 30 Page 119 Item#6. O q O O IBM Rp A o c = J y I m � � c i II1 _ 3NQ IN Woo 1q a 6 ° s I �� } pp S m own mom L! ►lI S Cl s'' Z ,_ � i� M � � R OIL I 5 by figs qi 1st a o _ MODERN CRAFTSMAN r �0 3 AT BLACK CAT e 'o;'ve P wa BARON DEVELOPMENT '# _ m N CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 31 Page 120 Item#6. N t 4 III- I I: �r 77 Li r7 HP i, `J l m £ -- 1 In IT r a r' � I Ih � r g — � - T ti 41 O � � o a � ➢ s� € gip € � T� MODERN CRAFTSMAN r AT BLACK CAT ass '3iiiiirr,,.rX BARON DEVELOPMENT ®_ Prili` J = 0 CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN e� iSirm h Page 32 Page 121 Item#6. e oe D g I a [U 1 �q Z , o � Z ° wAr In � � f D a In m In �>aa� Aar; � . I I� ® — Im ■ ■ 0 Z Rl `po K3 ee m MMM c Page 33 Page 122 Item#6. E. Parking Plan(date: 5/1/2020) j u — k '0 co r r " z — — c� I " I in I 4' m j r cn ou y pT—. � - A xmy xo ci R7 � PO ➢� N N O ND ➢ � fll i D m co qq { A 99 � � I — I —JI : I71r. i L FV, ij : Y I - li q-7 I � - s I : a : I I MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT Di _ ilI $ I�s43 li I�§' �:: ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN 5;�p o ; a` BLACK CAT d CHINDEN ROADS - -� MERMAN,IDAHO ZIP Page 34 Page 123 Item#6. F. Pedestrian Circulation Plan :k I r / F I I 1 I Y I i d — a `l 1 y 'A I O I x L - a y _ o ty Y z CONCEPTUAL CIRCULATION MAP -1,° "� �'_'£ Iley En�meenng,lnc.'_d •e DETACHED BARON BLACK CAT SUBDIVISION BARON PROPERTIES LL— ° -1-1 Page 35 Page 124 Item#6. G. Conceptual Building Elevations MODERN CRAFTSMAN N AT BLACK CAT ACK CAT LINE SINGLE SLOPE ROOF FROMT NEW HIP ROOF-FRONT YIEW i■�is..r.. McLSMriouse e tion SINGLE SLOPE ROOF.BALK VIEW Elm ME 1EEDD 1.ATH-UN1LEX FLOOR PLAN ......... HIPROOF.BACKMEW - .. nn.�ircc.e:�anrcncc BACK VIEW v FLOOR PLAN _ MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT BACK VIEW SIDE VIEW CLUBHOUSE FRONT VIEW Page 36 - Page 125 Item#6. MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT ;I m__ m- SINGLE SLOPE HOOF FRONT VIEW HIP HOOF FRONT VIEW '®❑.`r`-_i..i S ' II� �L SINGLE SLOPE ROOF-SACK MEW FT zeeo-warn-a FLOORPUN HIP ROOF.BACK VIEW MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT COLOR PDLETIE 61 Norm LINE LINair-, - � SINGLE SLOPE ROOF FRONT VIEW HIP ROOF FRONT VIEW Elul SINGLE SLOPE ROOF BACK NEW IL2 BED-2 8ATH-B FLOOR PLAN w���.3waa.Pw.�„a. HIPROOF BACKMEW Page 37 Page 126 Item#6. MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT aim COLOR PD F p2 SINGLE SLOPE ROOF FRONT VIEW HIP ROI FRONT VIEW SINGLE SLOPE ROOF-BACK VIEW 11PI 2BE0-2 BATH-GARAGE FLOOR PLAN HIP ROOF-BACK VIEW - MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT . � _ — Elm —. SINGLE SLOPE ROOF-FRONTVIEW ; HIP ROOF FRONT VIEW IF[ N:..�.e.,.E. ME rTrI .s SINGLE SLOPE ROOF-BACK VIEW i - - C �• 3 BED BATH FLOOR PLAN HIPROOF-BACKVIEW Page 38 Page 127 I I' � III • 1(; IIIIIIII —■ a�y � YII CRAFFSMAN AT BLACK CAT LU ENMY FEATURE CRAFTSMAN CRAFTSMANMODEPN AT SI-ACK CAT 7 7- -_ _- 771 1 FGAI.AGI��IORAU MUM FLOOR PLAN Page , i_ 39 Item#6. MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT CALfFi PALETTE i 1 11 ❑❑ - .aE�PALEREwz — — _ FRONT VIEW vt .. ." ■■ i ------------ C0 PALETTE-1 u -❑ E IE ❑ ❑ TOWW.Il .5 PLEx FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 1 MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT M—PALME» — �aL�PALERE.z .., a.. .... BACK VIEW �.. _., �.. ■ ;.rm�.-...i p Luji .. � (�_ �� � .� �❑ �. � COLLfi PALEfiE 3 -- �. ❑ [ ❑ LiLE ]t7 1owNKouses-srLEx FLOOR PLAN LEVEL 2 Page 40 - Page 129 Item#6. MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT ...^,LOi PALETTE=I _ =T I ,.. ,. ,.. FRONT VIEW .. � ■� -=irtm, -----------f ----------- ■ i T G^LO'PALfTffb mm'r E:1W -=�-L M _2 n TOWNHOUSES-6PLEX o FLOORPLAN.LEVEL MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT G^ -PALME-1 ME BACK VIEWTF7 - m, &F 17 L �G u � �t OL�4FnLE E Y - - m I� .� �����- Wes' ME TOWNHOUSES-6PLEX FLOORPLAN-LEVEL2 Page 41 - Page 130 Item#6. MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT G^LC3 PALETfEN LIM ME C.—;-ME�1 FRONT VIEW I - vim: ..�, �.. r. caLo-vaLSTrea ----F� m, LI u_ H - n ll .. w Z` I� -� � -•- —�.'.11 TOWNHOUSES-6 FLEX o FLOOR PLAN-LEVELI MODERN CRAFTSMAN AT BLACK CAT G�LC'PhLfTff al BE EACH VIEW >.. _ �, ._ ❑❑ -- - T - WC In Ll . r TOWNHOUSES-6 FLEX FLOOR PLAN-LEVEL 4 Page 42 Page 131 Item#6. H. Vertically Integrated Building Rendering QP�p�,o - Q� f Y Z Q�� z�m �4 C - LL(D W H 2F FRONT ISO VIEY) U Z Q U W U pp[if E 0 "j PE LEVELI-FLOOR PLAN-PRELIMINARY-GROSS AREA LEVEL 4v=6,138 SF Ip,Q,Q E eP�'2N�QJL Q J V r 4U4 W� J�0 Z Wp m Q Q REAR ISO VIEW LL(D K W �Z� 0 0 o 0 'I,LEVEL 2-FLOOR PLAN-PRELIMINARY-FROSS AREA LEVEL 2=5,242 SF AD Page 43 Page 132 Item#6. I. Corner Commercial Rendering—2-story ConceiMM G Q U 1- U 0 Z m H Fn ~ W J Q U 5 O m 2E c) Q CO >-U L W co w d O - - - s — PERSPECTIVE VIEWS Page 44 Page 133 Item#6. VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the existing Development Agreements(DA) (Inst. Ws: 106151218; 107025555; 107141993; 110059432; and 2014- 065517)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 Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting subject modification. The new DA shall incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the submitted plat, site plan, landscape plan, open space exhibit, and conceptual building elevations for included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. The 10-foot multi-use pathway along Chinden Boulevard shall be constructed with Phase 1 of the development.. and should be placed at least four(4) feet from the edge of the common lot abutting the common lot reserved for ITD. c. Direct lot access to W. Chinden Boulevard(SH 20/26) shall be prohibited. d. The existing accesses onto Chinden Boulevard and N.Black Cat Road shall be closed upon development of the subject site. e. Additional right-of-way shall be reserved for dedication to Idaho Transportation District for the future widening of Chinden Boulevard, as shown on the plat as Lot 1,Block 1. f. The only approved access to N. Black Cat Road is the northernmost access shown on the proposed CUP Plan as W.Waverton Lane,unless City Council approves the second access in accord with UDC I I-3A-3. g. The required landscape street buffers shall be constructed and vegetated along the entire perimeter(along N. Black Cat and Chinden Boulevard)with the first phase of development. h. The Applicant shall vegetate the common lot(Lot 1,Block 1),reserved for future dedication to Idaho Transportation Department ITD),with grass and not gravel until such time that this lot is dedicated to ITD. i. The proposed commercial building located near the intersection of N. Black Cat Road and W. Chinden Boulevard(SH 20/26) shall be constructed as a two- story structure as depicted in the submitted concept renderings and as noted on the revised CUP Site Plan. j. The Vertically Integrated Residential Project area of the site shall adhere to the specific use standards as outlined in UDC 11-4-3-41. 2. The short plat included in Section VII.B, dated June 2020, shall be revised as follows prior to the City Council hearing: a. Revise the plat to ineltide the epAir-e required landseape btt�r-aleng N. Blaek Cat Read iin with UPC 11 3 F .Z. c. Stamped and signed by the licensed land surveyor. Page 45 Page 134 Item#6. 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.D, dated 06/18/2020, shall be revised as follows prior to submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application: a. The Landscape Calculations/Requirements table shall include the following: 1)the total linear feet of pathways and the required number of trees per UDC 11-3B-12);the total square footage of common open space and required number of trees per UDC 11-3G-3E. b. Revise the landscape plans to show the required modulation in the required noise attenuation wall along W. Chinden Blvd. in accord with UDC 11-3H-4D. c. Revise the landscape plans and add trees, shrubs, and other vegetative ground cover to the areas of the landscape buffers between the future commercial buildings and Chinden Blvd. and Black Cat Road in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C d. Revise the!a-adseape plans to add a 5 feet wide!a-adseape buffer-alefig the fiet4he path of tfaffie on the private stfeet. The btt�r-shall be!a-adseaped in aeeer-d with UDG l l�C- e. Revise the landscape plans to show trash receptacles and bags for waste disposal throughout the proposed dog park area. f. Revise the landscape plans to mirror any changes made to the site plan and plat. 4. The residential elevations included in Section VII.G, dated Febfuar- .2020, shall be -evise are approved as submitted. a. help br-eak up the large amotm4 of s�ueee as a field material. b. Create at least two (2)more design paleffes for-the proposed tevffiheme tmits to ifielude at e. Gefftinue the stone material alefig the bottom of all building faVades of the propose el„l 5. The Open Spaee E��ibit Meu4a4iens table shall be eeffeeted to Fefleet the eeffeet amount of 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6,UDC Table 11-2B-3, and those listed in the specific use standards for multi-family development,UDC 11-4-3-27. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 8. With the CZC submittal,the Applicant shall correct the applicable plans to show additional colored or stamped concrete (or similar)of the main pedestrian sidewalk that traverses through the center of development to further delineate the pedestrian pathways. 9. The Applicant shall work with the City Arborist on an appropriate alternative to their proposed"Ash"tree selection and obtain approval from the City Arborist prior to Final Plat approval. 10. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 11. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review approval for the future commercial buildings with the submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the entire site. The Page 46 Page 135 Item#6. architecture of the commercial buildings shall complement that of the residential portion of the project. 12. The Applicant shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval for the entire subject site prior to applying for any building permit. 13. Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 12. 14. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 1I- 3A-15,UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 15. Upon completion of the landscape installation,a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 17. The applicant and/or assigns shall comply with the private street standards as set forth in UDC 11-3F-3 and 11-3F-4. 18. The conditional use approval shall become null and void unless otherwise approved by the City if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use, satisfy the requirements, acquire building permits and commence construction within two years as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.1; or 2) obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.4. 19. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on any building,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the multi-use pathway(s) along Chinden Boulevard to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. 20. Business hours of operation within the C-C zoning district shall be limited from 6 am to 11 pm as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3A.4. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Design and number of units clustered together is of particular concern—staff is unclear as to how all units will be serviced.A utility layout depicting how all of the units will be serviced while still meeting design requirements shall be required. 1.2 Sanitary sewer mainlines are not allowed within common drives, only sewer services (reminder that a maximum of three services are allowed into a manhole,with a minimum 30- degrees of angle separation). 1.3 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A future installation agreement is required for the streetlights on Chinden Blvd. Contact the Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator for additional information. 1.4 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of water mains under the jurisdiction of SUEZ North America. 1.5 Though the City of Meridian will not own or maintain the water system in this development, final fire hydrant location shall be coordinated with and receive approval from the Meridian Public Works Department and Meridian Fire Department prior to construction plan approval. 1.6 Structures of 3600 square feet and larger including the garage, shall comply with the fire flow, and hydrant requirements of appendix b and c of the 2015 International Fire Code. 1.7 Prior to construction plan approval,the applicant shall submit documentation from SUEZ Page 47 Page 136 Item#6. North America indicating that they have approved the water plans. 1.8 Prior to scheduling of a pre-construction meeting,the applicant shall submit documentation from SUEZ North America that all of their requirements have been met to be able to go to construction. 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 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. Page 48 Page 137 Item#6. 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 Stfeet signs are to be in plaee, aetiva4ed,read base appf:eved by the Ada Couffty Highway Distfiet and the Final Plat fe 2.10 Prior to applying for building permits,the following minimum items shall be completed: street signs are to be in place,the installation of sanitary sewer and water systems (with the water system being fully activated), a compacted road base capable of supporting an 80,000 lb. fire truck shall be approved by design engineer,with written confirmation of such approval submitted to the Meridian Building Department. 2.11 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. 2.12 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. 2.13 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. 2.14 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. 2.15 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.16 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.17 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.18 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. 2.19 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. 2.20 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. 2.21 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. 2.22 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. Page 49 Page 138 Item#6. 2.23 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 hyps://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184359&dbid=0&repo=Meridian C ky D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=184598&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=185184&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=184930&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv G. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL https:llweblink.meridiancily.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=184482&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv Page 50 Page 139 Item#6. H. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184914&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv I. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT https:11weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=184498&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iu J. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=184482&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=190915&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv IX. 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; Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to adjust the areas of the existing R- 15 and C-C zoning districts and subsequent development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all conditions of approval are complied with. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment and request for the development of multi family residential will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available within the City. Stafffinds the proposed addition of commercial within the development is generally consistent with the purpose statement of the commercial district and future land use designation of Mixed Use Community. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and welfare; 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 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. Page 51 Page 140 Item#6. The subject property is already annexed; therefore Commission finds that this finding is not applicable. B. Short Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Commission finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII 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, 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; Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section VII for more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, 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 but has not provided comments at this time. 6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features. Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. C. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Page 52 Page 141 Item#6. Commission finds that the submitted conditional use plat appears to meet all dimensional and development regulations in the R-15 zoning district in which it resides. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Commission finds the proposed use of multi family residential and commercial are harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Mixed-Use Community and the requirements of this title. 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. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses closest to the subject site, Commission finds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Commission finds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property 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. Commission finds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as all services are readily available and nearby streets are currently being widened to accommodate additional traffic flow. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Commission finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials,equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Although traffic will likely increase in the vicinity with the proposed use, all major roadways adjacent to the site are planned for improvements in the near future. Therefore, Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare. Page 53 Page 142 Modern Craftsman at Black Cat FlyAT BLACK CATMODERN CRAFTSMANINTRODUCINGThrough- Site Plan Mixed Use commercial spaceSF 19,500 -13,000: Corner lotcommercial spaceSF 4 units, 2,362 : ”up-“PopcommercialSF 6 units, 5,070 : Integrated-Verticallyresidents1,050 SF office space for : Clubhouse Clubhouse CommercialUp-Pop Vertical Commercial Integration: Vertical Integration: Commercial Story-Single Corner: Commercial Story-Two Corner: Residential:3BR2BRDuplex1BR Residential:3BR/Garage2BR Residential:Garagewith plex-6 Residential:Townhomes Unit TypeVariety Architectural Variety Parking & Storage Amenities: Comm. GardenDog park Picnic/BBQPlazaTot Lot;PoolFitness Center;Clubhouse; Pathways Services the project have capacityserve Ada schools that All West –Schools•Within Suez service area; service line is directly adjacent–Water•PlanWaste Water Master Meets Meridian –Sewer•acceptableAll ACHD conditions of approval are –Traffic•Estimated response time 5.5 min or less–Police•time5 min response less than from Station No. #5, 2.2 miles –Fire • Conditions and ACHD approved.accesses,Fairbournematch , UDCAccess points meet Delete Condition 1(A)(f) Conditions story commercial-2story or -To allow either 1Amend Condition 1(A)(i) Waiver: Zonesbetween Buffer Modern Craftsman at Black Cat Lighting Traffic Flow Item#6. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30- 2005,eff. 9-15-2005) Commission is not aware of any such features; the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. D. Private Street Findings: In order to approve the application,the director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this article; The Director finds that the proposed private street design meets the requirements. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage,hazard,or nuisance,or other detriment to persons,property,or uses in the vicinity; and The Director finds that the proposed private streets would not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity if all conditions of approval are met. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. (Ord. 05-1170,8-30-2005,eff.9-15-2005) The Director finds the use and location of the private streets do not conflict with the comprehensive plan or the regional transportation plan because the proposed design meets all requirements. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. (Ord. 10-1463, 11-3-2010,eff. 11-8-2010) NA Page 54 Page 143 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 20-1898: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-4-2(A)(5)(d), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Mobile Sales Unit License; Amending Meridian City Code Section 3-3-2(C), Regarding Criminal History Disqualifying Applicants for Vehicle Immobilization License; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Page 144 Item#7. CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1898 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 3-4-2(A)(5)(D), REGARDING CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALIFYING APPLICANTS FOR MOBILE SALES UNIT LICENSE; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 3-3-2(C), REGARDING CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALIFYING APPLICANTS FOR VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE; ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian seeks by this ordinance to establish consistency and clarity in regulation of mobile sales unit and vehicle immobilization licensing applicants, and protect public safety, consumer interests, and property; WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that the following ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That Meridian City Code section 3-4-2(A)(5)(d) shall be amended as follows: 3-4-2: MOBILE SALES UNITS: A. License and/or Permit Requirements: It shall be unlawful for any person to operate, allow the operation of, or act as a mobile sales unit without each and all of the following licenses, permits, and/or certifications: 5. A City of Meridian mobile sales unit license. d. The city clerk shall deny an application for a mobile sales unit license where: (1) The application is incomplete or required application materials or fees have not been submitted within thirty(30) days from receipt of a partial application; (2) Investigation of such application or application materials reveals that provided information is invalid, false, or incomplete; or (3) Tnezappheant has been Eenvieted-af- (A) A violation of . . a of this seetion within the five (5) ye oa;r the date � >,,,,,;ss;on of the ., rhea4ie pr-eeMOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALTIERS PAGE page 145 Item#7. applieant does not seek to operate a motor-vehiele while operating or aeting as a mobile sales unit. (C) A misdemeanor-ehar-ge of driving under-the influenee of aleohol or-drugs within the five (5) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the applieatiefl, of felony ehar-ge of driving under-the influenee of aleohol or-drugs within the ten (10) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the applieation, exeept that stleh eenvietion shall not be grounds for-denial where the applieant does not seek to operate a motor-vehiele while operating or-aeting as a mobile sales tm (D) Any misdemeanor-ehar-ge involving theft or fraud within the five (5) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the applieation, or-any felony ehar-ge of theft E)r-ftuud within the fifteen (15) years preeeding the date of submission of the applieati (E) A misdemeanor ehar-ge of battery, sjsatilt, domestic battery OrisSft ti, harassment,telephone stalking, battery, or-violation of a pr-oteetiVe order-within the five (5) years preeeding the date of submission of the applieation, or-a felony eharge of assault, assault, > stalking, or- violation of a proteetive order-within the ten (10) years preeeding the date o s4mission of the applieation. «�) An, c iri,� ; �lvin-, related to, fireafms or other-weapons. anWor-other vulnerable persons.- C147 A ; olving, „ related t9,pr-vscrccrtierr niacc2n exposure, obseene eonduet, o notheir sexual (1) An, .1 1 — of ted to .1,ugs o ;llie t s4st.,nees (4) The applieant is or at any time has been required by any law Or legal ofder-to r-egiStef as a sex off ader (3) Within the five (5) years preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of, or has completed a sentence of incarceration for, any of the following crimes, or any probation or parole violation related to such conviction: (A)A violation of any provision of this chapter. (B) Any misdemeanor charge involving theft or fraud, except that a conviction of, or completion of a sentence of incarceration for, petit theft shall not be grounds for denial. (C)Any misdemeanor charge of battery, assault, domestic battery or assault, telephone harassment, stalking, or violation of a protective order. (D) Any misdemeanor charge involving, or related to, a child or children, elderly persons, and/or other vulnerable persons, except that a conviction of, or completion of a sentence of incarceration for, a first offense misdemeanor charge of injury to child shall not be ,grounds for denial. (E)Any crime involving, or related to,use of or possession of drugs or illicit substances. (4) Within the ten (10) years preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of, or has completed a sentence of incarceration for, any of the following crimes, or any probation or parole violation related to such conviction: MOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALTIERS PAGE page 146 Item#7. (A) any felony charge of theft or fraud. ) Any felony charge of battery, assault, domestic battery or assault, telephone harassment, stalking, or violation of a protective order. (C)Any felony crime involving, or related to, a child or children, elderly persons, and/or other vulnerable persons, except that a conviction for a felony sex crime shall disqualif the he applicant as set forth below. (5)At any time preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of any of the following crimes: (A)Any charge involving, or related to firearms or other weapons, except that a conviction related to carrying a concealed weapon shall not be grounds for denial. (B) Any charge involving, or related to a crime against any person, whether minor or adult, involving, or related to, sexual abuse, sexual assault, prostitution, indecent exposure, obscene conduct, or any other sexual conduct or activity_ (C) Murder; manslaughter; rape; kidnapping; robbery; arson; fraud; or manufacturing_, delivery, or trafficking drugs or illicit substance(s). (D)Any crime resulting in the requirement by any law or legal order that the applicant register as a sex offender. Section 2. That Meridian City Code section 3-3-2(C) shall be amended as follows: C. Denial: The City Clerk shall deny an application for a vehicle immobilization license where: 1. The application is incomplete; 2. The applicant is under eighteen (18) years of age; 3. Investigation of such application or application materials reveals that provided information is invalid, false, or incomplete; or 4. The a plie „t has been, etoa fang of the following: driving,a. A violation of an )f this ehapter-within the five (5) yeafs pr-eeeding the date of-submissi iliemien. b. A violation of any leeal law !hiele immobilization within the five > the five (5) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the appheatieft. within the five (5) years pr-eeeding the date of s4mission of the applieation, or-a felony ehar-ge of driving tinder-the influenee of aleehol or-dmgs within the ten (!0) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the appliemien. e. Any misdemeanor-ehar-ge involving theft or-fraud within the five (5) years pr-eeediag the date of submission of the appliea4ien, or-a-By felony ehar-ge of theft or-fta-ud within the fifteen (15) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the ,.I; .,t e r MOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALTIERS PAGI;, Page 147 Item#7. battery,f A misdemeanor- charge of > > battery,telephone har-assment, stalking, or-,violation of a pr-oteetive order-within the five (5) years pr-eeeding the date of submission of the applieation, or a felony ehar-ge of or- assault, assault, telephone harassment, stalking, violation of a pr-oteetive order-within the ten (10) years preceding the date o s4mission of the applieation. g. Any erime involving, or-related to, fir-eafms OF other-weapons. h dime involving,ing, related-to, a EE�1iid or- e iildr-en, elderly per-sonss-ikndlor other vulnerable per-sons. i Any er-ifne involving, related t6,r-ostitlition,i deeent expostwe, obseene eenduct, or-other-sexual eonduet or-aetivity. k The zapplieant is or at any time has been required by any law el-legal order-to register-as a se* offen4er-. 4. Within the five (5)years preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of, or has completed a sentence of incarceration for, any of the followiniz crimes, or any probation or parole violation related to such conviction: (A)A violation of any provision of this chapter. (B) Any misdemeanor charge involving theft or fraud, except that a conviction of, or completion of a sentence of incarceration for, petit theft shall not be ogres for denial. (C) Any misdemeanor charge of battery, assault, domestic battery or assault, telephone harassment, stalking, or violation of a protective order. (D) Any misdemeanor charge involving, or related to, a child or children, elderly persons, and/or other vulnerable persons, except that a conviction of, or completion of a sentence of incarceration for, a first offense misdemeanor charge of injury to child shall not be grounds for denial. (E)Any crime involving, or related to,use of or possession of drugs or illicit substances. 5. Within the ten (l0) years preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of, or has completed a sentence of incarceration for, any of the following crimes, or any probation or parole violation related to such conviction: (A) any felony charge of theft or fraud. (B) Any felony charge of battery, assault, domestic battery or assault, telephone harassment, stalking, or violation of a protective order. (C) Any felony crime involving, or related to, a child or children, elderly persons, and/or other vulnerable persons, except that a conviction for a felony sex crime shall disqualify the applicant as set forth below. 6. At an.. t�preceding the date of submission of the application, the applicant has been convicted of any of the following crimes: (A) Any charge involving, or related to firearms or other weapons, except that a conviction related to carrying a concealed weapon shall not be grounds for denial. MOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALTIERS PAGE page 148 Item #7. B An charge involving, r related t� ��_g r v g, o r at d o a creme against any person, whether minor or adult, involving, or related to , sexual abuse, sexual assault, prostitution, indecent exposure, obscene conduct, or any other sexual conduct or activity. (C) Murder; manslaughter; rape; kidnapping; robbery, arson; fiaud ; or manufacturing, delivery, or trafficking drugs or illicit substance(s) . (D) Any crime resulting in the requirement by any law or legal order that the applicant register as a sex offender. Section 3 . That all ordinances , resolutions, orders , or parts thereof or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby voided. Section 4 . That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian , Idaho , this day of October, 2020 . � APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this I3 day of October, 2020 . APPROVED : ATTEST . Aoi . Si son, Mayor s Jo o , 13jty Clerk STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO, 204898 The undersigned, William L. M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Ordinance no . 20- 1898 of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50.901A(3 ) . DATED this day of October, 2020 . William L.M . Nary, City Attorney MOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALIFIERS PAGE Fa e 149 Item#7. NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1898 An ordinance amending Meridian City Code section 3-4-2(a)(5)(d), regarding criminal history disqualifying applicants for Mobile Sales Unit License; amending Meridian City Code section 3- 3-2(c), regarding criminal history disqualifying applicants for Vehicle Immobilization License; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date. First Reading: Adopted after first reading by suspension of the rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code City of Meridian § 50-902: YES NO Mayor and City Council Second Reading: By: Chris Johnson, City Clerk Third Reading: MOBILE SALES AND VEHICLE IMMOBILIZATION LICENSE CRIMINAL HISTORY DISQUALIFIERS PAGE page 150 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 20-1899: An Ordinance (H-2020-0035 - Poiema Subdivision) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land as Shown on Record of Survey Number 2880, Recorded as Instrument Number 94050954, Records of Ada County, Situate in a Portion of Government Lot 3, Section 4,Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment"A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 14.87 Acres of Land From RUT to R-15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date FPg,151 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2020-138119 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 10/15/2020 11:50 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1899 BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, BY THE CITY COUNCIL: HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE (H-2020-0035 — POIEMA SUBDIVISION) FOR ANNEXATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY NUMBER 2880, RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NUMBER 94050954, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, SITUATE IN A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO,AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 14.87 ACRES OF LAND FROM RUT TO R-15 (MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR,THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER,ANDTHE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR ANDTHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OFIDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A"are within the corporate limits ofthe City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request foannexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley, Inc.. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-zoned from RUT to R-15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half(1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council,the rule requiring two(2)separate readings by title and one(1)reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 13th day of October , 2020. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,this 13th day of October , 2020. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 13thday of October ,2020,before me,the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared ROBERT E.SIMISON and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,respectively,of the Cityof Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: Meridian, Idaho MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Item#8. Exhibit A A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map _ �a ANNEXATION H 1..; r Page I.OF] .AND GROUT" February 19,2020 Project No..,119622 ANNEXATION CALVARY CHAPELTREASURE VALLEY INC. A parcel of land as shown on Record of Survey Number 2880,recorded as Instrument Number 94050954,records of Ada County,situate in a portion of Government Lot 3,Section 4, Township 2 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING atthe North Quarter Corner of said Section 4(from which the Northwest Corner of said Section 4 bears South 89`55'28"West,2651.66feet distant); Thence on the north/south midsection lisle of said Section 4,5outb 00"37'05"West;1356.13 feet; Thence leaving said north/south midsection lime and wi the soulhurlyand westerly boundary of said parcel shown on Record of Survey Number 2880,South 89"59'56"West,21Ab feet; Thence North 28"52'16"West,82.77 feet; Thence North 34"04'12"West,1543,37 feet to a point on the north section line of said Section 4; Thence on said north Section line North 89"56'28"East,943.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING The above described parcel contains 14.87 acres,more or less. PREPARED BY,, The land Group,.Inc. '01,LA P drr F OF-to l:lf/99�Zt12tF Page 155 ttem#s. EXHIBIT B F EAST UKE HAZEL ROAD N"1 14M, SECTION T.2N R/W IW N89'56'28°E 943,00' IW —POR F{W 569,5fl'28'Vt' NVI OWNER 1745.f6' CALVARY CHAPEL TREASURE VALLEY INC. SECTION A 4 3727 E.LAKE HAZEL RO, 1.2N.,R.1 E.,R.fA_ AM'S1+10421.2485 M ANNEXATION AREA AREA:±14.87Actes. 0 a aa, r.�tiglztrac� N28°52'1 W 82,)56T,' 21,DD'4 N89'59' E 't. Exhibit"B„ O 250' 5AE1 u �SL7 W l:saanec:Fo�uar{19,2tl2a "MTHE calvary Chapel Treasure Valley Inc. Elf T .AND Annexation mmi-MGROUP Page 156 CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY : William L. M . Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public . oca/* J400 William L . M . Nary, City Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO, 204899 An Ordinance (H-2020-0035 — Poiema Subdivision) For Annexation of A Parcel of land as shown on Record of Survey Number 2880, Recorded As Instrument Number 94050954, Records Of Ada County, Situate In A Portion of Government Lot 3 , Section 4, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho as defined in the map published herewith; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification from RUT to R- 15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .] ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — Poiema Subdivision (H 2O20A035) Page 3 of 3 Page154 7/tem 77 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 20-1900: An Ordinance (H-2020-0032 - Brody Square) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Situated Within the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment"A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 15.00 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor,the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Page 157 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2020-138111 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 10/15/2020 11:46 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1900 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE (H-2020-0032 — BRODY SQUARE) FOR ANNEXATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE I WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY,IDAHO,AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A"AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 15.00 ACRES OF LAND FROM RUT TO R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" are within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request forannexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Pinnacle Land Development, LLC. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-zoned from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning Districts in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed,rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half(1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council,the rule requiring two(2)separate readings by title and one(1)reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 13th day of October , 2020. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,this 13th day of October , 2020. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO, ) County of Ada ss: ) On this 13th day of October 2020,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared ROBERT E.SIMISON and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,respectively,of the Cityof Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: Meridian, Idaho MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 3-28-2022 Item#9. Exhibit A Legal Degeription Desv'pl'on for Brody Squarer Subdivision-Artnexa lon Marc!?13, 2020 A parcel:of land situated within the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian,Ado County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Gommencing at the Section corner common to Sections 27, 28, 33, and 34,TAN, RAW.8,M. from which the 1/4 oornec common to said Seo,Vons 27.and 28 wars North 00'31`09"East, 2637.37 feet;thence on the West boundary'line of said Section 27, North 00"31`09"oast, 329.49 feet to the REAL POINT OF ISEGINNING; thence continuing on said West boundary iiho, North 0093110T East; 989AS feet to the South 1116 corner common to said Section 27 and 28; thence on the north.boundary line of the,Southwot 114 of the Soutbwest 114 of said Section 27,South 89"l741"East, 660.80 feet to the Novh west corner of Lot 2, Mock 2, Black Cat Estates No;2,as filed in Book 32 of Plats at Pages 1945 and,1946, records of Ada County, Cdaho thence South W3VOW West,989.12 feet to the Sat:theast corner of said Lot 1, Black Cat Estates No. t, as filed in look 29 of Plats at Pages 1798 and 1799, records of Ada County, Woho thence North 89'17'52"West, 660.80 feetto the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 15.00 acres, more or 6ess. End of Descdption, C� X r Page of I Brody Square H-2020-0032 Page 161 Item#s. Exhibit B 1/4 , Naa sec UYPUTTED 1 1 1 � I N 1 I BLA CA CAI' In ;{7 SG>BlIVISIQA dl- r 1 � N 01 RUCK CAT s 11779 79 . Atvc+ 1DAHO EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR � rppVEY .��, BROD ' SQUARE SUBDIVISION—SURVEY L..k oarc,�rarsxr�zaa GROUP. i,LC :MOOO A AF W rfi C.—ME s#1 V4{S WTIZU 37. Brody Square H-2020-0032 Page 162 CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY : William L.M . Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public . William . Nary, C ity Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO, 204900 An Ordinance (11-2020-0032 — Brody Square) For Annexation of a parcel of land situated within the Southwest 1/a of the Southwest 1/a of Section 27, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho as defined in the map published herewith; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 15 . 00 acres from RUT to R- 8 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .] I ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — Brody Square ( H 2O20-0032) Page 3 of 3 Page160 Item#10. (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 20-1901: An Ordinance (H-2019-0106 - Shelburne South) for Annexation of a Parcel of Land Being Located in the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 28 Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, as Described in Attachment"A" and Annexing Certain Lands and Territory, Situated in Ada County, Idaho, and Adjacent and Contiguous to the Corporate Limits of the City of Meridian as Requested by the City of Meridian; Establish-ing and Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of 29.01 Acres of Land From RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code; Providing that Copies if this Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County Assessor,the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an Effective Date Page 163 ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2020-138123 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 10/15/2020 11:53 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-1901 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE (H-2019-0106— SHELBURNE SOUTH) FOR ANNEXATION OF A PARCEL OF LAND BEING LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 28 TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,RANGE 1 EAST,BOISE MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO,AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 29.01ACRES OF LAND FROM RUT TO R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" are within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request forannexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Shelburne Properties, LLC, Kenneth A. Williams, and Gordon Jay Skinner SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-zoned from RUT to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed,rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half(1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council,the rule requiring two(2)separate readings by title and one(1)reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 13th day of October 2020. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,this 13th day of October , 2020. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 13th day of October ,2019,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared ROBERT E.SIMISON and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,respectively,of the City of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: Meridian, Idaho MY COMMISSION EXPIRES3-28-2022 Item#10. EXHIBIT A Annexation &Zoning Legal Description , Lena!Description for Annexation Shelburne South Subdivision A parcel of land being located in the SW'/of the SE Y of Section 28,Township 3 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a Brass Cap monument marking the southwest corner of the SE%of said Section 28, from which an Aluminum Cap monument marking the southeast corner of said SE `f< bears S 8V14'43"E a distance of 2660,54 feet; Thence S 89'14'43'E along the southerly boundary of said SE'/e a distance of 238.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence N 0°31'20"E a distance of 965.92 feet to a point; Thence S 89°19'33"E a distance of 398.08 feet to a point; Thence N 0*31'18"E a distance of 358.85 feet to a point on the north boundary of the SE%of said Section 28;„ Thence S 89919'52"E along said north boundary a distance of 693.19 feet to the northeast corner of the SW'!of the SE Y.of said Section 28; Thence S 0°28'36"W along the east boundary of said SW'/of the SE%a distance of 1326.37 feet to the southeast corner of the SW%of the SE%of said Section 28; Thence along the south boundary of said SW'/a of the SE%N 89014143"W a distance of 706.23 feet to a point; Thence leaving said south boundary N 0031'18"E a distance of 220.00 feet to a point; Thence N 89'14`43'W a distance of 186,00 feet to a point; Thence S 0*31'17"W a distance of 220.00 feet to a point on the south boundary of the SW-/4 of the SE'/of said Section 28; Thence along said south boundary N 89014'43"W a distance of G LAN,) 200.09 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. �`o A S T This parcel contains 29.01 acres. 4 8 P 11118 Clinton W.Hansen, Pt_S �t'1�� �Q �- Land Solutions,PC � T OF 0 August 14,2019 r0 W NQ r "~ SWbump South Subdivision Annexation L,-j':n l bI Ll 1 orl Job No.ims ��r^ssnes.n.yi.ymWC, 3 u' Pagel of Shelburne South AZ 2019-0106 Page 167 Item#10. EXHIBIT B SHELBURNE SOUTH SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 QE THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 28,T.3N., R.1 E., B.M. MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO r C5 t/f6 MTING,My WITS MtirfARY W91 2"E G9319' � SE 00, sev99'S2'¢ �sc.I.' �ri9'�•K t/ts POWT OF 3Si9,27' E � � 1 S89'f9'33'E 39&US' t I t� 1 1 I fl8"J't443'Y!iSB.Ofi` I nP N BEWNIW N09't4`43'W 114 26 238Eh11' 33 M'seWE zst t, 1' E AMITY RD, �t I0 as s4 0AUS OF MUG L LA kb or W. —; . 1 0 125 250 500 Land Surveying and Consulting 231 E.5TH ST,STE,A MERIOMN,10 B34-t2 1200r 2M2040 12051280.2557 rut WwWand:ntuWtss.Wx lee a 19-W Shelburne South AZ 2019-0106 Page 168 CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY : William L. M . Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public . JAIE 147 William L . M . Nary, City Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO 20 - 1901 An ordinance (H-2019-0106 Shelburne South) for annexation of a parcel of land as defined in the map published herewith; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification from RUT zoning district to R- 8 (medium density residential) zoning district; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .] i ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — Shelburne South (H 2O194106) Page 3 of 3 Page 166 i C � wE N DIAN --- IDAHO Future Meeting Topics Meeting Notes: