Loading...
2020-11-19 WE IDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Chairperson Ryan Fitzgerald Commissioner Lisa Holland Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel (arrived at 6:20 p.m.) Commissioner Nick Grove Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Steven Yearsley ABSENT Commissioner Bill Cassinelli ADOPTION OF AGENDA-Adopted CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] -Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the November 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing Continued from October 15, 2020 for Skybreak (H-2020-0079) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, Located at 3487 E.Adler Hoff Ln. Applicant Has Requested Withdrawal A. Request: Annexation of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 353 building lots, 40 common lots and 14 other lots (i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot and 1 lot for the existing home) on 79.69 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. -Application Withdrawal Request Approved 3. Public Hearing for 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) by KM Engineering, Located at 2810 E. Franklin Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. - Recommended Approval to City Council 4. Public Hearing for Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) by The Land Group, Inc., Located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total build- out on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1, Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district. - Continued to December 17, 2020 S. Public Hearing for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision (H-2020-0104) by Wadsworth Development, Located at 3085 E. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of five (5) commercial building lots in the C-G zoning district for ownership purposes. - Recommended Approval to City Council ADJOURNMENT - 6:54 p.m. Item 1. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting November 19, 2020. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of November 19, 2020, was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by Chairman Ryan Fitzgerald. Members Present: Chairman Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Nick Grove and Commissioner Steven Yearsley. Members Absent: Commissioner Bill Cassinelli. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE _X Lisa Holland X Rhonda McCarvel (6:20 pm) X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley Bill Cassinelli X Ryan Fitzgerald - Chairman Fitzgerald: So, at this time I would call -- I would call the -- call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting for the date of November 19th and let's start with roll call. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Fitzgerald: Thanks, Madam Clerk. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We do have a couple of items just -- I want to let everybody know what we are working on. We have -- the first on the agenda is the application for Skybreak, H-2020- 0079. We will open that application up just to approve a request to withdraw that application. In addition, Poiema -- Poiema Cavalry -- Calvary -- I can't talk tonight -- Chapel has been requested to continue until December 3rd and we will have Tamara Thompson, the applicant's representative, to give an explanation there and Joe can give us some information. But those are the only two changes I have or updates. So, with that can I get a motion to accept the agenda as presented? Seal: So moved. Holland: So moved. Seal: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to accept the -- adopt the agenda as presented. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 5 Page 2 of 20 All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the November 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Fitzgerald: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda, which is -- the only item on there is the approval of minutes for the November 5th, 2020, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting. Any comments on the Consent Agenda or anything we need to deal with? If not, I will entertain a motion. Holland: Mr. Chair, I would move that we approve the Consent Agenda. Yearsley: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Fitzgerald: So, at this time I will explain the hearing process. We appreciate the patience of our Meridian citizens as we deal with kind of ramifications of COVID and the pandemic. So, we have both folks in person -- Commissioner Seal, we really appreciate you being there in person. I think our staff is all remote and can be in chambers if they need to be, but we have everybody kind of socially distanced online. We appreciate everybody continuing to do the work of the city while we are dealing with rising cases of COVID. So, as we start this process the staff will report their findings for each application regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and the Uniform Development Code with the staff's recommendations on the application. After the staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case for the approval of the application and respond to staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to make their presentation and, then, after the applicant is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Hopefully -- I don't -- do we have anybody in person, Commissioner Seal, or is it just you? Seal: There is nobody in chambers. Fitzgerald: Okay. So, if there is folks online on Zoom we will ask you to raise your hand for the application you would like to comment on and the clerk will transfer you over to be a panelist and we will let you provide your testimony. Each individual will have an opportunity for three minutes to give your testimony. We will not take additional testimony Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 6 Page 3 of 20 after you have given your three minute presentation. So, please, make sure you get your points across. If we have heard issues that have already been brought up, please, focus on new issues or things that the Commission hasn't heard. After we have taken all testimony the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come up and close and, hopefully, answer any questions that the public has presented during the evening conversation and after that we will close the public hearing and the Commission will have an opportunity to deliberate on the application and, hopefully, make a recommendation to City Council. ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing Continued from October 15, 2020 for Skybreak (H-2020-0079) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, Located at 3487 E. Adler Hoff Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 353 building lots, 40 common lots and 14 other lots (i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot and 1 lot for the existing home) on 79.69 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Fitzgerald: So, with that we will move on to the first item on our agenda, which is the public hearing for Skybreak Subdivision, H-2020-0079, and can I get a motion to allow this applicant to redraw that application? Yearsley: Mr. Chair, I move that we accept the application to withdraw. Holland: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to allow the applicant to withdraw Skybreak Subdivision, H-2020-0079. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) by KM Engineering, Located at 2810 E. Franklin Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. Fitzgerald: Next item on the agenda is the public hearing for 2010 East Franklin Road, the file number H-2020-0097, and I will turn it over to Sonya for the staff report. And, Sonya, if you are talking we cannot hear you, because you are on mute. I see you coming off mute, Sonya, are you -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 7 Page 4 of 20 Allen: Oh, there we go. Thank you, Adrienne. A bit of a learning curve. It has a different display tonight and it's not very intuitive. Any who. The application before you next is a request for annexation and zoning. This site consists of 1.01 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 2810 East Franklin Road. Fitzgerald: Sonya, can you hold on one second. We don't see your slides if we are working on that. Can we get those up on Zoom for us or is that possible from -- Allen: Yes. Just a moment. I'm sorry. I'm seeing a different screen on my side and it looked like it was up. Just a moment. Fitzgerald: Thank you, ma'am. Allen: How about that? Can you see that? Fitzgerald: Yep. Allen: Okay. Fitzgerald: Thank you so much. Allen: All right. We are rolling. Sorry about that. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the west is a multi-tenant commercial building, zoned M1 in Ada county. To the north is industrial property vacant and a landscape supply business, zoned I-L. To the east is a residential home, zoned C-G, to be redeveloped in the future with commercial use. And south is Franklin Road and across Franklin is a residential home, zoned R1 and Jump Time, an indoor entertainment center, zoned C-C. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is commercial. The applicant proposes to annex the 1 .01 acres of land with the C-G zoning district consistent with the associated future land use designation of commercial. A conceptual development plan is proposed as shown that depicts the existing residential home on the property that the applicant proposes to remodel and expand for a flex space use. The concept plan depicts 2,239 square feet of office on the first floor and 1 ,550 square feet of office and support uses in the basement of the existing structure and a new 2,600 square foot structure for a warehouse. The new structure is proposed to the north behind the existing building and will include a daylight basement. The user will be an automotive tool and equipment supplier classified as a flex space use. The business proposes to sell products online to automotive businesses and to home mechanics and will not conduct any retail sales on the site. Flex space is a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-18. The proposed use and site design complies with these standards. The topography of the site slopes down significantly from Franklin Road to the north property boundary and has approximately a 20 foot grade difference as shown on the grading plan on the right. A retaining wall is proposed at the north and west boundaries of the area proposed to be improved with this project. A 35 foot wide street buffer is required with development along Franklin Road, an entryway corridor. Landscape per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. The existing driveway Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 $ Page 5 of 20 access via Franklin Road is proposed to remain for access to the site and has been approved by ACHD. Because it closely aligns with the driveway on the south side of Franklin Road, relocation of the driveway is not recommended. The UDC requires cross- access ingress-egress easements to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street is not available, unless otherwise waived by City Council. In accord with this standard, staff is recommending cross-access easements are provided and driveways are constructed to the properties to the east and west. A 20 foot wide cross- access easement is depicted on the concept plan to the east and west, but the applicant is requesting Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to not provide cross-access easements due to the topography of the site and site constraints related to the space available for development. At a minimum staff is recommending that Council require cross-access to the west. Would like to note, though, however, staff did contact Ada county to see if a cross-access easement was provided to the subject property with redevelopment of the adjacent property to the west in 2002, but it was not. So, if a cross- access is granted on this property, it will not be able to connect until the properties to the east and west, if required, grant reciprocal cross-access. So, just a note on that. A minimum of 12 vehicle spaces, based on 6,389 square feet of gross floor area, and one bicycle space is required. A total of 13 spaces are depicted on the concept plan, including an ADA space, which is one more than required. However, if cross-access easement driveways are promoted -- are provided to adjacent properties as required, parking will be reduced by up to three spaces, which will result in parking below the minimum required standard. If a waiver is not approved by Council to the requirement for cross-access, the applicant may apply for alternative compliance or construct a smaller addition to reduce the parking requirement. Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with UDC standards, which requires a minimum five foot wide perimeter landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading, or other paved vehicular use areas, landscaped per the standards in the UDC. A retaining wall and fence is proposed along the west boundary adjacent to the parallel parking spaces where the buffer is required, which doesn't leave adequate area for landscaping. If the site cannot be reconfigured to comply with this standard, alternative compliance may be requested with the certificate of zoning compliance application. The Snyder Lateral exists in a 40 foot wide easement on the northern property -- portion of the property that is not proposed to be improved. All irrigation lateral -- laterals are required to be piped unless improved as a water amenity or linear open space. The City Council may waive this requirement if it finds a public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. The applicant proposes to fence off the area where the lateral is located to preserve public safety and request a Council waiver to this requirement to allow the lateral to remain open. Because a large portion of the site on the north end is not proposed to be improved, staff is recommending weeds are regularly maintained in this area, so as not to create a nuisance and in a manner that prevents wildfire in accord with Meridian City Code 4-2. Conceptual building elevations with materials were submitted for the remodel of the existing structure and proposed addition as shown. The materials for the front facade and sides of the existing building consistent of stucco with pre-faced metal siding and stone veneer accents. The materials for the proposed warehouse addition consist of a mix of horizontal and vertical metal siding. All improvements to the existing structure and new construction are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission 191 Item 1. November 19,2020 Page 6 of 20 architectural standards manual. Written testimony was received from Stephanie Leonard, KM Engineering, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report, except for condition A-1-13, which requires cross-access easements to be granted and driveways constructed for cross-access with the abutting properties to the east and west. The applicant requests Council approval of a waiver of this provision, as previously mentioned, to not require cross-access to adjacent properties due to existing site constraints. The amount of grade, combined with elimination of parking stalls, would make construction of cross-access driveways infeasible. Staff is recommending approval of the annexation with a development agreement with the provisions noted in the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Sonya. Are there any questions for staff at this time? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Sonya, the -- on the frontage, are they going to be required to remove that white fence that's on the frontage there and do -- they are going to have to do landscaping on the frontage as well; is that correct? Allen: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Holland, yes, they will be required to provide a new 35 foot wide landscape buffer and fences cannot be within that buffer, they would have to be at the back edge of the buffer. Holland: Okay. Thank you. Allen: Yes. Fitzgerald: Additional questions for Sonya? Hearing none at this time -- I know Stephanie is with us. Hopefully you can transfer her over. Weatherly: Stephanie, one moment. Allen: Stephanie, I have stopped sharing my screen, so you should be able to go in and share yours now. Fitzgerald: Stephanie, welcome. Thanks forjoining us this evening. I think -- Sonya said she stopped sharing her -- sharing her screen, so if you would like to take over and -- Leonard: Okay. Fitzgerald: -- put up your slides you are welcome to do so, ma'am. Leonard: Perfect. Thank you. Just a second. Okay. It should be showing up shortly. Hopefully. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 Flo] Page 7 of 20 Fitzgerald: Yep. Leonard: Okay. Good evening. Thank you very much. Good evening, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Thanks for allowing me to join you virtually tonight. My name is Stephanie Leonard with KM Engineering. 9233 West State, Boise. 83714. Sonya did a great job summarizing our request. I will try to keep my presentation pithy, so we can keep to discussing it. We are requesting to annex into the city for a flex space building to accommodate an online sales of automotive tools and equipment and we are requesting -- let me see if I can get it -- sorry, my screen isn't working. We are requesting the C-G zoning district. So, we are requesting to zone from RUT to C-G, which as you can see with this map is consistent with property to the east. We have also got light industry to the north and, then, community business district -- district down to the south. The future land use map, as Sonya said, is commercial for this area as well. So, we are consistent with that. There are some residential properties to the west, but a nice buffer of commercial and industrial directly to our west. This is our conceptual site plan. It's changed a bit since the one that we submitted with our application. We chatted with staff and made some changes, specifically added the 35 foot land -- landscape buffer that Sonya mentioned and, then, moved the ADA space out of that buffer. Otherwise, everything has remained the same. We are planning to renovate the existing building on the property and use that as office and support space. So, that's this front part of the building, the existing home, and, then, proposing to add a building addition that will include a daylight basement and will be used for warehouse space and that's approximately 2,600 square feet. We are providing the required number of parking spaces with the site plan and have specifically tried to work around this existing building and configured our drive aisle the best we can and parking the best we can, given the current configuration of the building on the site and, then, the site concerns that Sonya has mentioned with the grade and some of just the interesting site characteristics here. So, the driveway that we are proposing to Franklin is an existing driveway that's there. It does align fairly well with Jump Time to the south. ACHD and the city both agree that that's a good location, since it aligns there. These are our building elevations. The west and north -- so, this will be facing the industrial property to the north. We are proposing a roll up door for the deliveries that occur occasionally and, then, the northern -- I'm sorry. The south elevation will be more ornate for the -- for facing Franklin Road and, then, also the east elevation -- you can see here, too, with the daylight basement we are accommodating some of the grades. You can kind of see how much that changes throughout the site. We are proposing a mix of materials and finishes. We are going to have varying siding materials, stone veneer product on the front, and, then, stucco as well. All of that will be kind of further detailed in our certificate of zoning compliance and design review application should this annexation application be approved. As Sonya mentioned, we are requesting -- or going to be requesting a couple of waivers from Council to deal with the cross-access ingress-egress easements and construction of those driveways to the east and west. As she mentioned, there is a fair amount of grade on this site and building those would actually be a little bit awkward, just because the site's out of a grade that would be about five -- I believe it's five feet lower than what ours would be. So, it would almost be like a driveway leading to a -- much higher than the site to our west. To the east I believe staff is in agreement with us, we don't think that adding a cross-access driveway there would Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 Fil Page 8 of 20 make sense, just because it would get rid of some of our parking and there is also the additional grade and retaining walls that we have planned on the west and east. So, let's see. The second waiver that we are requesting that she mentioned is to leave the Snyder Lateral open. It's actually -- so, the retaining wall I just mentioned is going to go kind of along our property boundary on the west here and, then, across and, then, it does -- kind of curves that way. The Snyder Lateral is a fair distance away from that retaining wall and fence. We think that that will provide some security for folks that may be entering the building and we will kind of keep that lateral safe -- and folks safe from it and we also think it will be a nice amenity to be left open. In addition, it looks like there is quite a bit of vegetation out there and leaving that kind of in its natural state is something that the property owner would prefer to do. So, that's another waiver that we will be discussing with City Council. So, overall we think that this project is really going to be an improvement for this area. It's -- as you can see from the elevations it's going to be a nice building. It's going to be an improvement from what's already there and will add existing commercial opportunities to the area in line with the future land use map and just consistent with the rest of the zoning in the area and we think that this is in the best interest for the City of Meridian. So, with that -- I think that our -- one of our design members is on the phone, too, if you have got any questions for him, but I'm happy to stand for questions as well. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Stephanie. We appreciate it. Are there any questions for the applicant at this time? Seal: Mr. Chair? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Looking at how much -- you have got about -- a little over 35 -- well, over 3,500 square feet of office space. I'm a little bit concerned about the parking ratio and I know it meets code standards, but is there -- I mean I don't know if you have another option of where to add more parking in there, but do they have a significant number of people that are planning to work in those offices? Leonard: No. Thank you, Commissioner. Sorry, Mr. Chair, Commissioner Holland. No, they actually -- I don't actually know how many employees they are planning on having, but they won't have a retail component or any customers that will be -- or coming to the office, so it's really going to be just the folks that work there that are preparing things to be shipped out, essentially. So, they use FedEx and UPS and they occasionally have larger trucks that will come to deliver things. From my understanding that's a couple times a year. But, otherwise, they are not going to have a lot of folks coming and going, it's just going to be -- my guess is probably four or five employees. I don't know for sure how many they have got. But I think that the parking should be adequate. That was my understanding from the owner. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F12 Page 9 of 20 Holland: Okay. Thanks, Stephanie. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: With alternative -- I mean if you are not granted a waiver on the cross-access easement request, what is your alternative compliance concept? Do you have one? Leonard: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I -- you know, I think if we were required to construct the cross-access it's probably something that we could figure out. I don't know that we have got an alternative figured out for that specifically. I don't know that it's an -- I don't know that we would be able to approve it with an alternate compliance request. I think that it's something that we would be required to get a waiver from for Council. We are -- we are amenable to providing the cross-access easement. As we put on our site plan it's the construction that we are kind of having a hard time with specifically. So, I don't know, maybe -- I could speak with our client and see if there is something that they would be able to propose in lieu of that, but I think it's just, really, the grade and kind of the site constraints that are making it difficult to construct it. Fitzgerald: Understood. Thank you for the clarification. Leonard: Uh-huh. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Yeah. Just a question on the fence. On the -- essentially the north eastern side of the property there, is -- Leonard: Uh-huh. Seal: -- is that fence going to continue all the way down to the building that's being built or does it just incorporate the west side and the north side? Leonard: The -- I have, actually, an exhibit that I meant to include here, but the retaining wall and fence -- so, this is the fence line with the X's and just this --the dashes and, then, the retaining wall is this larger kind of thick line. So, the fence line will continue to the building. I'm sorry. The edge of the parking lot and will stop at the building and, then, the retaining wall will kind of continue almost to the -- to the east side. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Leonard: Thank you. Holland: Mr. Chair, one more follow up question. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, ma'am. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F13 Page 10 of 20 Holland: In the parking area there is kind of a patch that's labeled number three. Is that -- can you just explain to me what that is, just so I'm understanding what I'm looking at. Leonard: Sure. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Holland. I believe that's a drainage swale. can -- unfortunately, when sharing my screen I can't look at all my things in detail, but -- yeah, that's a -- like a sewer drainage kind of. Well, actually, storm drainage. I'm sorry. Holland: Okay. Thank you. Leonard: Yeah. It's just -- Fitzgerald: Any additional questions for Stephanie? Well, Stephanie, we will let -- we will have public testimony and if there are questions or comments we will have you come and close either way, but we really appreciate the information. Leonard: Of course. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk, are -- do we have anyone in the public who would like to testify on this application? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we have no one in house, but I also see that Tamara Thompson signed up online and indicated a wish to testify. Tamara, I'm just going to allow you to talk if you wanted to say anything. You should have the ability to unmute yourself. Thompson: Hi. Tamara Thompson. That was a mistake. I meant to do the next two. Apologies. Fitzgerald: Well, we appreciate you being here, Tamara. Is there anyone who would like to testify on this application? Please put your hand up, raise your hand via the Zoom platform, and the clerk will make sure you are transferred over to the -- as a panelist, so we can hear you. Leaving that pregnant pause for a moment. Not seeing anyone, are there any questions for staff? If not, I will bring Tamara up --or, sorry, Tamara. Stephanie up to close and see if there is any final comments she wants to make. Stephanie, do you want to say any additional words for us to close? Leonard: Mr. Chair, I don't have a whole lot to add. I will I guess just reiterate that we are in agreement with the staff's conditions in their report and just would like to thank them for their discussion with Council about those waivers that we are requesting. So, thank you. If you have any questions I'm happy to answer. Fitzgerald: Well, we appreciate you being here tonight. Any additional questions for Stephanie or for staff? If not, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Seal: Mr. Chair? Holland: Mr. Chair, I move we close the public hearing -- or close the evidence and move Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F14 Page 11 of 20 to deliberation for 2810 East Franklin Road, H-2020-0097. Seal: Second. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a second to close the public hearing on H-2020-0097. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk. Weatherly: Pardon me for the interruption. I just wanted to note for the record Commissioner McCarvel joined us at 6:20 p.m. Fitzgerald: Glad they turned the lights over on Victory for you, madam. McCarvel: Yeah. It shut down my internet right as I was logging on and, then, it just frazzled everything for a few minutes. Fitzgerald: Well, we are happy to have you. With that would anyone like to start us off? This one seems pretty straightforward to me. I understand there may be a parking question, but the use seems pretty -- not people or car heavy, so I think it's up to Council whether they are going to require an alternative compliance. So, I don't understand why their requests aren't made to have those cross-accesses put in when -- when the -- at least the property to the west was redeveloped. It's baffling to me. But that's -- and it's challenging. But anyone want to start off comments? Yearsley: Mr. Chair, this is Steven Yearsley. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Yearsley, go right ahead, sir. Yearsley: I -- you know, when you -- you have a good staff report and the applicant agrees with the staff report, it sure makes it a lot easier to comment on. I think it's a good project. I think it kind of fits the area. A good transition spot for the -- the site -- or the -- I can't even think of it now. The -- the building frontages look really good. I think it looks nice and so I would be in favor of it. Fitzgerald: Spoken like a true former chairman. I like it. Commissioner Holland, you came off mute, so you get to go next. Holland: Oh, great. Mr. Chair, I -- I don't see any big concerns with it either. My only preference would be that -- I wish sometimes that projects like this could have -- both this Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F15] Page 12 of 20 property and the one to the east of them developing at the same time, so we didn't have multiple of these kind of projects next to each other, but I think it's -- it's nice that they are going to plan to upgrade the frontage, make it look a little bit nicer on the facade. It won't look like a residential house anymore and certainly an improvement to what's there right now. So, I don't see any big concerns and appreciate the applicant's explanation of -- looking at 3,700 square feet of office space, that can house quite a few people, so that would be my only concern in the future if it ever changed uses, if you had somebody that came in that had a lot more parking needs, but for what use they are proposing I'm not too worried about it. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal or Commissioner Grove, any thoughts? Grove: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Go ahead, Commissioner Grove. Grove: I don't have anything substantial to add. It looks good. It looks like it will fit with what's there, so -- Fitzgerald: Thanks, sir. Seal: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: The only -- only thing that I would -- in looking at it -- and Commissioner Holland kind of touched on it -- was that it looks like the little drainage that they have in the middle of what is the parking lot there, it seems like maybe that could move -- or be built where the -- you know, where they have difficulties with the grade and kind of get that out of that area, so they could have more parking spots. That could also be something that they could consider I think for, you know, that cross-easement possibly. I don't know. To make that a reality. But it just seems like that was kind of put in there where it could be put somewhere else on the site and, again, I'm not an engineer, so I don't know if that's feasible or not, but it seems like there is a -- some space over there they could -- they could definitely take advantage of to do a couple of different things. As far as the application itself, I think it's going to be a good fit for that -- that part of the city and -- I mean where they are going to have, you know, different shipments coming in and out, you know, it's a good place for that as well. So, the -- the traffic -- or, sorry, the streets are already improved and signalized and close access to the freeway, so it's a good fit. Fitzgerald: Thank you, Commissioner Seal. Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I'm -- I agree with Commissioner Yearsley before, when you have got a well written staff report and when the applicant agrees, it's pretty easy. I guess there is, you know, always some -- a few things that could be tweaked, but I'm in general in favor of the project. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F16 Page 13 of 20 Fitzgerald: Somebody want to take a swing? Seal: Mr. Chair. Fitzgerald: Commissioner Seal. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of the City Council of file number H-2020-0097 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 19th, 2020. Grove: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to recommend approval of file number H-2020- 0097, 2810 East Franklin Road. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing for Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) by The Land Group, Inc., Located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total buildout on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1, Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district. Fitzgerald: Stephanie, thanks for being here tonight. Good luck and we will see you soon. So, moving on to the next item on our agenda is Poiema Calvary-- Calvary Chapel and, Joe, I think we were moving to continue this one, so you want to give us a heads up and, then, we can let Tamara come in and give us her thoughts as well. Dodson: Yes, sir, Mr. Chair. Can everybody hear me okay? Fitzgerald: Yes. Dodson: I'm not Darth Vader still? Okay. Yeah. I wish we could hear this tonight. Unfortunately, there was a condition in the staff report that is going to require a little further review by both me and the applicant to clarify and, then, make sure that the -- the notice that went out regarding the project includes something about this. So, at this point the applicant is requesting to continue it. I'm not sure of the date. I would love for it to be on the next hearing on the 17th -- or in a month I should say, but I do show that we already have six on that and a few of them are quite large. I do think that this would be a straightforward hearing, in my professional opinion, for this project, but we will -- I would leave that up to you guys and the clerk to tell us a little bit more. I don't know if-- of those six of how many of those were actually scheduled or if they are just a placeholder. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F17 Page 14 of 20 Fitzgerald: So, Joe, can we do it on the -- on the next application, which is actually the -- not the 17th. It's the 3rd. Dodson: Madam Clerk -- Fitzgerald: We have got three -- we have got three hearings on the 3rd and five for the 17th. Does time allow Tamara -- and maybe we can let her talk here in a second, but would the 3rd allow enough notification and all the logistics to be taken care of that you are aware of if we wanted to do it on -- on December 3rd? Joe? Dodson: Oh, sorry, sir. I think on my end, yes, I would say, Mr. Chair, but I'm not sure if there is a legal aspect to that with noticing and anything like that. I don't know if that two weeks is enough time. Fitzgerald: Okay. Dodson: I would default to Bill, which has institutional knowledge, and -- or Madam Clerk tonight. Fitzgerald: Mr. Parsons or Madam Clerk, do you want to chime in there and, then, I can let Ms. Thompson give us her thoughts as well. Parsons: Yeah. Mr. Chair, I would like to also get maybe a legal opinion, too. If we are going to have to renotice this, so that we could amend the application to include the request for conditional use for the outdoor speakers, then, certainly the 3rd is not going to work. Fitzgerald: Okay. Parsons: It's going to have to be 30 days in order to meet the posting requirements and the notification requirements under the -- under the city code. So, we are looking at the 17th is probably the -- the optimal date and I think we have missed that window, if I'm -- unless the clerk can do special noticing, but I will leave that up to Adrienne if she wants to -- if she wants to chime in on that portion of it. Fitzgerald: Now I need Andrea or Adrienne to give me direction. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, this is Adrienne. I can make an -- I can make an effort to notice for December 17th, just as long as everybody's aware that as far as I understand this would be number six. I see five that are on for noticing already. So, this would be number six. But I definitely can accommodate noticing. I cannot accommodate if it needs to be renoticed for December 3rd. That date has already past. Fitzgerald: Okay. Okay. Andrea, do you concur with our -- making sure we are staying above board on the legal side? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F18 Page 15 of 20 Pogue: Can you hear me, Ryan? Fitzgerald: Yes. Pogue: Mr. Chair? Yeah, I think we should go with the 17th. Fitzgerald: Okay. Okay. Dodson: Mr. Chair, I'm fine with that. I have two other projects, so why not make it a triple header there. Fitzgerald: Vice-Chair Holland, I think I'm getting a cold. Holland: Yeah. Me, too. Fitzgerald: Tamara, can you chime in here? I want to make sure you are comfortable where we are headed. So, you come off mute and give us your thoughts, ma'am. Thompson: Absolutely. Tamara Thompson with The land Group. I am representing the property owner and we are disappointed that we can't go forward tonight, but we understand and procedurally we want to make sure that everything is right. So, since we have to be continued that December 17th date would be -- Fitzgerald: Okay. Well, we --we apologize for the circumstances and we appreciate your patience and hopefully that will work. Anything else we need to be aware of? You guys are all squared away, other than that; correct? Thompson: That is correct on my side. Weatherly: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Madam Clerk. Weatherly: One more point of clarification. If we do have to -- if we are required to renotice there will be a renoticing fee. In the motion will you, please, specify if the renoticing fee is going to be waived or required to be paid by the applicant. Fitzgerald: Yeah. This is something we should talk about. Yeah. Thank you for the clarification. We will definitely touch on that. Joe, this was something that came out of -- out of our staff report and not -- it was not in a pre-app or -- how do you want us to take that on? Because I -- Dodson: Yes, sir. Mr. Chair, yeah -- yeah, in most cases, yeah, I think, you know, it's usually some kind of noticing mistake by the applicant. In this case I will take blame for this in not allowing this -- or I should say for allowing this to get to this point and not having checked with my boss. So, if it's okay with the Commission, I would say to waive the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F19 Page 16 of 20 renoticing fee for them this time. Fitzgerald: Okay. Commissioners, is there any additional questions you need answered or -- from the applicant or from staff? Hearing none, I -- Commissioner Holland. Holland: I was just going to make a motion. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, ma'am. Holland: December 17th, is that the date we are looking at? Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am. Holland: Mr. Chair, I move that we continue the public hearing for Poiema Calvary Chapel, H-2020-0095, to the hearing date of December 17th to allow for proper noticing and that the city would waive that fee for them on the renoticing. Seal: Second. Grove: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to continue file number H-2020-0095, Poiema Calvary Chapel, to the hearing date of 12 -- of December 17th. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Thank you all very much and, Tamara, we appreciate your patience and give our best to your -- your client. Thompson: I will. Thank you. 5. Public Hearing for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision (H-2020-0104) by Wadsworth Development, Located at 3085 E. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of five (5) commercial building lots in the C-G zoning district for ownership purposes. Fitzgerald: Moving on to the next item on our agenda is a public hearing for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision, file number H-2020-0104. And, Joe, I think this one is yours as well, sir. Dodson: Yes, sir, it is. Thank you. And thank you, Commissioners, for being accommodating for my snafu. I appreciate that and thank you, Tamara, for that as well. I greatly apologize for that. As noted, the next application on our docket here is for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision. It is a commercial subdivision requesting a five lot Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F20 Page 17 of 20 subdivision. The site consists of 3.29 acres of land, currently zoned C-G, and it is located at 3085 East Ustick. The subject site is located specifically at the southwest corner of Eagle and Ustick. To the east and across Eagle are two large commercial centers. To the north is an additional commercial center. The surrounding areas provide a plethora of commercial uses that are used at a regional level. Directly to the west of the subject site is intended and I should say approved the high end indoor gym, the Villa Sports subdivision, and further to the south of the site is existing residential and some community serving commercial between. As lots within this subdivision develop over time staff believes that they will likely be a higher benefit or utilized more by the future users of Villa Sport and residents to the southwest of this site, rather than regional when compared to the adjacent commercial across Eagle. Staff is of the opinion that there is less need for these five relatively small commercial lots to serve a regional base than those sites to the north and east. In addition, this project, in conjunction with the approved projects -- or uses to the west should satisfy the Comprehensive Plan and mixed use policies for mixed use regional. The requested preliminary plat proposes five commercial building lots that vary in size from .39 acres to just over one acre. The C-G zoning district does not have a minimum lot size requirement and all landscape buffers are previously approved with the original CZC for the overall site improvements and that approved in early 2020 with a 2019 number. When future buildings are proposed on each building lot staff will analyze each building for compliance with other dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district, like height. Access for the development will be via a shared driveway at the western boundary line and shared with the Villa Sport to the west and it's supposed to be constructed with the Villa Sport improvements and is limited to a right-in, right-out access. This applicant will be required to construct that shared driveway should this site develop before the Villa Sport project. There are no public streets as a part of this commercial development, therefore, no stub streets are proposed. Instead there are private drive aisles, as our standard for commercial developments. The applicant has an existing cross-access agreement with the adjacent commercial properties. That's to the west and to the south. It will be required to maintain the cross-access agreements across these proposed lots within their CC&Rs. Wrong computer. I got two computers going here. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B for nonresidential uses at the ratio of one space per 500 square feet of area. If any future restaurants are proposed, the parking ratio is one per 250. With the existing and approved CZC 109 parking spaces were approved, but did not show any parking directly adjacent to the future commercial buildings. So, the approved CZC does not show any of these lots, if you can see my pointer. The revised site plan provided by the applicant shows some changes to the parking lot that differ from the currently approved site plan. One of these changes includes three additional trash enclosures to totally four and are now proposed along the perimeter of the parking area. The original had one proposal in the center. Overall the changes with the additional trash enclosures and the parking here shows a net positive gain of 16 additional parking spaces. Again, as each pad site is developed the required number of spaces will be checked throughout the site and the applicant will be required to comply with the code requirements. And as noted above the parking for the whole site will be available for each building site. So, the -- each tenant will not be able to say that, oh, my part in front of my building is my spaces. They all have the cross-access. Because the overall parking plan has changed since the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F21 Page 18 of 20 original approval of the CZC, the applicant will need to obtain approval of a new one outlining the changes made to the site improvements prior to obtaining any building permits. There were no written testimony for or against this and staff does recommend approval of the requested preliminary plat and after that I will stand for questions. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Joe. Are there questions for Joe or the staff at this time? Hearing none, would the applicant like to come forward or be recognized on Zoom. Thompson: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Tamara Thompson with The Land Group, 416 East Shore Drive in Eagle and I am representing the property owner for this project as well. I do have a PowerPoint, but Joe did a really nice job of explaining everything. We have -- we have read the staff report and agree with staff's analysis and findings -- or recommended conditions and so we request your approval tonight and I will answer any questions, unless you do want me to share my screen, but a lot of it is the same thing that Joe just went through. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Tamara. Appreciate you doing double duty this evening. Are there any questions for Ms. Thompson? Tamara, I think you are hopefully getting off easy right now. Let's see if there is public testimony and I will allow you to close, ma'am. Madam Clerk, is there anyone who would like to testify on this application? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, one minute. Fitzgerald: If there is anyone who would like to testify on this application, please, raise your hand via Zoom. And, Commissioner Seal, I take it there is no one in chambers with you? Seal: That is correct. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we did have one person sign up online, but did not indicate a wish to testify. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you, Madam Clerk. If there is a desire for that person to testify or anyone else that would like to testify, please, raise your hand. We will give a little bit of a pause here, make sure everyone has a chance to speak. Going once. Going twice. Are there any additional questions for Tamara at this time? Tamara, do you have any other comments you would like to make, ma'am? Thompson: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, no. I suspect that the other person that signed in was my client. But we -- again, we agree with staff's analysis and the recommended conditions of approval and we request your approval tonight. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Tamara. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Seal: So moved. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F22 Page 19 of 20 McCarvel: So moved. Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2020-0104, Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Team, what do you think? Anybody want to lead off? Holland: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Holland. Holland: It seems like a pretty straightforward application to me. I don't see any big concerns. Fitzgerald: My thoughts exactly. It was pretty thorough. I think we had a -- we thought through the original application with -- to the west of this for a long time. So, it's good to see this hard corner coming to fruition on Ustick. So, I feel comfortable with where they are headed. Anyone else? Comments or thoughts? If not, motions are always in order. Grove: Mr. Chair? Fitzgerald: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I will make a motion if that's okay with everyone. Fitzgerald: Go right ahead, sir. Grove: All right. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2020-0104 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 19th, 2020. Seal: Second. Yearsley: I will second that. Fitzgerald: Okay. I was just going to say, I think I have a motion and a second. I have a motion and a second to recommend approval of file number H-2020-0104. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Thanks, Tamara. We appreciate it. Good luck. Hopefully we will see you in December. Well, that was a relatively painless adventure, folks. I think the next ones are Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 19,2020 F23 Page 20 of 20 not going to be so easy and simple. So, I will accept one more motion and we can all go enjoy families. So glad to see Commissioner Holland. So good to see you. Stay safe. Stay healthy all. And anyone want me to make that final motion? Holland: I was going to say one more comment, too. It's really good to see Commissioner Yearsley back with us and I'm super glad to have you. Yearsley: Thank you. Holland; I hope you stick around. With that, Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn for the evening of November -- sorry -- 19th. McCarvel: Second. Fitzgerald: I have a motion and a second that we adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:53 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 12 1 03 12020 RYAN FITZGERALD - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 1. 3 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the November 5, 2020 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. November 5,2020 F37 Page 34 of 34 for the hearing date of November 5th, 2020, with the following modifications: That no more than three residences are allowed on shared driveways and that the applicant consider central trash collection enclosure, because of the small width of the streets and the common driveways. Holland: We have a motion on the table. Is there a second or any discussion? McCarvel: Second. Holland: Okay. Motion and a second by Commissioner McCarvel. All those in favor? Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Holland: With that I believe that's all we have got on the agenda, unless staff has anything else. So, we have got one more motion for the night. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Seal: Second. McCarvel: Second. Holland: All right. Motion and a second. Any -- all those in favor? None opposed. Have a great night all. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:01 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED RYAN FITZGERALD - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Public Hearings Changes to Agenda: None Item #3: 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.01 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 2810 E. Franklin Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: West: Multi-tenant commercial building, zoned M1 in Ada County North: Industrial property (vacant & landscape supply business), zoned I-L East: Residential home, zoned C-G (to be redeveloped in the future w/commercial use) South: Franklin Rd., residential home, zoned R1 & Jump Time (indoor entertainment), zoned C-C History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The Applicant proposes to annex 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district consistent with the associated FLUM designation of Commercial. A conceptual development plan is proposed that depicts the existing residential home on the property that the Applicant proposes to remodel and expand for a flex space use. The concept plan depicts 2,239 square feet (s.f.) of office on the first floor & 1,550 s.f. of office and support uses in the basement of the existing structure, and a new 2,600 s.f. structure for a warehouse. The new structure is proposed to the north behind the existing structure and will include a daylight basement. The user will be an automotive tool and equipment supplier, classified as a flex space use. The business proposes to sell products online to automotive businesses and at-home mechanics and will not conduct any retail sales on the site. Flex space is a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district, subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-18; the proposed use & site design complies with these standards. The topography of this site slopes down significantly from Franklin Rd. to the north property boundary and has approximately a 20 foot grade difference as shown on the grading plan. A retaining wall is proposed at the north & west boundaries of the area proposed to be improved with this project. A 35’ wide street buffer is required with development along Franklin Rd., an entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The existing driveway access via Franklin Rd. is proposed to remain for access to the site and has been approved by ACHD. Because it closely aligns with a driveway on the south side of Franklin Rd., relocation of the driveway is not recommended. The UDC requires cross-access/ingress-egress easements to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street is not available, unless otherwise waived by City Council. In accord with this standard, Staff recommends cross-access easements are provided & driveways constructed to the properties to the east and west. A 20-foot wide cross-access easement is depicted on the concept plan to the east and west but the Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to not provide cross-access easements due to the topography of the site and site constraints related to the space available for development. At a minimum, Staff recommends Council require cross-access to the west. Note: Staff contacted Ada County to see if a cross-access easement was provided to the subject property with re-development of the adjacent property to the west in 2002 but one was not. A minimum of 12 vehicle spaces (based on 6,389 s.f.) and one (1) bicycle space is required. A total of 13 spaces are depicted on the conceptual site plan, including an ADA space, which is one more than required. However, if cross-access driveways are provided to adjacent properties as required, parking will be reduced by up to (3) spaces, which will result in parking below the required minimum standard. If a waiver is not approved by Council to the requirement for cross-access, the Applicant may apply for alternative compliance; or, construct a smaller addition to reduce the parking requirement. Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with UDC standards, which requires a minimum 5-foot wide perimeter landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading or other paved vehicular use areas, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 8C.1b. A retaining wall and fence is proposed along the west boundary adjacent to the parallel parking spaces where the buffer is required, which doesn’t leave adequare area for landscaping. If the site cannot be reconfigured to comply with this standard, alternative compliance may be requested with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. The Snyder Lateral exists in a 40-foot wide easement on the northern portion of the property that is not proposed to be improved. All irrigation laterals are required to be piped unless improved as a water amenity or linear open space; the City Council may waive this requirement if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. The Applicant proposes to fence off the area where the lateral is located to preserve public safety and requests a Council waiver to this requirement to allow the lateral to remain open. Because a large portion of this site on the north end is not proposed to be improved, Staff recommends weeds are regularly maintained in this area so as not to create a nuisance and in a manner that prevents wildfire in accord with MCC 4-2. Conceptual building elevations with materials were submitted for the remodel of the existing structure and proposed addition. The materials for the front façade and sides of the existing building consist of stucco with pre-finished metal siding & stone veneer accents; the materials for the proposed warehouse addition consist of a mix of horizontal & vertical metal siding. All improvements to the existing structure and new construction are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Written Testimony: Stephanie Leonard, KM Engineering (Applicant’s Representative) – In agreement w/staff report except for condition #A1.b which requires cross-access easements to be granted and driveways constructed for cross-access with the abutting properties to the east & west – the Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this provision to not require cross-access to adjacent properties due to existing site constraints – the amount of grade combined with elimination of parking stalls would make construction of cross-access driveways infeasible. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/a DA Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0097, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 19, 2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2020- 0097, as presented during the hearing on November 19, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0097 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4: Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of approximately 7 acres of land, zoned R-15, located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel Road. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: West – Vacant, zoned RUT; North – Residential, R-8; East – Golf Course, RUT; South – County Residential, RUT. History: Annexed and Zoned as part of Poiema Subdivision (H-2020-0035) Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium-High Density Residential Summary of Request: Conditional Use Permit request to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total build-out on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1, Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district. Phase 1 is proposed with a sanctuary and associated offices and rooms, an outdoor amphitheater, an outdoor patio area that is shared with a pond-less water feature, and includes 155 parking spaces. Phase 2 includes a larger sanctuary, a few more offices/accessory rooms, and additional parking to total 320 spaces on site. Note: the proposed parking is about 3x the minimum required parking of 104 spaces based on the gross floor area of the proposed Church. Access for the Church site is via driveway connections to the new local streets that will be constructed with the Poiema Subdivision surrounding it; no directly lot access to Lake Hazel is proposed or allowed accept for the required emergency only access along the western property boundary. At the time of the second phase of development, the Applicant is showing the emergency access to become a parking drive aisle which both Planning and Fire Staff have approved. Because the proposed use is a nonresidential use, a minimum 5’ wide sidewalk is required adjacent to all buildings. The Applicant is showing compliance with this requirement but Staff has recommended an additional segment of sidewalk be added in the second phase of development to be located around the western side of the outdoor amphitheater. Staff made a mistake in how the condition is written within the staff report for this recommendation and has agreed with the Applicant that it can be modified to be more clear; the Applicant will have that requested language for the Commission. Again, the proposed use is a nonresidential use so there are no amenity and open space requirements. However, as discussed with the Poiema Subdivision project, the 15,000 square foot open space lot for the subdivision is intended to be shared between the Church and the residents. Its maintenance and use have already been conditioned through the subdivision application and therefore there is no need for the Commission to act on this aspect of the project. The Applicant has submitted sample elevations of the proposed church and concept renderings for phase 1. All nonresidential structures require administrative design review approval prior to obtaining building permits. The submitted elevations show a single- story structure with a maximum height of 30 feet for any area that will be occupied. The elevations show architectural features extending to approximately 35 feet in height and overall design that appear to include stucco, high-end siding, and stone. In addition, the elevations show both shed roof and more traditional flat roof designs adding to the architectural elements of the building. There appears to be adequate modulation in wall plans, especially on the North elevation that faces Lake Hazel. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject Conditional Use Permit application for the proposed Church. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0095, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 19, 2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2020- 0095, as presented during the hearing on November 19, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0095 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #5: Wadsworth Meridian (H-2020-0104) Application(s):  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 3.29 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 3085 E. Ustick, the SWC of Ustick and Eagle. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: C-G zoning in all directions with undeveloped land to the west and south. History: H-2019-0082 (DA Modification to remove the subject site from an existing DA and enter into a new one specific to this site; DA Inst. #2019-121599); A-2019-0376 (CZC for parking lot, landscaping, and other relevant site improvements); A-2020-0163 (CZC and Design Review approval of an urgent care facility on the SEC pad site). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-Use Regional Summary of Request: The subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of E. Ustick Road (an arterial street) and N. Eagle Road/SH 55. To the east and across Eagle Road are two large commercial centers; to the north is an additional commercial center. These surrounding areas provide a plethora of commercial uses that are used at a regional level. Directly to the west of the subject site is intended to be a high-end indoor gym (Villasport) and further to the south of the site is existing residential and some community serving commercial. As lots within this subdivision develop over time, Staff believes that they will likely be a higher benefit to users of the future Villasport and residents to the southwest of this site. Staff is of the opinion that there is less need for these five relatively small commercial lots to serve a regional base than those sites to the north and east. In addition, this project, in conjunction with the approved uses to the west, should satisfy the comprehensive plan and mixed-use policies. The submitted Preliminary Plat proposes five (5) commercial building lots that vary in size from 0.39 acres to 1.02 acres. The C-G zoning district does not have a minimum lot size requirement. All landscape buffers are previously approved with the CZC for the overall site improvements (A-2019-0376). When future buildings are proposed on each building lot, Staff will analyze each building for compliance with other dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district. Access for this development will be via a shared driveway constructed with the Villasport improvements limited to a right-in/right-out access—this Applicant will be required to construct this shared driveway access for their development if it this site develops before the Villasport project. There are no public streets as part of this commercial development and therefore no stub streets are proposed. Instead, there are private drive-aisles as are standard for commercial developments. The Applicant has an existing cross-access agreement with the adjacent commercial properties (Inst. #106169335) and will be required to maintain the cross-access agreement across the proposed lots via the CC&Rs. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B for nonresidential uses at the ratio of one (1) space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. If any restaurants are proposed, the parking ratio is one (1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area. With the existing and approved CZC, 109 parking spaces were approved but did not show any parking directly adjacent to the future commercial buildings on the north end of the site. The revised site plan provided by the Applicant shows some changes to the parking lot that differ from the currently approved site plan. One of these changes include three additional trash enclosures for a total of four but now none are proposed within the center parking area. The new locations of the trash enclosures should help minimize any blind corners when traversing the site. In addition, the Applicant is now showing a reconfiguration of some of the parking spaces and additional parking adjacent to the northern building lots. These changes show a net positive gain of 16 additional parking spaces. Again, as each pad site is developed, the required number of spaces will be checked throughout the site and the Applicant will be required to comply with code requirements. As noted above, parking for the whole site will be available for each building site per the recorded CC&Rs. Because the overall parking plan has changed since the original approval of the CZC, the Applicant will need to obtain approval of a new CZC outlining the changes made to the site improvements prior to obtaining any more building permits. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of subject Preliminary Plat request. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0104, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 19, 2020, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2020- 0104, as presented during the hearing on November 19, 2020, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0104 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting November 19, 2020 FLUM Grading PlanConcept Plan Concept Elevations 2810 Franklin RoadNovember 19, 2020City of Meridian Annexation Application RUT G-C Thank you FLUM FLUM Item 2. 38 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing Continued from October 15, 2020 for Skybreak (H-2020-0079) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, Located at 3487 E. Adler Hoff Ln. Applicant Has Requested Withdrawal A. Request: Annexation of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 353 building lots, 40 common lots and 14 other lots (i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot and 1 lot for the existing home) on 79.69 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Item 2. F39 (:�WE IDIAN:--- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: November 19, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing Continued from October 15, 2020 for Skybreak (H-2020-0079) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, Located at 3487 E.Adler Hoff Ln. Applicant Has Requested Withdrawal A. Request: Annexation of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 353 building lots, 40 common lots and 14 other lots (i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot and 1 lot for the existing home) on 79.69 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Item 2. F 0 STAFF REPORTC�WE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 10/15/2020 Legend DATE: ��Project Lacfl�iar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0079 OF Skybreak LOCATION: 7020 S. Eagle Rd. &3487 E.Adler Hof -� Ln., in the south'/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 4,T.2N.,R.IE. (Parcels# S1404244250& S1404233650) r I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted the following applications: • Annexation of 80.46 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; • Preliminary plat consisting of 353 building lots,40 common lots and 14 other lots(i.e. 12 common driveway lots, one(1)private street lot and one(1)lot for the existing home) on 79.69 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; • Private streets in the gated portion of the development serving 121 residential units with two(2) gates; and, • Alternative Compliance to UDC 11-3F-4A.6,which prohibits common driveways off private streets,to allow such in three(3)locations within the gated area of the subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 79.69 Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County(existing)/R-8(proposed) Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential(LDR)&Medium Density Residential(MDR) Existing Land Use(s) Single-family residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential(SFR) Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 353 SFR buildable lots/40 common lots/14 other lots(i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot& 1 lot for the existing home) Phasing Plan(#of phases) 8 phases Number of Residential Units(type 353 detached SFR homes of units) Density(gross&net) 4.44 units/acre(gross); 7.36 units/acre(net) Pagel Item 2. F41 Description Details Page Open Space(acres,total 14.54 acres(or 18.3%) [%]/buffer/qualified) Amenities ■ (2)dog parks;children's play area with a play structure,climbing rocks,a shade structure and benches; and pathways Physical Features(waterways, The Farr Lateral crosses the southwest corner of this site; hazards,flood plain,hillside) hillside/topography within southern rim area;Phase 8 is in an"A"flood zone. Neighborhood meeting date;#of 5/27/20; 14 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) Property boundary adjustment(Record of Survey#12358,Eisenman 2020) B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway _ District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Traffic Impact Stud es/no) Yes Access One(1)public street access(Street A)is proposed via S.Eagle Rd.,an arterial (Arterial/Collectors/State street.Eagle Rd. is currently improved with 2 travel lanes and no curb,gutter or Hwy/Local)(Existing and sidewalk. Proposed) Traffic Level of Service Eagle Rd.—Better than"E"(acceptable level of service) Stub Stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties for future extension and Street/Interconnectivity/Cross interconnectivity as depicted on the plat. Access Existing Road Network There is an existing private street(E.Adler Hof Ln.)that provides access from S. Eagle Rd.to the existing homes on this site. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None Buffers Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)l Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): Improvements • Lake Hazel Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to he widened to 5-lanes from Eagle Road to Cloverdale Road in 2024. • Eagle Road is scheduled In the iFY1NP to be widened to 5-lanes from Lake Hazel Road to Amity Road in 2023. • The Intersection of Lake Hazel Road and Eagle Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to he widened to 6-lanes on the north leg. 5-lanes on the south.7-lanes east,and 6-lanes on the west leg,and reconstructed/signalized in 2023. • Lake Hazel Road is listed in the 2016 C I P to be widened to 5-lanes from Locust Grove Road to Eagle Road between 2026 and 2030. ■ The intersection of Lake Hazel Road and Locust Grove Road is listed in the 2016 CIP to be widened to 3-lanes on the north leg. 2-lanes on the south,2-lanes east,and 3-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2026 and 2030, Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 2.9 miles(Fire Station#4) • Fire Response Time Most(3/4+/-)of this development falls outside of the 5 minute response time goal from Fire Station#4. • Resource Reliability Current reliability is 77%from Station#4—does not meet targeted goal of 80%or greater • Risk Identification 2—current resources would not be adequate to supply service. A wildfire safety plan is required. Page 2 Item 2. F42 Description Details Page • Accessibility Project meets all required access,road widths and turnaround. • Special/resource needs Project will not require an aerial device;can meet this need in the required timeframe if a truck company is required(fire station is 5.9 miles away). • Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for one hour,may be less if buildings are fully sprinklered. • Other Resources In the event of a hazmat event,there will need to be mutual aid required for the development. In the event of a structure fire,an additional truck company will be required—this will require additional time delays as a second truck company is not available in the City. Police Service • Distance to Police 5.5 miles Station • Police Response Time There is no call data in this area because the proposed development is at the edge of City limits. • Calls for Service 7(within a mile of site—between 2/1/19 and 1/31/20) • %of calls for service See Section IX.D split by priority • Accessibility No concerns • Specialty/resource needs None at this time • Crimes 1 (within a mile of site—between 2/1/19 and 1/31/20) • Crashes 9(within a mile of site between 2/1/19 and 1/31/20) • Other Although located near the edge of City limits, service can be provided if this development is approved. West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms, Enrollment COW Kt hs) •F371ver&W Elementary" 330 425 5.1 enllfi • Capacity of Schools take Mani hmwdre schmi 921 loan 1.4 mlk-i • #of Students Enrolled Viim H'4h Scholl n7$ 4.1 mlks "E"rollrnenn dl Hillsdale Hemenlary N iurrently capped. Students in this deweloWent will he attending Silver Sage Elementary eretil a new school Is built tGelimnmale ortrttowdldq 9 Hllredalr Elementary.** • Predicted#of 247 students generated from proposed development Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Sewer will be available with the development of Keep Subdivision on the West Services side of Eagle Road. • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See Application ERU's • WRRF Declining 13.97 Balance • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns The City is applying the following requirements for Common Driveways. o Three or less lots—services from main in adjacent road o Four or more lots—Sewer in common drive. Sewer will be private and will be the responsibility of the HOA to maintain. Manhole needed in the common drive at the property boundary with"Private"on the lid. I Page 3 Item 2. F43 Water • Distance to Water Directly adjacent Services • Pressure Zone IN • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality None • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Common drives that have both water and sewer mains will require a 30' easement •As currently designed,most phases do not meet minimum fire flow pressure. There are multiple options to meet fire flow including upsizing some water mains to 12" and a secondary connections. •Coordinate with PW Engineering on main sizes,connection at the SW corner and connection at the NE corner. C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend ® Legend Pra}eci LcoafK:m Pro; v=Lmc:* Ps -H fig.. nity A f Residential ti is M-dlURl ensHV I sidentlal Law Den ffy Ridpmtidl F `'t A: + . - — a - r r Page 4 Item 2. F 4 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend 0 Pre' i Lacaiyar Pro' t Laca-ion yec R-$ sec � �Ljrnft RU R-15 — F a ned Parcels amam i R-$ .x R-4 I I R I C R RR R M1 R1 r r III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Conger Group—4824 W. Fairview Ave.,Boise,ID 83706 B. Owner: Peter and Dana Eisenman—3487 E. Adler Hof Ln.,Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Laren Bailey, Conger Group—4824 W. Fairview Ave.,Boise, ID 83706 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 9/25/2020 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 9/23/2020 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 10/1/2020 Nextdoor posting 9/23/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan) The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates the 6.6+/-acres at the southwest corner of the site, south of the Farr Lateral, as Low Density Residential(LDR) and the remaining 73+/-acres as Medium Density Residential(MDR). A City Park is designated in the general area at the southwest corner of the site. Page 5 Item 2. 45 Per the Comprehensive Plan,the LDR designation allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of 3 dwelling units or less per acre. These areas often transition between existing rural residential and urban properties. Developments need to respect agricultural heritage and resources,recognize view sheds and open spaces,and maintain or improve the overall atmosphere of the area. The use of open spaces,parks,trails and other appropriate means should enhance the character of the area. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. The MDR designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as apark, school, or land dedicated for public services. The Applicant proposes to develop this site with 353 single-family residential detached homes at an overall gross density of 4.4 dwelling units per acre.A total of 24 units are proposed within the 6.6+/-acre LDR designated area for a gross density of 3.6 units per acre in that area,which exceeds the density desired of 3 or fewer units per acre; small lots, instead of large or estate lots as desired in LDR designated areas, are proposed along with open space areas along the southern boundary and along the northern boundary adjacent to the Farr Lateral. A total of 329 units are proposed in the MDR designated area for a gross density of 4.5 units per acre in that area,which is consistent with that desired in MDR designated areas of 3 to 8 units per acre. A City park is not proposed;however,the Park's Department has determined a City park is not needed in this area. The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development: • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) Only one housing type, single-family detached homes, is proposed in this development, which although may contribute to the variety of housing types in the overall area, does not provide any variety for different needs,preferences and financial capabilities ofpresent and future residents in this development as desired. Additionally, 310 out of the 353 lots are proposed to be restricted to a single-story with a bonus room (see exhibit in Section VIII.G). The lack of variety is not consistent with the purpose of the residential districts in the UDC, which is to provide a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (UDC 11-2A-1). • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21.As currently designed, most phases do not meet minimum fire flow pressure; however, there are multiple options to meet fire flow including upsizing some water mains to 12"and secondary connections. This development cannot be adequately served by the Fire Department as most of the development is outside of response time goals, does not meet resource reliability goals, and has risk factors including a steep hill with a potential for wildfire if the hillside isn't maintained(see Section IX.C for more information). Additionally, with the main access and secondary access both from Eagle Rd., if access is blocked from the north via Eagle Rd. it would create a significant delay for emergency services by having to travel 3.5+/-miles around the square mile to access the site,potentially creating a life safety issue. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The site design of the proposed development is not compatible with abutting I-acre rural residential lots to the south as there is not an adequate transition in lot sizes and/or zoning. Although landscaped Page 6 Item 2. ■ common areas and a private street are proposed as a buffer, Staff and abutting neighbors that submitted written testimony, do not believe it's an adequate buffer between proposed 4,448-4,950 sf lots and 1-acre rural lots to the south. Larger lots are proposed on the east end of the development on and near the rim but not as a transition to abutting estate lots to the south. • "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) Only one housing type is proposed in this development(i.e. single-family detached, mostly single- level). The minimum lot size proposed is 4,000 square feet(sf.) with an average lot size of 6,280 sf. Although a mix of lot sizes are proposed and larger lots are proposed on the east end of the development, the predominant size is in the 4,000-5,000+/-square foot range which Staff does not believe provides enough diversity for a development of this size. Larger lot sizes should be provided as a transition to I-acre lots to the south and additional housing types (i.e. single-family attached, townhomes, etc)should be provided to offer more diversity in the proposed subdivision. Further, one of the purpose statements of the subdivision regulations stipulates developments provide for desirable and appropriately located living areas and a variety of dwelling types and densities with adequate provision for sunlight,fresh air and usable open space. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed single-family detached homes are generally compatible with existing rural residential homes to the north and south and future medium high-density residential uses to the north as they are all residential in nature. However; the proposed site design with smaller lots (i.e. 4,448-4,950 sf.) adjacent to 1-acre rural residential lots in Vantage Pointe to the south separated only by a private street and common area, and(3)21,000+/-sf. lots (Lot 78-80, Block 5)proposed adjacent to one rural lot, does not provide an adequate transition to minimize conflicts. Further, there is no transition in zoning to the rural residential lots to the south, which would result in larger lots and/or greater setbacks if an R-2 or an R-4 zone were provided. Several letters of testimony have been received from adjacent neighbors objecting to the lack of transition in lot sizes and zoning to their properties/subdivision. • "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections, easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools,and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities." (2.02.01A) The Pathways Plan depicts a segment of the City's multi-use pathway system along the eastern boundary of the site; a 10 foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed in accord with the Plan on the northern portion of the development but transitions to a 5-foot wide pathway to the south and does not stub to the south for future extension as shown on the Plan; however, the Park's Dept. has indicated they are supportive of the proposed design. This pathway will eventually provide a connection to Discovery Park to the west and Hillside Elementary and the YMCA to the north. Open space and site amenities are proposed in accord with UDC standards; however, much of the open space area consists of unusable arterial/collector street buffers and end caps with parkways, the easementfor the Farr Lateral, slope/hillside areas and areas that aren't centrally located for easy access—Staff calculates the actual usable area at approximately 4.6 acres (or 6%of the development area). Proposed site amenities consist of children's play equipment/structures, a picnic shelter, pathways, two dog parks and additional open space of at least 20,000 square feet above the minimum UDC requirements, which are located along the northern and southern boundaries of the site and are not centrally located. The UDC also requires common open space and site amenities to be located in Page 7 Item 2. 47 areas of high visibility to avoid hidden areas and corners, dark areas, unusable space and reduce the opportunity for crime. • "Evaluate open space and amenity requirement and criteria for consistency with community needs and values."(2.02.01B) Because the average lot size proposed in the development is only 6,280 square feet, Staff is of the opinion more usable open space&site amenities than proposed are needed to serve this development. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems; services are required to be provided to and though this development. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The proposed project is located on the fringe of the City and will require extension of City services, which will not maximize existing public services as infill development would. Later phases may not develop until the properties to the north develop and extend utilities. • "Encourage the incorporation of creek corridors as amenities in development design."(4.05.02C) The Ten Mile Creek crosses the northeast corner of the site; a common area is proposed for the creek area and a multi-use pathway is proposed along the creek in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) City sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided with development. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits."(4.05.03B) The proposed project is in the City's `fringe"area; therefore, development in this area is not encouraged as are vacant/underutilized parcels currently within City limits. • "Evaluate comprehensive impacts of growth and consider City Master Plans and Strategic Plans in all land use decisions(e.g.,traffic impacts, school enrollment, and parks)."(3.01.01A) Eagle Rd. is currently a 2-lane roadway with no curb,gutter or sidewalks; no improvements are planned in the CIPIIFYWP to the segment of Eagle Rd. abutting this site. The Lake Hazel/Eagle Road intersection north of the site is planned to be reconstructed and signalized in 2023. The ACHD report states that the TIS estimates this development to generate an additional 3,343 trips per day resulting in an acceptable level ofservice (i.e. better than "E'). WASD estimates this development will house approximately 247 school aged children—enrollment at Hillsdale Elementary is currently capped so students in this development would attend Silver Sage, which is currently under capacity; enrollment at Lake Hazel Middle School and Mountain View High School would be over capacity at build-out of this development according to the Community Development's school impact review included in Section IX.K. Discovery Park, a 77+/-acre City Park, is located approximately a mile away from this site to the west on Lake Hazel Rd., which should be adequate to serve this development. • "Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal conforms to Page 8 Item 2. 48 the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is provided." (3.03.03) The density proposed in the LDR designated area at the southwest corner of the site is slightly above the 3 units or fewer per acre desired in that area; the density in the MDR designated area falls within the desired range. Only one housing type is proposed rather than a mix of housing types; an inadequate transition in lot sizes and zoning is proposed to 1-acre rural properties to the south; inadequate unusable open space and site amenities;public services are proposed to be extended to the fringe of the City rather than to vacant/underdeveloped infill parcels as desired; and enrollment at middle and high schools will be over capacity if approved. For these reasons, Staff is of the opinion the proposed annexation isn't consistent with the City's vision in the Comprehensive Plan and isn't in the best interest of the City. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD A. Annexation&Zoning: The proposed annexation area consists of two (2)tax parcels containing a total of 80.46 acres of land designated as LDR and MDR on the FLUM and contains land to the section line of S. Eagle Rd. The Applicant proposes to annex the two(2)parcels with an R-8 zoning district and develop a total of 353 single-family detached homes on the site. The annexation area is contiguous to and on the fringe of the current City limits boundary and within the City's Area of City Impact at the east boundary. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.A. As discussed above in Section V, Staff is of the opinion the proposed development is not consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan or the purpose statements of the residential districts in UDC 11-2A-1 and the subdivision regulations in UDC 11-6A-1,thus recommends denial of the annexation request. B. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat consists of 353 building lots,40 common lots and 14 other lots(i.e. 12 common driveway lots, 1 private street lot and 1 lot for the existing home)on 79.69 acres of land in the R- 8 zoning district. The minimum lot size proposed is 4,000 square feet(s.f.)with an average lot size of 6,280 s.f.;the gross density is 4.4 units/acre with a net density of 7.4 units/acre. The subdivision is proposed to develop in eight(8)phases as depicted on the plat(see Section VIII.B). Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are two(2)existing homes and outbuildings on this site—the 5,892 square foot home constructed in 2002 at the east end of the site is planned to remain on a lot(Lot 64,Block 5)in the proposed subdivision; the home and accessory structures on the west end of the site are planned to be removed with development. These homes are accessed via a private lane(E. Adler Hof Ln.)from S. Eagle Rd. If annexed,the home proposed to remain is required to hook-up to City water and sewer service and change their address. Proposed Use Analysis: Single-family detached dwellings are listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district. The proposed use,with only one housing type, is not consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts and the subdivision regulations in that a range of housing opportunities and a variety of dwelling types are not provided consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and UDC 11-2A-1 and 11-6A-1. Page 9 Item 2. F49] Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. Several of the lots don't meet the minimum street frontage requirement of 40 feet. Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3) Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to streets, common driveways and block face. Block length is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3F. Block faces should not exceed 750' in length without an intersecting street or alley unless a pedestrian connection is provided, then the block face may be extended up to 1,000' in length. The City Council may approve a block face up to 1,200' in length where block design is constrained by certain site conditions as specified in UDC 11-6C- 3F.3b. The face of Block 9 on the north side of the Farr Lateral is 1,000'+/- and does not contain a pathway or intersecting street or alley—Council approval is needed due to the location of the Farr Lateral, a large waterway,along the south side of Block 9; alternatively,the plat would need to be revised to comply with this standard. At the northeast corner of the site, a street ending in a cul-de-sac is proposed which will likely exceed the maximum 500' length allowed in UDC 11-6C-3B.4 depending on how the property to the north develops. Staff had recommended an internal street access to this portion of the development rather than the sole access being provided via a stub street from the north.Due to the topography in this area,the Applicant has not provided the recommended internal access. Twelve(12)common driveways are proposed; such driveways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.A perpetual ingress/egress easement shall be filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. An exhibit should be submitted with the final plat application that depicts the setbacks,fencing,building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures accessed via the common driveway; if a property abuts a common driveway but has the required minimum street frontage and is taking access via the public street,the driveway should be depicted on the opposite side of the shared property line from the common driveway.Address signage should be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes.Where two(2) common driveways are proposed that adjoin, bollards(or other barrier approved by the Fire Dept.) should be placed at the common lot line to prevent a through connection between streets. Access(UDC 11-3A-3) One(1)public street, Street A,is proposed for access via S. Eagle Rd. as a collector street to the intersection of Street C; a secondary emergency access is proposed from the south via E. Vantage Pointe Ln. to be constructed with the first phase of development—an emergency only access easement was granted for this access(Inst. #2020-063349),public access is not allowed. Three(3) stub streets are proposed at the north and two (2)stub street are proposed at the south boundaries of the site for future extension in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. Each phase of development is proposed to have two (2) accesses for emergency services (see phasing exhibit in Fire comments in Section 1X.C). Although the proposed access meets the minimum access required by the Fire Dept., Staff is highly concerned with the feasibility of only one(1)public access to the site(until adjacent properties redevelop and provide stub streets to this property)with 353 units proposed.Additionally,if access from the north via Eagle Rd.is blocked,in the event of an emergency,emergency vehicles would have to travel an additional 3.5+/-miles around the square mile to access the site creating a potential life safety issue due to a delayed response time. Page 10 Item 2. 50 A combination of public and private streets are proposed for access within the development—public streets are proposed on the west and private streets are proposed on the east end of the subdivision. Three(3) common driveways are proposed for access off private streets(see analysis below). Private Streets: Per UDC 11-3F-1,it is not the intent to approve private streets for single-family developments other than those that create a common mew through the site design or that propose a limited gated residential development—mews are not proposed; two(2)gates are proposed for access to 121 lots located on the east end of the site(see exhibit in Section VIII.IT). (Note: A third gate is proposed but it's through two(2)common driveways,Lots 24&36,Block 5,and doesn't qualify as a gated entrance accessible to all residents,only an emergency access.)At 121 lots,Staff does not consider this to be a limited residential development.Additionally, gated developments are not allowed to have more than 50 dwelling units—in the past with Planned Unit Development applications, Staff has allowed this number to apply to each gate—even so,the maximum number of units allowed still exceed UDC standards. Further,the provisions for private streets apply to any properties that do not have frontage on a public street or where frontage is not required per UDC 11-3F-2—a minimum street frontage of 40 feet is required in the R-8 district per UDC Table 11-2A-6. Therefore,private streets cannot be approved for this development as the applicability for private streets cannot be met.Additionally, there is no reason the public street network can't be extended in the areas where private streets are proposed.Therefore, Staff is not in support of the proposed private streets. Alternative Compliance is proposed to UDC 11-3F-4A.6,which prohibits common driveways off private streets,to allow such in three locations within the gated area of the subdivision. The Applicant's request for such explains the general reasons common driveways are utilized and states that through the use of common driveways they're able to allocate more land area to common landscaped open spaces instead of wasting it on unusable and unnecessary roadways.Because private streets aren't a viable option in the R-8 district as noted above and public streets can be extended to serve the overall development area, Staff is consequently not in support of the request for Alternative Compliance.Further,Alternative Compliance is only allowed when one or more of the conditions noted in UDC 11-5B-5B.2 exists— Staff does not find any of the listed conditions apply in this case. Transportation: The existing roadways in this area are rural in nature. Eagle Rd. is currently improved with 2 travel lanes and no curb, gutter or sidewalk. Improvements and a signal are planned for the Lake Hazel/Eagle Rd. intersection in 2023. Lake Hazel is planned to be widened to 5-lanes between Eagle and Cloverdale Roads in 2024; and to 5-lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Roads between 2026 and 2030; no improvements are planned to Eagle Rd. south of Lake Hazel abutting the site. 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 single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. A parking plan is included in Section VIII.J that depicts a total of 334 on-street parking spaces along public and private streets;parking along private streets must be approved by the Fire Marshall. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): The Pathways Master Plan(PMP)depicts a north/south segment of the City's multi-use pathway system along the east side of the subject property and along the south side of the Farr Lateral at the southwest corner of the site. The Applicant has worked with the Park's Dept.pathway coordinator on the design proposed along the east boundary; the pathway along the south side of the Farr Lateral is consistent with the PMP. The pathways are required to be placed in a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement. Ten-foot(10')wide segments of the City's multi-use pathway are proposed within the street buffer along Eagle Rd., along the south side of the Farr Lateral, along the Ten Mile Creek and the northern portion of the east boundary of the site and a golf cart path. Other pathway connections are also proposed for Page 11 Item 2. 51 pedestrian interconnectivity and access to common areas within the development. A pathway connection is proposed between the pathway on the eastern portion of the site to the sidewalks along internal public streets on the west end of the site. A total of 5,167 linear feet of pathways are proposed in this development(see exhibit in Section VIII.I). All pathways are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 and landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. Where pathways are proposed in common driveways (i.e.Lot 71,Block 9)they should be located in separate common lots with landscaping on either side in accord with UDC 11-3B-12C. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 : A detached sidewalk is proposed along S. Eagle Rd. and attached sidewalks are proposed along internal public streets(with the exception of detached sidewalks where landscaped endcaps are proposed)in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17.No sidewalks are required or proposed along private streets except for along private Streets K& S where a detached sidewalk is proposed for a pedestrian connection between the pathway on the east end of the site to the sidewalk along public Street I on the west end of the site. If private streets were approved for this development(although they can't be accommodated in the R-8 district), Staff would have concerns in regard to public safety with the lack of pedestrian walkways in front of homes,requiring pedestrians to walk in vehicular use areas in the street. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-1 : Eight-foot wide parkways with detached sidewalks are proposed along the entry street(Street A)and in a few other areas; sidewalks are mostly attached with no parkways in this development.All parkways are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to S. Eagle Rd., an arterial street; a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along Street A where it is designated as a collector street(i.e. from Eagle Rd. to the intersection of Street C), landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. A 35-foot wide buffer is proposed along Eagle Rd. and a 30-foot wide buffer is proposed along the collector street(Street A) landscaped with grass and deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs in excess of the minimum standards. Parkways are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Landscaping is proposed within parkways; calculations should be included in the Landscape Calculations table that demonstrate compliance with UDC standards. Landscaping is required along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Landscaping is proposed along pathways; calculations should be included in the Landscape Calculations table that demonstrate compliance with UDC standards. Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3E. Landscaping is depicted in common areas in excess of UDC standards. There are existing trees on the site within proposed building lots that are proposed to be removed that may require mitigation.The Applicant should coordinate with Matt Perkins,the City Arborist, to determine mitigation requirements per the standards listed in UDC 11-311-1OC.5. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3 : A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B is required. Based on the area of the proposed plat(80+/-acres),a minimum of 8 acres of qualified open space should be provided. The Applicant proposes 14.7 acres(or 18.4%)of qualified open space consisting of street buffers, linear open space,parkways and common areas greater than 50' x 100' in area, including the slope area on the Page 12 Item 2. 52 east end of the site (see qualified open space exhibit in Section VIII.D). Although the open space proposed complies with the minimum UDC standards, much of the open space area consists of unusable arterial/collector street buffers and end caps with parkways,the easement for the Farr Lateral, slope/hillside areas and areas that aren't centrally located for easy access—Staff calculates the actual usable area at approximately 4.6 acres (or 6% of the development area)and much of that area is not centrally located for easy access. Staff is of the opinion the quality and usable amount of open space proposed is inadequate for a development of this size. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G1 Based on the area of the proposed plat(80+/-acres), a minimum of four(4) qualified site amenities are required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. Proposed site amenities consist of children's play equipment/structures, a picnic shelter/shade structure, pathways,two dog parks and additional open space of at least 20,000 square feet above the minimum UDC requirements. Dog owner facilities are required to be improved with a dog washing station with a drain to sanitary sewer system and trash receptacles and bags for dog waste disposal; or fencing to enclose a minimum 0.75 acre of open space for an off leash dog park and trash receptacles and bags for dog waste disposal per UDC 11-3G-3C.h. Although the proposed amenities meet the minimum standards,they are primarily located along the northern and southern boundaries of the site or in the gated portion of the development and are not centrally located(see details in Section VIII.D),which Staff is of the opinion is not ideal.Further,UDC 11-3G-3D.3 requires common open space and site amenities to be located in areas of high visibility to avoid hidden areas and corners,dark areas,unusable space and reduce the opportunity for crime. Storm Drainage: An adequate storm drainage system is required in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.Design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the City. Irrigation: An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided with development to each lot within the subdivision in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-15. Irrigation water is provided from the New York Irrigation District. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-du"]: The Farr Lateral runs across the southwest corner of this site within a common lot(Lot 53,Block 9). The Applicant proposes to leave the waterway open and improve the area as a linear open space with a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along the south side as allowed by UDC 11-3A-6B.2. Fencing(UDC 11-3A- : All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C and 11-3A-7. Six-foot tall open vision vinyl slat top fencing is proposed along connection pathways and the Farr Lateral, 4-foot tall open vision wrought iron fencing is proposed adjacent to the dog parks and 6-foot tall vinyl fencing is proposed along street buffers and the perimeter of the subdivision as shown on the landscape plan. UDC 11-3A-6C.3 requires open laterals to be fenced with an open vision fence at least 6-foot in height and having an I I-gauge,2-inch mesh or other construction equivalent in ability to deter access to the lateral. Staff recommends fencing is installed between the lateral and the pathway to preserve public safety. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant submitted sample photo elevations of the types of homes planned to be constructed in this development which are included in Section VIII.F. Homes depicted are predominantly single-story, some with a bonus room,with a few that are 2-stories in height proposed on the east end of the development on or near the rim. All but 43 of the homes are proposed to be restricted to single-story with the option of a Page 13 Item 2. ■ bonus room; the larger lots on the east end of the development are not restricted to single-story homes (see exhibit in Section VIII.G). Building materials consist of a mix of finish materials (i.e. horizontal and vertical siding and stucco)with stone/brick veneer accents. Staff is concerned about the feasibility of the homes in the proposed sample photos actually fitting on the proposed 40'-45'+/-wide lots,which are the predominate range of lot sizes in the development. Therefore, Staff requested the Applicant submit floor plans to demonstrate they can be accommodated and meet setback requirements. The Applicant was unable to do so.Therefore, Staff is not in support of the proposed sample elevation photos unless floor plans can be submitted that verify they fit on the proposed lots.If they don't,the Applicant should submit concept elevations that are feasible to fit on the lots. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the requested annexation and zoning of the property and consequently the preliminary plat,private street and alternative compliance requests because the proposed zoning and development is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons: 1)the property is located on the fringe of the City and existing public services would not be maximized by providing services to this development;2)most of the development is located outside of established response time goals of the Fire Dept., does not meet resource reliability goals, and has risk factors including a steep hill with a potential for wildfire if the hillside isn't maintained; 3)growth will negatively impact West Ada School District(the area high school is already over capacity and the middle school will be over capacity); 4) lack of significant variety in housing types and lot sizes; 5)lack of transition in lot sizes and zoning to the 1-acre estate lots and LDR designated property to the south; 6)much of qualified open space area is unusable and/or not centrally located; and, 7)the proposed private streets are not compatible with the R-8 district as street frontage is required(see Findings in Section X). Page 14 Item 2. F54 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description&Exhibit Map 5avvbooth Land 5urveync3, LLC F P: �208J 398-5 1 L 1 CJtS) i is t U5 2030 S. WanhncjEon Ave-,f-mmctt, It 63C 17 Skybreak Annexation Description BASIS OF BEARINGS is S.0°i2'S2"W. between a found aluminum cap marking the W114 mmer and a Fauna aluminum cap marking the NW corner of Sedan 4,T.2 N., R. i E., 8,M„Ada County, Idaho. A parcel of lane located in the 5112 of the NW114 df Secwn 4 Township 2 North,mange 1 East,8oi5e Meriden, Ada County,Idaho,more pardw1arly described as follows. COMMENCING at an aluminum cap marking the NW corner of said Section 4; Thence S.4°12'52"W.,coincident with the west line of said NWI/4r a distance of 1352.04 feet to an aluminum cap marking the N1/16 carder of Said Sec ion 4 and the POMW OF BEGINNING; Thencc S.89052'36"E.,coincident wO the north line of said 5112 of the NW 1/4,a distemn of 1321-04 feet to the NW 1 f 16 wrrier of sold Section 4r marked by a 5 f 8"rebar with cap RL5 645; Theme N.84°55'26"E.,coincident with said north line, 1321,10 feet to the CNN/16 corner of said Section 4, OArkM by it 519" reharvwth cap RLS VS; Thence S,01137M"W,r coincident with the east line of said MW 1f4, a distance of 1333.72 feet to the C1{4 CDrr*r of said Section 4,marked by a 314"rebar; Thence N-89°4;i3'26"W., colriddent with the south line of raid N V1/4, a 6idance of 2632,72 feet to the W1f4 corner of said Section 4, marked try an alurninum cap; Thence N.0"i2'52"€.,cdincident with said west line of the NW 1/4,a distance of 1326.27 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, The above deserrbed parcel contains 8D.46 acres more or less. This description was prepared using record data fmrn Record of Survey No- t23513,.Ada County records,and not from an actual field Survey, 't fi IC 11 � LP 27//ZO 4'OF 1 F �+ SEEN ?2019319446-SKYBREAIK SUB CM'SuNey�arawinggMescriVions�194.16 AnnCxation DesCri�ion docx I� Page 15 Item 2. 55 r Mom 1W C 1 iR.Irrll�li.IlrY w�l�rlw "toFif of low frop4Ar bnwldary Adoffirtime1 r i F4` l re.�ut.ti�,�lr r 1 f ■r r,.r Eisenman F I 311Lumea In I.e 5 t17 611bp MIDI 1;A 4F$CfliPn 4, Taroingl 2 Nor .Range f Eask Wim FEirld'un, + Rom_ Aft Cawnik,W6W r 343U "M.0 rrn r.rir k Z- `ter" " ,# t ♦ I -. wY ar9 M r■1[Mft WIRW r �, -_ •+ + P� YMY��r1Y.Irrr�Yr NIY rw,xr YrF ��••u.�+rr..mFrrrwrr r+411. CcrMk&.it wa Co"Ir�OAIr�r ' vr _ iJ +rlrrYalmuYr �i:� r M1� _ __._ �► iLa+xlirw — }� 6�nikkl.l le .�aR' I,Ih II�I� a„•QI rulal j 1 I ■ ��`}' 4nf 4'T� cftAwm d or .k a n..f L 4SYL1�.lrY�r+tm�i.PIPM�M4P.JJ�r*[R91 IYi�YJW 1rlYYY�f�YYno.�arY�w��a.�wiY�Yi Y[ — — cd=MJlr.v 4d—rlWat.. oppm-.dLmbm ar.1•w R.4 N.Km.A�/r�'.rr.aw Ir r .Ir.�rr,rarruaww.atad _ �..1. fWfWL +rrR�rrr4i1 I1KovelarIr.�'I�..rltk"a�l�����Y�= YXi YfrYe1141dK'4iY 11r f GJrr..iYY re Il-aLr, @r4rlrEr�T.r.Q M LAND M. Ir..■Y561a IYk YF.r.01F��lf.OIAW LM� ~* SRO UP r rrrYOMJFw•ri�WRwlwii+cT.d�av�.n P wlp*"FI, 1✓rlPP.1r14 Fr..a+Pr Trn l •7.in- ` YYYYIIYi•��irYrrYYl wlrrY4�usr.w.Yr y1.1 ir DIY ■ YYnn�auluYwYrrx�saaYlaoro+Ytmin aRr4r ra.rr�� wry ...ipr Page 16 Item 2. F56 B. Preliminary Plat(date: 6/15/2020) & Phasing Plan sxYeRea19 sueaiuLsiow Ywr.�r,a�a i-ea I iwnA ere.1 ue.,y 2m2p A, w1•a. d. IL I wxaM.Kd) ��• � ae" y Oft al IE - r Y 1� u a�F a�".:..LT'• � .� r � Page 17 Item 2. F 7 r„ _ # :'1 r 4. .... ' _•-'__ _ -. ' _ ® sty a • _ - � _- - -- -- �� -ram ~. 'f. '���. +* - I - I TCM IWE'ifF 5nrlT t I� 1 I —a-- �I w_� `rrDw Y ff1.1 Z. 44 Ar � � 3 PPI.� Page 18 Item 2. F 8 � ems. PWR _7, wp; � I f'L rw L w I_ PPI.3 } Mr -E --- ,-.,....•. _ _- - - - - - - - - - -- ----- —— HE- s Y ICJ I , I mUm r r W.KD41'W Page 19 Item 2. F5-9 C. Landscape Plan (date: 6/16/2020) il-nlir�rY_ �••• Y ��G.`�1"i34rF �'rT.�F� i-�� �iTl �-"�`=-���_�+eR•x�Z"IdS= ,GREY ���.,� �:,�---- x ass � ��� _ ��� -��•=���"� i �,•��i�'..° � �� � �*-� ,�•�:_ '� ��'� •Ices;-a�:�-��,=;:���— MEhlbiAW. ib PAE41MIFkAHY pL,1t LANDSCAPE PLi1; tsar- Page 20 Item 2. ■ IN _ ,!'. 1 IN IN OWIN i � ..__ - "� � ems` - ..� }�..,?���•-�'*+i� r � y - � - � £ f �� ra T® �T���i'.t'Yf+'i�'.'lJ�a --1•J- � 1 Y I a x + � , F"+-----t------------- Lu �=: uaruax ie �I�Q R.SI,r Psl.�TiE K--rE-- �I An L1 I ,----------__--- �r IN IN IN oz IN 4'I�. ,I5 dux lif I': .i I t'—I'TT� h;p7"Er• ��� KEY MAP Ala Yl` yell {�X, " — �r'• v �.loll�rw 1- Lz Page 21 Item 2. F61 d. a . Lu } I IN w i IN L r. IL•YYy'_ a r� r ,r------_____________--- � q LS W x ry�sl.i P.ay�riz F.cre=_ � r------ - -------- �r-wa wa,----------------- . ----' � IM I• In I• Y F Y '. I IF 7�. IMNU e IN VA- IN IS I. FI w a -77 T la-KT F-wFM Y�7TC t a vv� •�"l' .,.'J1�r� -7.4 *L +Lill W.P. La Page 22 Item 2. 62 T P1&I-rrM LL&O AR [lox 6=6 V. li 11 11.4irpt -I lit W T?r Z to —iim v rrw-r IL 1 4.1 AN. m LLI c I.. .L, I I-Nil : m IL DLALpF,,1U%T L;atA pn;W. ':MY Vo 9 .-qp 4.1. %JAPQWApg L5 Page 23 Item 2. 63 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit& Site Amenities 7 rhp SKYE4RW UmoIVl4 N "AL kk$A-aJ9.69 A-C QLIALWnhr-CIMS EM-elA 76 AC(it A* �y �dwuunwaad�cr.�wfr ..�tea.. Page 24 Item 2. F 4 Qualified Open Space Calculations Project: Skybreak Neighborhood Date_ 6-12-2-020 ekrrk Lot Sgft Open Space Dimensions Description Uwesect 1 1 29,415 Arteria IJCollector Frontage 12,225 30'x 20D' Dag Park t _ 11 3,45 7 28'x MY End Cap-Parkway 6 3 1 5,518 50,x 1 z.o Landscaped Open Space 1 3,010 24-97'x 200' End Cap-Parkway 6 6,293 31.9+4 x 2DO' End Cap-Parkway B 5 2 23,755 20'min.width Collector Frontage 5 sa 2,670 20'x 120' Pedestrian Pathway Connection 6 5 _j 5 193,636 Open Space-Pat hwa,:s 5 65 3,14- 24'x 100' End Cap 6 5 75 3,543 BYXISD' Pe-destrian Pathway connection B 5 39 4,245 3o`x 20D' End Cap B 5 97 42r305 - ParkrspDrt Field t 5 9; 5,733 29.5'x200' End Cap B 5 _ 4,245 20'x 20U' End Cap B 5 14,30U - Park,Pathway,Seating Areas t 5 16r07- - Dog Park 5 --- 2112' 2Ar'x10D' End Cap B 5 _40 1,948 2A`x SOD' End Cap B 5 _=0 4,69E 22-68'x 200' End Cap-Parkway B,E 5 _=0 4,6E-8 22-68'x 24D' End Cap-Parkway B.E 5 - 5,541 29.5'x 20D' End Ca p B 5 '_}6 24r545 Col lector Buffer 6 -5 3,65 6 29-DO'x 200' End Cap-Parkway B 8,02° Park,5eatingArea A 9 _ 35,815 Arterial{Collector Frontage B,C,D 9 - 35,142 Tot LoOport Courtl5eating AFBB<Open Vision Safet,Fa :1 = A 9 59 2,715 2.01 x 1 0 Pedestrian Pathway Connection B 9 83 Za,752 Landscaped Open space{Park t 9 192 87,46E Open Space-Regional Pathway 10 1 10,350 Landscaped Open spacefFark t Total sgft 633,2 Qualified open space Ac. 14.54 Tota I Project Acres 79-69 Percent of 4ual'rfied Open space 18-3C% Page i Page 25 Item 2. F 5 Code section Description A 11-3G-3 B-SA open grassy area of at least fifty feet by one hundred feet 150'x 100')in a rea; 11-3G-3L3-1E Linear open spa€e area that is i t least twenty feet 1,20')a nd up to fifty feet(50%has an ar€ess at g each end,and is im proved and landscaped as set forth in subsection E of this sedimn- Full Area of Buffer:The fu II a rea of the lands€ape buffer along col lector streets may count towa rd C 11-3G-36 3 the required common open space. it-3G-3 P�4 Percentage of 13uffer:Fifty percent(50%)of the la nds€a pe buffer along arterial streets may€o Lint toewp and the required common open space. Parkways Along-Collector and Lo€aI Residential Streets:Parkways along local residential streets E Si-3G-3 P�5 that meet al I of the f-Dllow ing sta ndards may count toward the common ope n space requirement: Page 2 Page 26 Item 2. F66 i % .f Praposed Amen Ses: A. Large 3/4-Acre,Tat Park Block 9,Lot 52)-The Skyhreak Neighborhood park � will ron#ain the following recreation i facFllties: Play Structure + Seating Benches • Shade Structure Climbing Rucks • Attractive Landscaping .ki.f e — Page 27 Item 2. F67 R. Pathways-The 5kWeakNeig#iborhood wall include the following pedestrian pathways. • 14'WideRegional Pathway Mon g Eagle Road-I.M LF r 1Q'Wide Regional Pathway Along the Farr Lateral-1,120 LF • HY Wide Regional Pathway Along Ten M&N Creek- 526 LF « ib'Wide Gaff Cart Patfr - 260 tF ■ Natural Path-1,435 LF Pedestrian Pathways within the 5kybreak _ J Neighborhood will total nearly one mile in length.,. -. -- C. Chug Parks(Block 2, Lot 1 and Block 5,lot 121) -The Skybreak Neighdorhnod park wilt contain two 2)small ; dog,dog parks that will include the following: Open Vision Feneing + dual Gate 5ystern i Seating Areas :, + Attractive Landscaping D. Entry Park(Block 5,Lot 114)-The main Collector Roadway will te rim inate in an -- attractively landscaped open space that will provide far an aesthetically appealing entry lab state meat t hat will co n vey a sense of a rrival. j - - 41 S per imen Tree Plantings - - 41 Seating Areas + Attractive Landscaping F=� + Pathway E. open Sports Park (Block 5, Lot 97)-This park will include; Large 1-acre open sports area ` Pathway Connection I£, 0 Seating Areas = Attractive Landscaping F. Landscaped Passive Open Spares-Located throughout the Neighborhood- 0 Attractive Landscaping # Buffering of side yards Page 28 Item 2. F68 E. Common Driveway Exhibits II II rLOT 20 TA11 ES DIRECT STREET ——— b ACCESS. DRIVEWAY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF LOT, II 20 _ I I IL 19 12.00'REAR 25.00' COMMON SETBACK TIP o DRIVE •� '� L— ——— 5.00' LSCP II r `--------- BUFFER BLACK 1 30.00'WATER/ SEWER EASEMENT II is 15 I 18 I I I 20.00' FRONT 5.00'SIDE I a SETBACK SEFBACK Trr � I � I I I I :•'dl. LOT 15 TAKE$DIRECT STREET II ACCESS. DRIVEWAY LOCATED I+ ON EAST SIDE OF LOT. N �Y g� �N N CIV WORK 15 0 15 30 cO BOX 6059 SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION BOISE,IDBa7D7 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT-LOTS 16-20 BLOCK 1 SCALE: 1•_ !p Ph:(208)sac-3874 cgma am@csweng—nng— Page 29 GmZ F _N _ 14 Z z / Z � Z 12 / Z Z � x x _J ! /Z 21 g � � � ,. a ,s m po wx rpoS, SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION � 52�. COMMON I EXHIBIT - �TS1»4BLOCK2 �: r - £ Page 30 Item 2. 70 11 ——— — r ,i rBkEs [11eEtr 5T7�E-1 u ArcE.55. 11HrVEWW U7AIM Ow NORTH SICE OF LOT. I I L--- - -------- --J i w' �. .. F — — - ----- � I I � I I BLOCK 5 . `+. ` cowM20.0aoN I �aTVE 1 �� I I 17 I z N' LSCP I 6 I a.lFFER �.oa' slay I I SEIIWKrra I L---- --- — - - J 14 I 15 13 I - ---—— — — — — 12.00' REAR tiE-T.Wr.K T F �! I 210.00' FRONT LOT 14 T06KES ]ERECT STREET I I SETR%cm 16 ALCESS. TYEWAY LOUTEC ON WEST 5117E OF LDT. I I I I I I I L-- - - - --- -- ---J L _ ___ __j W ai CSW GI 1 L 01TW waw Fta 15 6 15 w F0EK3X5 s SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION EMOF-7D 1071" COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT - LOTS 14-19 BLOCK 5 SCALE 1' — N' �ralurn Q¢we�p YkvY�p�o�n Page 31 Item 2. F71 BLOCK 5 I o I I I A LOT 40 SS TRE�RE LOCATED ACCESS C E STREET 5.00'SIDE ON EAST SIDE OF LOT. sETWK TYP I I I I I I I I I I I I I 25 26 27 37 I 38 39 I 40 a c.: I I I I RESTRICTED TO E]AMENCY ACCESS ONLY L---J L ---J L ---awJ J---J L_ J V� V C (V I 24 36 — —.i r--_ ---a 12.00'REAR d —7 - g SE WK TYP ff 23 gm 35 � TAKES-ACCESS. DRIVEWAY LOCATED n (ACCESS.TDRN AIRE ET LOCATED ,q ?._. ••_:�.+� ON SOYTH SIDE OF LOr. ————J LN SOUTH SIDE OF LOT. - -——— N N rr c w Ll! WORK 20 0 20 40 PO BOX 6059 SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION BOISE,IDsa7O7 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT-LOTS 23-27 AND 35-40 BLOCK 5 SCALE: 1'= 4' vh:(2 )Sac-aa7a cgrahamC'rsweng ineenng.— Page 32 Item 2. F 2 I 85 107 rLAT 94 TAKES 31RECT STREET S ACCESS. ORKG"f LOCATED I(Iw NOATH 5qE CIF LOT- I 84 I 83 2D,04I oor♦ DI'2VE $1 +5-W L50P BUFFER PED PAT-F"Y y r_12.00'_REAR — SETSW< TYP MIL G' F404T — SERWC i I I I I I I I LW K TAKB DIRECT SMEEf I ACCESS. DRNE"Y UKATED OW EaN'T '�IUE of LOT. I I I S_7'B�k I I BLOCK 5 I I I I � I I N c aIvlL #ITC 20 9 20 #0 F0BUXrDse SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION BOMF-093707 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT - LOTS 84-84 BLOCK 5 Pe:i2m)s4r m:p4 cp raharn�cswdip I n csl n q.rom Page 33 Item 2. F73 I I kF— I I I I I i i I I I UCIC 5 I — - -T Lo- 1 IME5 o1REe-S-4--T I I I I J To I I I � I I I I � �m.� l�'14 I I I 1 1 I �!l�111fd1r I I I I I I I I I Ar I I I I I I I I I i I I 56 rs4 194 151s 1ss I 164 1 I 7137I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J 1 I I I I I I I j 163 I I I I I I I I I i i I I I I I sktlO m[ram AO=011* L LJ L —J L — L— J I I L_—_� L — — +i�.Nf t. { 143 tb7 —. IB2 I 168 + L01 197 TME5 CUM SFAEET I IL01 741 T>Km Go`f—dinEf A 1 AUXIM.UWWEW UXPFD A�f,Q [QG1EG s 1*104 111E OF LOT. ——— F � I T QI�IL�B ETC 70 a m •G ro SKYBKEAK $U�VIVISIQN HotiE.ro eymr COMMON DRIV;EXHIUIT-LOTS 163-168AND 192-IS7 RLOCII,S EXE. +'- 40' Phi fMIS4F73TM Page 34 Item 2. 74 ---- -- - - r -- - � a I = I I a I I 15 I I I I I I ULScP I BU F M � — - ----- - - CHIVE I 14 —J 5 H SIDE :£TF3ACK � I 1 I 15 I LOT 14 TAKESIDlr= STREET ACCESS JLOVEWAY LC{:ATE:} I L'i x 17 I I DH EAST SIDE CF LOT v 24,4?' FRONT I � • I 'w SEruxk L-- — ---- -- J '.. __ Y r1z.oa' REAR— — — — ———— -I - SETM:x TYF' I ————— ————— — LOT IF TAKE$ CIAECT STREET————— I NCCES5, ❑RNFWAf LOCATED ON SOUTH 5111E OF LLT. L- - - - ---- - -- =P%/IL wITC waw ian 115 15 15 30 RO ECK DELW SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION E°MF-3D937°7 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT- LOTS 14-19 BLOCK 9 Ph:12W)Wr,3874 carahamti cw+cnpincrrin{.00-r Page 35 Item 2. 75 LCT ZE TAMES DIRECT 5TREEf ,"ry ACCESS. DRh Y LO^TED �• � w Ova v301-I 510E OF LCT. #" 12.00 REM SErWk TYP I •� I y I� 4 26 27 I�5.0o' six J } LOT 29 ESS.T1IRNEWAY L KATED r y p q E { 28 { { ON EAST SIDE OF LOT. 29 r { t a 0 15 0 15 30 coebxeM SKYBREAK SUBDIVISION eon g783Jg7 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT- LOTS 25-30 BLOCK 9 SCALE- 1' — N' Ph:I2M,5WIF3874 caraYam{FeswcnglneMn{.00-r Page 36 Item 2. F76 I f I rry 72 I r LLYT M TAKES DIRER WEEP rr:• I I FRquT A-ESS. DRIVEWAY LL-STED Ck E&ST 516E OF LOT. I L_ SETBACK II ' -- -- - - - — I 70 73 I 7 I �� J•Y ———————— — 1 69 5,40' LSCP 6UFFER I - ———— ——— z3.x,- cOuwOw I � 13RRVPEU PA-MWAY I s m, 74 .� scTEWCIK Ty I e 75 I I 76 {.. LOT 76 TAKES DIRECT STREET S3. DsIWEWA'T LOG4TEL - ON NCOTH SIDE CF LOT- -— .4 I 77 I +•- 1M h n 20 6 20 41) P4 Box BID" S YBREAK SUBDIVISION e0M,ID 10717 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT- LOTS 70-76 BLOCK 9 SCALE: 1' - 40' Ph:I2013y WL-M!7a cgra Yam,�w+c7glnccrinp.Dom Page 37 Item 2. 77 F- - ----- ----- - < i I - - - -- ----- --- rIJ}T 7G Tdl{E 1 CIRmT STREET — — ACCESS, ORNE A' LOCATED .;.�. 3• ON NORTH 510E OF L9r. 76i �I ;:�..• I BLOCK � --- - - -� I 77Y :.'�: — - - - - -- ---J —— — — —— ————— � I e�F=oa 20.00' 06MYOM I 78 I ORNE 12AD' RE4'2 I _ SETBAf, , I so p�y i COMM LCT I I 20.00' FRONT -BACK 79 W a 5 O c GIVi� !IT! i5 6 IS 30 P4 BOX ro" KYBREAK SUBDIVISION as axor COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT- LOTS 76-80 BLOCK 9 9C1�LE i' — a4' Ph:I�1 sn�aaas cp ra ha m$nwenp I n ecl n q.oom Page 38 Item 2. F78 F. Conceptual Building Elevations NOT APPROVED max. - d Existing Home to remain(above) Existing Horne to remain{above} . ` ■o ■ L.. I —�:-- 6w hog Page 39 Item 2. F 9 r eon lid f � ----------------------------- ke -low r, - Oslo%. 4 Page 40 � m , . Not Restricted ' R �ONM lls in, � � Item 2. F81 I. Pedestrian Plan --------- - J L! �9�e6Ui�n C�nr+er�t�n An m ■ m Regime R21thwAy Fe[6 m6arq;doll Car! Pail, li J. On-Street Parking Plan on n Sliem Parkirlo Page 42 Item 2. 82 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS A. PLANNING DIVISION No conditions of approval are included due to Staffs recommendation of denial. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Comments 1.1 Phase 8 of the proposed Skybreak subdivision is in an"A"Flood Zone. This area requires extending the existing hydraulic and hydrology study and establishing Base Flood Elevations. This area was not included in the recent flood study downstream. 1.2 The City is applying the following requirements for Common Driveways. Three or less lots—services from main in adjacent road Four or more lots—Sewer in common drive. Sewer will be private and will be the responsibility of the HOA to maintain. Manhole needed in the common drive at the property boundary with"Private" on the lid. 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. 1.4 Common drives that have both water and sewer mains will require a 30'easement. 1.5 As currently designed,most phases do not meet minimum fire flow pressure.There are however multiple options to meet fire flow including upsizing some water mains to 12" and a secondary loop connection. Coordinate with PW Engineering on main sizes,connection at the SW corner and connection at the NE corner. Each phase must be modeled to ensure fire flow. Second water connection may be required at first phase. 1.6 Existing wells must be decommissioned according to IDWR rules which include employing methods to ensure grout fills the annular space outside of the well casing. Record of abandonment must be provided to the City prior to final plat signature. 1.7 The street addressing for any existing home(s)to remain on the site will change to an address based upon the internal roadways. 1.8 As noted in the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Atlas Materials Testing&Inspection, there are shallow cemented soils across the site. Particular attention needs to be focused on ensuring that all residences constructed with crawl spaces should be designed in a manner that will inhibit water in crawl spaces. This may include the installation of foundation drains, and the installation of rain gutters and roof drains that will carry storm water at least 10-feet away from all residences. Foundation drains are not allowed to drain into the sanitary sewer system,nor the trench backfill for the sewer and/or water service lines. 2. General Comments 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. Page 43 Item 2. 83 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B)for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC I I-5C- 3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. Page 44 Item 2. 84 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=214215&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioX D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=192 9 8 5&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=214368&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.oLy eUink/Doc View.aspx?id=193035&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City Page 45 Item 2. ■ G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES hags://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=192703&dbid=0&repo=Meridian CiU H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) hops://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=213934&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity L NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) hops://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=193631&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU J. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=192699&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCioy K. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) hops://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=203469&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City Community Development School Impact Review: hops://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=203755&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU L. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.asp x?id=19281 7&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: I. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to R-8 and proposed development plan is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in regard to density proposed in the Low Density Residential designated area (over the maximum of 3 units/acre), lack of variety and concentration of one housing type (single- family detached and predominantly single-level homes), lack of significant diversity in lot sizes and lack of usable and quality open space (see Sections V and VI for more information). 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the lack of variety in housing types (i.e. all single-family detached homes) and lack of significant diversity in lot sizes is not compatible with the purpose statement of the residential districts, which states a range of housing opportunities should be provided consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare although testimony has been submitted from adjacent neighbors to the south stating they are not in favor of the lack of transition in lot sizes and zoning proposed to their properties. Page 46 Item 2. 86 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds the impact of the proposed development on area middle and high schools will create an adverse impact as these schools will be (the high school already is) over capacity. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the City at this time as it is located on the fringe of the City and will not maximize existing public services. Further, Staff finds the design of the proposed development plan is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as discussed above in Section V. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6): In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat is not in substantial conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to maximizing public services by prioritizing infill development over parcels on the fringe,provision of a variety of housing types, density in the LDR designated area, transitional densities, adequate provision of services (Fire Dept.), usable open space, etc. (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; Staff finds that public services are available and can be extended to accommodate the proposed development although services would be maximized by development of infill or underdeveloped parcels already in the City instead of on the fringe as is the subject property (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Stafffinds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff 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 Mfor more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property.Public testimony has been submitted from adjacent residents to the south on 1-acre lots stating there is not an adequate transition in lot sizes or zoning to their properties/subdivision. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff finds the proposed development preserves the natural topography/hillside along the eastern boundary of the site. Staff is unaware of any other significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 47 Item 2. ■ C. Private Street(UDC 11-3F-5) In order to approve the application,the director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this article; The Director finds the design of the private streets doesn't comply with the maximum number of dwelling units allowed(i.e. 50) to be accessed by gated private streets—two (2)gates are proposed for access to 121 dwelling units.Additionally, common driveways aren't allowed offprivate streets; however, alternative compliance is requested to this standard. Although not a design issue, the minimum street frontage required in the R-8 district is 40 feet per UDC Table 11-2A-6—the provisions for private streets don't apply where frontage is required,per UDC 11-3F-1. 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 granting approval of the proposed private streets should not cause damage, hazard or nuisance or other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity. 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 shouldn't conflict with the Comprehensive Plan as interconnectivity is proposed to adjacent developments via public streets and the Master Street Map doesn't depict any collector streets in this area. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. (Ord. 10- 1463, 11-3-2010,eff. 11-8-2010) T finds the portion of the residential development where private streets are proposed is gated; however, the number of units (i.e. 121) behind the two (2)gates exceed the maximum number allowed in UDC 11-3F-A.4b. D. Alternative Compliance(UDC 11-513-5E) Required Findings: In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the following: (Ord. 10-1439, 1-12-2010,eff. 1-18-2010) 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds strict adherence to the requirement in UDC 11-3F-4A.6 that prohibits common driveways off a private street is feasible. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and, The Director finds the request for Alternative Compliance does not meet any of the conditions listed in UDC 11-5B-5B.2 for which such requests are allowed. Further, if it did, the Director does not find the proposed alternative provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirement. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. Although the proposed alternative may not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties, the Director finds none of the conditions listed in UDC 11-5B-5B.2 for which such requests are allowed exist. Therefore,per the Findings listed above, the Director denies the request for Alternative Compliance. Page 48 Item 3. 88 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) by KM Engineering, Located at 2810 E. Franklin Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. Item 3. F89 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: November 19, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing for 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) by KM Engineering, Located at 2810 E. Franklin Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing i PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: November 19, 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 3 I i PROJECT NAME: 2810 E. Franklin Rd. (H-2020-0097) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO j 1 j 3 I 2 i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Item 3. F-1 STAFF REPORTC�WE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING November 19,2020 Legend DATE: ' ��Project Lacfl�ian TO: Planning&Zoning Commission 1�T� FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 L SUBJECT: H-2020-0097 2810 E. Franklin Rd.—AZ ` LOCATION: 2810 E. Franklin Rd., in the SE 1/4 of Section 8,Township 3N.,Range 1E. (Parcel#S 1108449000) -- ---- � r I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant requests annexation of 1.01 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 0.92 of an acre(1.01 including adjacent right-of-way to the centerline of E.Franklin Rd.) Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use Single-family residential Proposed Land Use(s) Flex space Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning Commercial(General Retail and Service Commercial) Waterways The Snider Lateral crosses the northern portion of this site. Neighborhood meeting date;#of September 2,2020;3 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) None Pagel Item 3. F9-1 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One(1)existing access via E.Franklin Rd.,an arterial street Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) and entryway corridor,proposed to remain Fire Service No comments were submitted. Police Service No comments were submitted. Wastewater Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent in Franklin Rd. Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunk Estimated Project Sewer ERU's See application WRRF Declining Balance 13.98 Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan Impacts/Concerns No comment Water Distance to Water Services Directly adjacent in Franklin Rd. Pressure Zone 3 Estimated Project Water ERU's See application Water Quality None Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan Impacts/Concerns No comment C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map let legend Project Lcou-non ProjEct Limbs s i■ rs j IU :. 0M I a Pagc 2 Item 3. F92] Zoning Map Planned Development Map (fLegend 0 (fLegend Project Lflcaiion I Project Lacafian »r� +City Linyk — Planned Parcels �=L I _ LAO I { I I I 1 III______IILJJJ I I I I I 1 I 1 1 R.-4 RU r R1 - ----- III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Stephanie Leonard,KM Engineering—9233 W. State St., Boise,ID 83714 B. Owner: Daniel Eisenring— 194 W. Broderick Dr.,Meridian, ID 83646 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 10/30/2020 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 10/30/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 11/5/2020 on site Nextdoor posting 10/30/2020 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS LAND USE: This property is designated as Commercial on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)in the Comprehensive Plan. The Commercial designation provides for a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and visitors. Desired uses may include retail,restaurants,personal and professional services,and office uses, as well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses. Multi-family residential may be allowed in Page 3 Item 3. 93 some cases but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity and amenities. The Applicant proposes to redevelop this site for a flex space use that will consist of office and warehouse space for an automotive tool and equipment supplier. Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage infill development."(3.03.01E) The Comprehensive Plan defines infill as "development on vacant parcels, or redevelopment of existing parcels to a higher and better use that is surrounded by developed property within the City of Meridian."The subject property abuts City annexed land to the north, east and south and is proposed to redevelop with a commercial use. • "Focus development and redevelopment intensity on key transportation corridors." (3.07.02C) The subject property and proposed flex space use is located adjacent to E. Franklin Rd., a key transportation corridor and entryway corridor into the City. Redevelopment of this property to a commercial use is an appropriate intensity in this location along a major transportation corridor. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The property to the north is zoned industrial(I-L); the property to the northwest is developed with a landscape supply business and the property directly to the north is undeveloped. The property to the east is vacant/undeveloped land zoned C-G. The office proposed in the existing building adjacent to Franklin Rd. and the warehouse proposed in the rear building facing industrial zoned land should be compatible with existing and future abutting industrial and commercial uses. • "Require appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors(setback,vegetation, low walls,berms, etc.)."(3.07.01 C) A 35 foot wide landscaped street buffer will be required with development along E. Franklin Rd., an arterial street and entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available in E. Franklin Rd. and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Require appropriate building design, and landscaping elements to buffer, screen,beautify, and integrate commercial,multifamily, and parking lots into existing neighborhoods."(5.01.02D) Street buffer and parking lot landscaping will be required with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and 11-3B-8C, respectively. The design of the new structure is required to be consistent with the standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. • "Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross- access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads, and promoting local and collector street connectivity."(6.01.02B) The Applicant will be required to grant cross-access easements to adjacent properties to the east and west with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2, unless otherwise waived by Council. The Applicant is requesting a waiver from City Council to not provide cross-access easements to Page 4 Item 3. 94 adjacent properties due to the topography of the site combined with the space available for development with retention of the existing structure. • "Annex lands into the corporate boundaries of the City only when the annexation proposal conforms to the City's vision and the necessary extension of public services and infrastructure is provided." (3.03.03) The proposed annexation and flex space use of the property conforms to the City's vision and City water and sewer services are available to be extended to the property. Fire and police service are already provided in this area. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION&ZONING The area proposed to be annexed consists of 1.01 acres of land and includes land to the section line of E. Franklin Rd. The property is currently zoned RUT and located in Ada County. The Applicant proposes to annex the property into the City with a C-G zoning district consistent with the associated FLUM designation of Commercial. A conceptual development plan is proposed as shown in Section VIII.B. The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of City Impact Boundary.A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.A. The topography of this site slopes down significantly from Franklin Rd. to the north property boundary and has approximately a 20 foot grade difference as shown on the grading plan in Section VIII.B. A retaining wall is depicted on the concept plan at the north and west boundaries of the area proposed to be improved with this project. There is an existing residential home on the property that the Applicant proposes to remodel and expand for a flex space use. The concept plan depicts 2,239 square feet(s.f.) of office on the first floor and 1,550 s.f. of office and support uses in the basement of the existing structure, and a new 2,600 s.f. structure for a warehouse.The new structure is proposed to the north behind the existing structure and will include a daylight basement. The user will be an automotive tool and equipment supplier, classified as a flex space use. The business proposes to sell products online to automotive businesses and at-home mechanics and will not conduct any retail sales on the site. Flex space is listed in UDC Table 11-213-2 as a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-18: Flex Space,as follows: A. Office and/or retail showroom areas shall comprise a minimum of thirty percent(30%) of the structure and/or tenant space. The proposed office/support use comprises approximately 60%of the structure in accord with this standard; retail sale of products to the public is not proposed. B. Light industry and warehousing shall not comprise more than seventy percent(70%)of the tenant space.At approximately 4001o, the proposed warehouse area complies with this standard. C. In the C-C, C-G and M-E Districts,roll-up doors shall not be visible from a public street. One roll-up door is proposed at the rear of the structure, which isn't visible from E. Franklin Rd. D. Except in the I-L and I-H Districts,loading docks are prohibited.No loading docks are proposed; because this property is proposed to be zoned C-G, loading docks are prohibited. E. Retail use shall not exceed twenty five percent(25%)of leasable area in any tenant space. No retail sales are proposed. The proposed use and site design complies with the above listed standards. Compliance with the dimensional standards for the C-G zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-213-3 is also required. The existing and proposed structures comply with the minimum setback requirements of the district. A 35' Page 5 Item 3. ■ wide street buffer is required with development along Franklin Rd., an entryway corridor, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. The existing driveway access via Franklin Rd. is proposed to remain for access to the site and has been approved by ACHD. Because it closely aligns with a driveway on the south side of Franklin Rd., relocation of the driveway is not recommended. The UDC (11-3A-3A.2)requires cross-access/ingress- egress easements to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street is not available, unless otherwise waived by City Council. In accord with this standard,because access isn't available via a local street, Staff recommends cross-access easements are provided and driveways constructed to the properties to the east and west. A 20-foot wide cross-access easement is depicted on the concept plan to the east and west but the Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to this requirement to not provide cross-access easements due to the topography of the site and site constraints related to the space available for development.At a minimum, Staff recommends Council require cross- access to the west.Note: Staff contacted Ada County to see if a cross-access easement was provided to the subject property with re-development of the adjacent property to the west but has yet to receive an answer. A minimum of one(1) off-street vehicle parking space is required to be provided for every 500 square feet of gross floor area; and one(1)bicycle parking space is required for every 25 proposed vehicle spaces or portion thereof. Based on 6,389 square feet, a minimum of 12 vehicle spaces and one(1) bicycle space is required. A total of 13 spaces are depicted on the conceptual site plan,including an ADA space,which is one more than required. However,if cross-access driveways are provided to adjacent properties as required by the UDC, it will reduce the parking by up to(3)spaces,which will result in parking below the required minimum standard. If a waiver is not approved by Council to the requirement for cross-access to be provided to adjacent properties to the east and west,the Applicant may apply for alternative compliance to UDC 11-3C-6B.1; or,construct a smaller addition to reduce the parking requirement. Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-8C,which requires a minimum 5-foot wide perimeter landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading or other paved vehicular use areas,landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 8C.1b.A retaining wall and fence is proposed along the west boundary adjacent to the parallel parking spaces where the buffer is required,which doesn't leave adequare area for landscaping.If the site cannot be reconfigured to comply with this standard, alternative compliance may be requested with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. The Snyder Lateral exists in a 40-foot wide easement on the northern portion of the property that is not proposed to be improved. All irrigation laterals are required to be piped unless improved as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1 as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B. The City Council may waive this requirement if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved per UDC 11-3A-6B.3a. The Applicant proposes to fence off the area where the lateral is located to preserve public safety and requests a Council waiver to this requirement. Because a large portion of this site on the north end is not proposed to be improved, Staff recommends weeds are regularly maintained in this area so as not to create a nuisance and in a manner that prevents wildfire in accord with MCC 4-2. Conceptual building elevations with materials were submitted as shown in Section VIII.0 of the remodel of the existing structure and proposed addition. The materials for the front fagade and sides of the existing building consist of stucco with pre-finished metal siding and stone veneer accents; the materials for the proposed warehouse addition consist of a mix of horizontal and vertical metal siding. All improvements to the existing structure and new construction are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A Certificate of Zoning Page 6 Item 3. 96 Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of a building permit application. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application and as recommended by Staff in accord with UDC standards,Staff recommends a DA is required as a provision of annexation(see provision in Section IX.A). VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation&Zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. Page 7 Item 3. F97 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation&Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map 9233 WESTSTA_E STREET I BOISE,ID 93714 1 208.639.6939 I FAX 208.639,6930 septer'nt 22,2Q20 Project No.20-113 Exhi bit A Legal Description far Annexatlon and Rezone to C-G A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 8,Township 3 North,Range 1 East, B_M.,Ada County, Idaho and being mare particularly described as follows_ Commending at a found brass cap marking the Southeast turner of saki Section 8,which bears h189'54'35"W a distance of 2,571.03 fiat from a fotmd brass cap marking cite South.1/4 corner of said section 8, Thence following the southerly I l ne of said Southeast 1/4,bl89'54'35"W a disuncE of 1,171.79 feet to the POINT OF BEGINFIING Th ence following Slid southerly Ii ne;,N89'54'35"W a distance of 152.04 feet; Thence leaving said southerly line,ND7°1.2'WE a distance of 290,38 feet to a found 0-inch rebafon the boundary I I ne of Olson a ntt Bush Subdivision No-3(Book 107,Pages 14,905—14,997 of Plats); Thence fol lowing said subdivision boundary line the following two�2)courses- 1. 589'58'15"E a distance of 149.84 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar, 2, 500'13'25"E a distance of 290.54 feet to the PMNT OF BEGINNING. Sold parcel contains 1.OD6 a ores,more or less,a nd is subject to all exlsti ng easome nts a nd/ar rights-of- way of rewrd or implied. All subdivisions,deeds,records of wrvew,and other instruments of record referenced herein are recorded domments of the could in which these described lands are slUmtad In, Attached hereto is Exh2it B and by this reference is hereby made a part of. AIL LAND 0 6B cry, �a bF #BSc ENGINEERS SURVEYORS I PLANNERS Page 8 Item 3. F 8 Olson and Guth Sul division MD-3 Lot 8 Lot 3 rot 10 cF,Ns isr t f) 0 OF rs — +" c%1 HOMM ArEa: 1,095w AC ` iJnQlatited A AM`u37A644SO d W LCrt 11 51106M1385A5 co Cukr�nLZoning=RUT ° Propa9e6 ZOning:{-c- cy N jar} O � O � � Uti 4 RfW 'Rl'r li�r1' RJw— ' ' 0 v $ 1�47-�D� P(MNT OF BEMNING 7y71.t4' 8 9 _ N89'54'35" 1$ ,04" — 17# lfi S 1/4 CORNER SMTION a EIASM OF 0EAMND POINT OF COMMERCEMENT FOLdNf} RPAGS CAP E. Franklin Rd, SE CORNER SE)nON a PER CP&.F INST. Nu. iO41$7@B4 LEGEND VMIMID BRASS C.4P "IRS 5291 12-04* 0 50 100 iso FOUND BRASS CAF 5/9YaNCH REMR Phan 5c3fe:1"w 50' a 1 2-INiGH REBID CALCULATED POINT &amREZONE f30UmDARy —"*STING RFGffT-OF-WAY i ` — — —SEQTK4N LJNE E NV I M E E R I W G 9213 WEST STATEWMFr ` AIWCE T BOUNDARY LINE SORE,IMW BR14. P"5 1210 63-40!9 EXHIBIT B w �dlP.ram CAM alfano ANNEXATION AN 1) REZONE TO C'C ?auEYhn 7C :13 SHED A PORTION OF THE 5 V2 OF THE SE 114 OF 1 OF 1 SECTION 8, T314, RIE, ADA COUNTY, IDAH0 Page 9 Item 3. F9—q B. Conceptual Development Plan&Grading Exhibit(dated: November 5,2020) k I f I I L--' I __--L FlFtlllllJN RV . p "!li Yn i6FL Page 10 Item 3. Fl-oo J - ` -- -- — - ".- _.------.. . -L - • EFHA.Yi4JH ild�' �— — Page 11 Item 3. 1o1 1 C. Conceptual Building Elevations(dated: September 10, 2020) y Or"L YEhidlaM _tii l�I.E�ILIe�enx+.W nFa iti[{ +.i 1 WLG�IG T. EH r r 1 h�� 3.01 - F CrFCE�� _C71 r"wa v 1'T Pi. '.h q' r Page 12 Item 3. F102 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan included in Section VIII.B, applicable standards in the Unified Development Code, and the provisions contained herein. b. Cross-access/ingress-egress easements shall be granted to adjoining properties to the east and west with development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2,unless otherwise waived by City Council. Driveways shall be constructed within the easements to the property boundary to facilitate future cross-access between properties. Recorded copies of the easements shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. c. The Snyder Lateral,lying on the northern portion of the subject property, shall be piped or otherwise covered with development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B,unless otherwise waived by City Council. d. The unimproved portion of the site shall be regularly maintained in a manner that prevents weeds from being a nuisance and prevents wildfire in accord with MCC 4-2. e. All development shall comply with the structure and site design standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 19 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Sanitary sewer and water service lines currently exist to this address. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT No comments were received. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments were received. E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments were received. F. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.ory/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=214 62 8&db id=0&repo=Meridian City G. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancioy.ory/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=21641 S&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU Page 13 Item 3. F103 X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the Applicant's proposal to annex the subject 1.01 acre property with a C-G zoning district for the development of a flex space use is consistent with the associated Commercial FLUM designation for this property. (See Section V above for more information) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment and subsequent development will comply with the regulations of the C-G zoning district and will provide for the service needs of the community in accord with the purpose statement of the Commercial districts. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment will 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 Stafffinds the proposed map amendment will not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City, including the school district. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. Page 14 Applicant Presentation 2810 Franklin RoadNovember 19, 2020City of Meridian Annexation Application Project Location & Information G-CRUT Concept Site Plan Building Elevations Waiver Requests Waiver Requests Thank you Item 4. Ll 04 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) by The Land Group, Inc., Located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total build-out on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1, Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district. Item 4. 105 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: November 19, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing for Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) by The Land Group, Inc., Located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total build- out on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1, Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET I DATE: November 1.9, 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 PROJECT NAME: Poiema Calvary Chapel (H-2020-0095) i 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 4. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 11/19/2020 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner ® �® 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0095 Poiema Calvary Chapel LOCATION: The site is located at 3727 E. Lake Hazel ` Road, in the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 of e Section 4,Township 2N.,Range 1 E. -------- 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit request to construct a new church facility built in two phases to total 52,000 square feet and 320 parking spaces at total build-out on approximately 7 acres of land on Lot 1,Block 2 of Poiema Subdivision in the R-15 zoning district,by The Land Group,Inc. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 14.87 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium-High Density Residential Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Religious Institution(Church) Lots(#and type; 1 total lot—lot previously reserved for Church bldg./common) building site in Poiema Subdivision(H-2020-0035) Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed to be constructed in two(2)phases. Open Space (acres,total Open space is not required with this use and the open [%]/buffer/qualified) space shown on the site plan was approved with the Poiema Subdivision in August 2020. Physical Features (waterways, Ten Mile Creek runs along the western boundary but hazards, flood plain,hillside) is not on the subject site. Part of the site resides within the 100-year floodplain zone. Neighborhood meeting date; # August 4, 2020—no attendees of attendees: Page 1 Item 4. F107 Description Details Page History(previous approvals) Subject site is located on one of the lots of the Annexation and Preliminary Plat approval for Poiema Subdivision(H-2020-0035; DA Inst. #2020-138120). This approval preliminarily granted the Church use but required that a conditional use permit was approved as is required within the R-15 zoning district. B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) No; Staff level comply with letter. • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Access Proposed access is from E. Lake Hazel Road, an (Arterial/Collectors/State arterial. The proposed access is via a new public local Hwy/Local)(Existing and street. ACHD is allowing a modification to their Proposed) district policies to allow this access as there is no other lesser classified street available. Stub A new stub street is proposed with the preliminary Street/Interconnectivity/Cross plat to the adjacent property to the west from the Access proposed local street noted above. This access is approved by ACHD as noted in their staff report.The church site will have over 300 parking spaces within the building lot but there is no need for any cross- access as the adjacent roadways to the site are all public roadways. Existing Road Network E. Lake Hazel, an arterial, is existing with 2 travel lanes. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ No; Applicant is required to improve frontage with Buffers landscaping and detached sidewalk with the preliminary plat. Proposed Road Improvements Applicant is not proposing to improve E. Lake Hazel as it is scheduled to be widened to 5 travel lanes by ACHD in 2024. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 3 miles from Fire Station#4 • Fire Response Time Part of the proposed development falls within the 5 minute response time goal. • Resource Reliability 78%(below the target rating of 80%) • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—Residential with hazards; current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project due to nearby waterway if an emergency were to occur. • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access,road widths, and turnarounds. Page 2 Item 4. F108 Description Details Page Police Service(comments for the overall subdivision; no specific comments for the Church site). • Distance to Police Station 5.5 miles • Response Time Goal of 3-5 minutes • Accessibility MPD has no concerns with access into this development;the MPD can service this development if approved. • Additional Comments There is no call data in this area because the proposed development is at the edge of City Limits. Between March 2019 and March 2020,MPD responded to 7 calls for service within one mile of this proposed development. The crime count on those calls was one(1). Between March 2019 and March 2020,MPD responded to 9 crashes within 1 mile of this proposed development. West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) No comments submitted for this project. • Capacity of Schools • #of Students Enrolled Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining 13.92 Balance • Project Consistent with YES WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Additional Comments • Flows have been committed • Existing sewer in Lake Hazel;proposed sewer as art of Poiema Subdivision. Water • Distance to Water 0 feet Services • Pressure Zone 5 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with YES Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns No utilities were shown for the Church portion of this property. All proposed infrastructure serving the Page 3 Item 4. Flog] Description Details Page church must be submitted,reviewed, and approved by Public Works. Page 4 1 1 1 �, -■ _ :III i{NIi= {���C-'.1n111� � •11 Inn ir��1111111��1.,� J.j� - IIII 1 �- • 1 - 4 • -- - nnln ■ -ulnm ■�r■I\� o■��■L m ml •`mm�n nmmn\►1n1\ - 7".1 OP, `��. ,1_IJIIIIII 11 W,VI IIII-;,nuumn i ., � d- 111 ��IlAlllll 111411111�� J'-= s i�llnnn� •r•114 I,�,a•r J � � 'nn ini . 4i nn - •. t�1r � � �,/�IIIIIIIIIP �•, llllllllll_ i �e V - �>: a L/i,•' IIIIIIIIII? � ,�,.� •x:; a IIIIII c •— ■ LAKE a oil IIII►\:lnlllllllll� - • - • glpnn 11nIn1 * - • - • inn nun -- _ �glpnm Cllnlnl •�• ��:: _�_-- IIII -• �:: __ -- IIII v --i- � •1 11::7C IIIIII H 41. •1 11::7C IIIIII •Ian nw n�=nm � _� nw Ire=nnnd!-._ uu _. ���.n n n nn _ 6 1• p`�.n n n nnln-- - �? �ullll•� L IIII I^-mn11■�illlal::::� •_ e 7 IIII I^-moll■►I111111::-•• nuun•- -anon_`nnnn nlinTil:_=\; - r ��'�•.. =mom_s nnnn nlinTil=_-_ -�■ �• ■ �IIIIIIII= Inllm=�JIIIIIIII/11111111 77=�= ■ ��wj�►• :--.IIIIII■=u111- '_IIIIIIII- •11111111/11111111 77��.- ■�� ■• -ulnm�.mm�n.nunm-:��: � � nnnu-nm= '-neon- mom unuw---�i. r■I\� 1■�� l m nu-`nnnnn nnmw\Glnl- 111\� 11■�i�.71�iinmiel 'yam ml-~nnnnn muuwP_.l ala.^ 1111111111 UI IIII 1111NIIIO ■■■■_nN1 1111111 Illll unnrW UI IIII Il lllllm Illlllllllrr 111 IIIIIIII _-- 111 G IIIIIIII 111111111 11�4.'1_-IIIwI:� J:=- Inns _�___-�1Piw:R1 111�.,e== I IJ•=- - Pam muuu e nn ili IIII� 1�Fff'!,r1"::.....::. � U' nnmlll�n,%� nnuw t• a IIIIIIIIII= li hu,r�'_�-1�::���.- / .. I, IIII...... Q. IIIIIIIIIIII� i :�i.: .. � .. • /hQ�"""""''�'r IIIIIIIIII:: Ir�� W�.•.. __ 011111111111'- - j•ar° I- W�iynunnumfli innliun' ii L—AKE=HA—ZEL—' LAKE HA—ZEL—' 1 ' 1Im® _■■- W-01111,1111,1111,11,111 . 1 1I1III '�au ' -1 Item 4. F-1111 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 10/30/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 10/30/2020 Site Posting 11/5/2020 Nextdoor posting 10/30/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridiancitE.or /g compplan) Medium-High Density Residential—This designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high-quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity. The Applicant reserved this building lot for this church during the annexation and platting process that was approved in August, 2020. Because a church is a conditional use within the proposed R-15 zoning district, Staff did not analyze its use in that application other than to state that it requires a conditional use permit. The reserved lot is approximately 7 acres in size and the proposed project is proposed to be built in two phases. The second phase will include a larger sanctuary, an outdoor amphitheater, and additional parking. The subject site lies at the edge of the City's area of impact on the south side of E. Lake Hazel road, approximately Y2 mile east of Eagle Road. There is existing City of Meridian zoning directly across Lake Hazel to the north (Bicentennial Farm Subdivision) but no other existing Meridian zoning is adjacent to the subject site. There is a golf course directly to the east of this property, within the City of Boise. Despite minimal existing zoning directly to the west and southwest of this site, the City is currently processing multiple projects in this area, as seen in the Planned Development Map above. The comprehensive plan discusses creating an identity and approving projects that integrate gathering places between uses, especially between those that encourage social activity and engagement. Churches tend to do this inherently through civic engagement and with the incorporation of the shared open space area and other site designs like integrated open space, the outdoor amphitheater, and adequate buffers between uses, Staff finds that the proposed use meets this comprehensive plan goal. This project, if approved, should add an additional service and use for adjacent developments that is compatible with the future single-family residential both directly adjacent and those in close proximity. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https:llwww.meridiancitE.or /�comQplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross- access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads, and promoting local and collector street connectivity"(6.01.0213).All accesses for this development are to remain the Page 6 Item 4. F112 same for the proposed Church site that were approved with the Poiema Subdivision. This includes the main access points for the parking lot being to the proposed public roads and the emergency access to Lake Hazel along the western property boundary. The Applicant has proposed the main access into this development as far east on their parcel as possible which ACHD has agreed to modem their policy to allow for this additional access onto E. Lake Hazel. Once the land to the west redevelops, additional public roads will be available for church traffic to get back to the arterial road network. In the near-term, all traffic will filter onto Lake Hazel at the main entrance to the subdivision and ACHD has reviewed and approved the traffic generations for this use through the TIS review. "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(5.01.01F). There can always be concerns that arise from the proposition of a large parking lot or outdoor amphitheater when near a residential development. City code will be enforced by confirming the project's conformance with code for both parking lot lighting and any noise. The Applicant has stated that no permanent sound equipment will be used in the amphitheater and any outdoor speakers that would be used intermittently will be required to meet UDC 11-3A-13. "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00). The proposed Church development should be compatible with nearby uses as it is a community serving use and will be required to conform to city code requirements regarding lighting and noise as noted above. In addition, the church and single-family residential homes all within Poiema will share the large open space lot in the center of the development. The Church will be subject to the same CC&R's of the residential which should further integrate the two uses and minimize any conflicts that may arise. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on the subject site and no site improvements are known at this time. The Applicant will be constructing the public roads and a majority of the overall site improvements with the single-family portion of the Poiema Subdivision. The Applicant will be required to obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance for this building and at that time all required site improvements will be conformed with by all City Departments.ACHD is not requiring any additional road improvements because Lake Hazel is scheduled to be widened in 202312024 to five (S) lanes within their CIP. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The proposed use is a church which is listed as a conditionally permitted use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Part of the property(along the western boundary and Tenmile Creek) lies within the 100-year floodplain boundary. The Applicant is currently awaiting the results of a floodplain study to determine the types of constraints and/or possibilities of reducing this boundary area. See Public Works comments for further requirements of the site. The Applicant is proposing the project in two(2)phases. The first phase is proposed with a sanctuary and associated offices and rooms, an outdoor amphitheater, and an outdoor patio area that is shared with a pond-less water feature. The second phase is shown to include a larger sanctuary with an enlarged entry area,additional rooms at the eastern end of the building, and additional parking. Staff supports the phased development plan to allow the Church to develop at their pace over time. Page 7 Item 4. F113 In addition,Churches have one specific use standard(UDC 11-4-3-6)noting that all accessory uses to the church shall be permitted to the extent of the underlying zoning district. The Applicant shall comply with this standard. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The R-15 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet and allows a maximum building height of 40 feet. The church is proposed on approximately 7 acres of land is shown with a maximum height of 30 feet for those areas meant for occupation and other architectural features measure approximately 35 feet in height; these dimensions meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted site plan and elevations. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed via two(2) driveway connections to the new local street into this development from E. Lake Hazel Road. The Applicant is also proposing one (1)more driveway connection to the east-west stub street that connects to the western property line south of the church lot. These connections appear to meet UDC requirements.As noted above,the Applicant is also proposing an emergency only access out to Lake Hazel that runs along the western boundary. This access is intended to have multiple parking spaces along it upon construction of the second phase of development—Fire has noted their approval with this design. This emergency access is already conditioned to be built prior to any certificates of occupancy being obtained by the Applicant with the Annexation aporovals. G. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B for nonresidential uses at the ratio of one (1) space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. Bicycle racks are also required to be provided at the ratio of one(1)per every 25 parking spaces.All phases of development will be required to comply with these standards throughout the project.No specific parking plan was submitted with the application. In the first phase of development, the gross floor area is approximately 25,000 square feet requiring a minimum of 50 parking spaces be provided;the site plan shows 155 spaces will be provided with phase 1. The second phase of development adds approximately 27,00 more square feet making a total gross floor area of 52,000 square feet requiring a minimum of 104 parking spaces,the site plans shows 320 parking spaces being provided with phase 2.All parking spaces are noted as being 9'x 20'which exceeds UDC requirements. All drive aisles are shown as 25 feet wide and the Applicant is showing 12 bicycle racks;the drive aisles meet UDC requirements and each bicycle rack should lock at two(2) bicycles therefore providing 24 bicycle spaces and exceeding the UDC requirement of 13 total bicycle spaces for 320 parking spaces. Parking for a busy weekend church service is always of concern to neighbors and Staff. The Applicant is aware of this and has proposed parking that exceeds the code requirements by 300%.In addition, the local streets abutting the church lot have street sections that are 33 feet wide which accommodate parking on both sides of the street where no driveways exist. Specifically, almost all the frontage on the west and north side of the local streets will be available for on-street parking. This frontage can allow approximately 31 additional on-street parking spaces during both phases of development as the local roads will be constructed prior to any other development on the subject property. Therefore,Staff finds that the proposed parking is adequate for the proposed use. Page 8 Item 4. F114 H. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): No multi-use pathways are proposed or required with this development because the Master Pathways Plan(MPP) shows a multi-use pathway along the opposite side of the Ten Mile Creek on an adjacent parcel. There are no pathways shown on the MPP along this side of Lake Hazel and the required detached sidewalk will be constructed with the residential portion of the Poiema Subdivision as was required in its approval. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): The required detached sidewalk along E. Lake Hazel will be constructed with the residential portion of the subdivision as noted above.Five-foot sidewalks are required adjacent to the building and the Applicant is showing sidewalks that appear to be at least 6 feet wide adjacent to the building and connect to the attached sidewalk along the abutting local street. The proposed sidewalks meet UDC requirements. Although the Applicant is meeting UDC requirements, staff finds that some additional pedestrian connections should occur to help churchgoers get to and from the parking areas more efficiently and safely. Specifically, the area that surrounds the amphitheater on its west and south edge should incorporate a 5-foot sidewalk where only grass is shown in a similar path as depicted in red below. This additional sidewalk would offer an additional path for those who are parking in this area and would help minimize foot traffic within the drive aisles. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): '\ Patio \ I I M \\ 1 s ® I I \ \ ® I I \\\�0 79 iBl I \ Amphitheater I I \ \ I \ 1 \\ \ ------ _____________ \ 12 t All parking areas are required to provide at least 5-feet of perimeter landscaping and meet the landscape requirements of UDC 11-3B-8. The Applicant's submitted landscape plans show two different proposals. The landscape plan showing the full-build out does not show the correct number of trees,the detailing of the other required vegetative ground cover,nor compliance with the required number of trees within parking islands. The other submitted landscape plan that shows only phase 1, shows more compliance with these requirements; the Applicant should submit revised landscape plans showing compliance at full-build out prior to CZC submittal. Page 9 Item 4. F-1151 K. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3U): There is no open space requirement for the proposed use of a Church. However,the Applicant has expressed a desire to share the large, 15,000 square foot open space lot(Lot 2,Block 2)with the residential portion of the Poiema Subdivision. This request was discussed and preliminarily approved with the annexation and platting of Poiema Subdivision. In addition, as seen on the submitted landscape plans,the Applicant is proposing outdoor areas for use by churchgoers including a patio area,a pond-less water feature,and an outdoor amphitheater. Staff is not aware if these additional areas are intended to be shared with the residents. The shared open space at the south end of the development is consistent with the requirements of the recorded development agreement. L. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): No fencing is shown on the submitted landscape plans. If any fencing is to occur,it would be only for the subdivision boundary and installed with the Poiema Subdivision. All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. M. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant has submitted sample elevations of the proposed church and concept renderings for the phase 1 development(see Section VII.D). All nonresidential structures require administrative design review approval prior to obtaining building permits and the Applicant has not applied for this concurrently with the conditional use permit. The submitted elevations show a single-story structure with a maximum height of 30 feet for any area that will be occupied. The elevations show architectural features extending to approximately 35 feet in height and overall design that appear to include stucco, high-end siding, and stone. In addition, the elevations show both shed roof and more traditional flat roof designs adding to the architectural elements of the building. There appears to be adequate modulation in wall plans, especially on the North elevation that faces Lake Hazel.As discussed, the Applicant is required to obtain administrative design review approval of these elevations and at this point Staff will make any required recommendations to the design of the building facades. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit with the conditions noted in Section VIILA per the findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. Commission: Enter Summary of Commission Decision. Page 10 Item 4. F116 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site-Plan—Full Build-out p pl.14 o3 ppv D IMUH aged N .v s Fapen aanseaul jadeyo""0 . Ea ioift!A �4om4�Pasodad a_: �., 'Cn G 8 F ¢W 2 � a 63rt6�' i ti F JU b C C000063000UUOO C O 0 b A / O 1 7� d / (0 i, Ln 40, _ / L i / a _ o L ro / O i 6 t ro ro V Page 11 Item 4. 117 B. Site-Plan—Phase One (1)Build-out a Appaj Lpinqo p-oc-d U) as R�R nos(D G(i) mo L 11 U lilt �o ---------- - ro > Ln ro is cc IL ra ro U Page 12 Item 4. ■ C. Landscape Plans(dated: 06/15/2020) ----------------------------- ----- Vq iv CO A3 T .L-1 o C) (D Q(D Q,- J� i a QQ OG % H lok v! Mir 7 CALVARY CHAPEL LAKE HAZEL Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley Inc. —E LAKE—EL Page 13 Item 4. ■ IT C7 3 LAKE HAZEL ROAD IF I CB �NX WEAIE BUffFR—RFfFR M a EUWNBA SUBDIVISION Fffl—I NARY PIAI ONJVNI XOS FOR ORE IXFORMNION ° A O RDWXF l l PENNRX I I I — I ®I® A Q CO O I I• I 'I I I I I -U, D WO D STREET B _ r m _ V� Z3 � F, ,. CALVARY CHAPEL- LAKE HAZEL Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley Inc. { yy O b z^ ap 3727E.EnKH; LRDAD I I N9ond on.Idaho 9364E Page 14 Item 4. ■ n C U) o / co / Y �1- m7T77II ❑J / r. R ,,y: \ fD '/ v ---- off - - Q a,� i Op_ L `4 = - - ts 1 -- �; a . i I } I I :0 oo®00000000�000000 0 000 � � � � m % y cEr 78 � (n 4 m Proposed Church Facility for =_ N i e _ fiF3 Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley e r N Lk.Hari Road,Ada C Inty,idano C Page 15 Item 4. 121 D. Conceptual Building Elevations III .i i �.��• .�� .1111 iii Ili6' (A e' In em m e m n m m > > c S 71 ]. n �$ e m k _ IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII III II v f-h € r.= IL iIHH7 g a 9 7 § e � e _ v `�•4 # n s a? 9U Proposed Church Facility for �= Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley w Lake Raml Road,Pda County,Idaho Page 16 I� T.' F 1 � 4�CHA ERY TREASURE VALLEY .....-,... 1 4�CHAPERY �`� � v s �W wW� i 41 s......., .....- e 4�CHA CHAPEL v TRFASI:RF VA4I FY ....�. ION I � - � 1 `ti CALVARY v 4�CHAPEL v TREASURE VAI I FY �,: mid w. t 1 • l ........... .......... ...... ....... Avow 3 �ti CALVARY � Y 4�CHAPEL v TREASURE VAiLEY .a��,.�„ t ); , • 1 3 _- TRFASURE --- Page 19 Item 4. 125 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable Development Agreement provisions (DA Inst. #2020-138120)and conditions of approval associated with the Poiema Subdivision(H-2020- 0035). 2. The applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-6, Church or Place of Religious Worship. 3. Prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the site plan included in Section VII.A &B, dated 01/30/2020, shall be revised as follows: a. Construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the parking spaces and drive aisle to the south and west of the amphitheater as shown in the rendering within the staff report in Section V.I. b. With the phase 2 site plan,provide traffic calming wherever feasible, especially along the long drive aisle in the west of the site that also serves as the emergency access.Verify with Meridian Fire on any proposals. 4. Prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal,the landscape plans included in Section VII.C, dated 01/30/2020 and 02/18/2020 shall be revised as follows: a. Revise all landscape plans to show the a 5-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the parking spaces to the west of the proposed amphitheater, commensurate with condition 3.a above. b. Revise the landscape plans with each phase to show compliance with the parking lot landscape standards in UDC 11-313-8. c. Correct all landscape plans to show the required 70%vegetative ground cover in all landscaped areas as required in UDC 11-3B-5N. 5. The Applicant shall construct the landscape buffer and additional dedicated right-of-way to E. Lake Hazel to include no more than 10 feet of gravel and the rest vegetated in accord with UDC 11-313-7C. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the R-15 dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-613 for nonresidential uses and the Applicant shall provide no less off-street parking than is proposed on the master site plan at the time of full-build out. 8. Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance applications are required to be submitted and approved prior to submittal of any building permit applications for any construction phases. 9. Future design of the proposed church building shall be substantially consistent with the submitted elevations in Exhibit VII.D and shall adhere to the standards in the Architectural Standards Manual for nonresidential structures. 10. The Ten Mile Creek that abuts the subject site along its western boundary shall be protected during construction. Page 20 Item 4. F126] 11. The Applicant shall construct a temporary turnaround with a minimum turning radius of 45 feet at the end of the proposed western stub street in alignment with ACHD policies. The turnaround is required until such time that the stub street connects to future streets in the development to the west. 12. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2)years to commence the church use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the use has not begun within two(2)years of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation or a time extension must be requested in accord with UDC 11-513-6F. 13. The Applicant shall complete all required improvements prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. It is unlawful to use or occupy any building or structure until the Building Official has issued a Certificate of Occupancy. 14. The Applicant shall comply with the Outdoor Lighting standards outlined in UDC 11-3A-11. 15. The Applicant shall comply with the Outdoor Speaker System standards outlined in UDC 1I- 3A-13 when using any amplified speakers outdoors in the amphitheater or other outdoor area. 16. Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 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. 1.2 An FLDP(Flood Plain Development Permit)is required. Currently the property is within an "A Zone". Study submitted requires culvert on Lake Hazel to be replaced and LOMR completed to change maps. 1.3 Sanitary sewer mains are not allowed in common driveways. 1.4 Applicant to provide"to and through" sanitary sewer mainline connection to the property to the west. 1.5 The water main extension in E. Lake Hazel Road is shown in the wrong utility corridor, as depicted on the conceptual engineering submitted with the application. The water main should remain north of center-line instead of being moved south of center-line. In addition, the water main in E. Lake Hazel Road needs to be a 12-inch diameter,not an 8-inch diameter as shown.We prefer to have a mainline stub or service line (whichever is needed)to the future church lot to eliminate cutting the new road in the future. 1.6 The geotechnical investigative report prepared by MTI(Materials Testing&Inspection) dated March 7,2003,and updated July 24, 2020, indicates some significant groundwater and soils concerns,and specific construction considerations and recommendations. The applicant shall be responsible for the strict adherence of these considerations and recommendations to help ensure that homes are constructed upon suitable bearing soils, and that shallow groundwater does not become a problem with home construction. 1.7 Due to the significant groundwater and soils concerns on site, structures are to be founded on conventional reinforced spread footings and walls,and slab-on-grade foundations. 2. General Conditions of Approval Page 21 Item 4. F127] 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available,a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B.Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. Page 22 Item 4. 128 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities,etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 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 Page 23 Item 4. F129] 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. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=215805&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky D. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL(BPBC) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=188199&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ity E. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=214579&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv F. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=215819&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC i &cr--1 IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E) Required 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; Staff finds that the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed because the proposed building, excess parking, and some additional green space is proposed on the subject site meeting all dimensional and development regulations in the R-I5 zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title;As discussed in Section V.A, Staff finds that the proposed use is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. 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.; Stafffinds the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the Church will be compatible with adjacent uses as analyzed and discussed throughout Section V of the staff report; the proposed use should add to the character of the immediate area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity;If it complies with all conditions of approval, Staff finds the proposed use 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; Staff finds the required and essential public facilities nearby can adequately serve the proposed use;Police, Fire, and the highway district have also offered their support of the proposed use. Page 24 Item 4. F130] 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;Because the Applicant is responsible for connecting and extending any public services to serve their site, Staff finds the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs nor be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes, glare or odors; If all conditions of approval and city codes are complied with, Staff finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare; traffic is analyzed by ACHD and they have not raised concerns regarding the proposed use due to the adjacent section of Lake Hazel being widened in the next five (5)years. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance; (Ord. 05-1170,8-30- 2005,eff. 9-15-2005)Staff is not aware of any historic features on the subject site and the adjacent Ten Mile Creek is not on the subject site but will be protected during construction as is required by city code. Page 25 Item 5. Ll 31 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision (H-2020-0104) by Wadsworth Development, Located at 3085 E. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of five (5) commercial building lots in the C-G zoning district for ownership purposes. Item 5. 132 (:�N-VE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: November 19, 2020 Topic: Public Hearing for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision (H-2020-0104) by Wadsworth Development, Located at 3085 E. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of five (5) commercial building lots in the C-G zoning district for ownership purposes. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET c DATE: November 19, 2020 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 5 PROJECT NAME: Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision (H-2020-0104) 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 11/19/2020 Legend DATE: I�l U Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ®- FF SUBJECT: H-2020-0104 Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision ' ' IBM 'J Ey LOCATION: The site is located at 3085 E. Ustick - Road, at the southwest corner of S. Eagle Road and E. Ustick Road,in the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 5,Township 3N., Range 1 E. ' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for Preliminary Plat approval consisting of five (5)commercial building lots on 3.29 acres in the C-G zoning district for ownership purposes,by Wadsworth Development. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 3.29(C-G zoning district) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Regional Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 5 building lots Physical Features(waterways, Milk Lateral runs along southern boundary of property; hazards,flood plain,hillside) portion of irrigation easement that is on the subject site is being respected and was verified during CZC approval. Neighborhood meeting date;#of July 27,2020—One(1)attendee(representative of Kohls) attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2019-0082(DA Modification to remove the subject site from an existing DA and enter into a new one specific to this site;DA Inst.#2019-121599);A-2019-0376(CZC for parking lot,landscaping,and other relevant site improvements);A-2020-0163(CZC and Design Review approval of an urgent care facility on the SEC pad site). Page 1 Item 5. F134] B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes;Comply with letter noting review that occurred with urgent care CZC(A-2020-0163). • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via a proposed shared driveway into Hwy/Loca1)(Existing and Proposed) the development from E.Ustick Rd.No direct access is proposed or allowed to E.Ustick Rd.or N.Eagle Rd. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Subject site has existing cross-access agreements in place Access for adjacent properties to the west and south.All of these properties will be accessed via drive aisles. Existing Road Network No Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ The required sidewalks and landscaping is currently under Buffers construction commensurate with the approved CZC plans (A-2019-0376). Proposed Road Improvements Applicant is not required to perform any road improvements because Ustick and Eagle are at their full- build out at this time. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.2 miles from Fire Station#3 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#3 reliability currently 80% • Risk Identification Risk Factor 3—commercial • Accessibility Proposed project meets all Fire required access,road widths,and turnarounds. Police Service • Distance to Station 3.5 miles from Meridian Police Department • Response Time Approximately 2.5 minute response time to an emergency. • Call Data Between 10/1/2019-9/30/2020,the Meridian Police Department responded to 1,379 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development.The crime count on the calls for service was 98. See attached documents for details. Between 10/1/2019-9/30/2020,the Meridian Police Department responded to 92 crashes within a mile of the proposed development. See attached documents for details. • Additional Concerns None Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services 0 • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 13.98 Project Consistent with WW YES Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns Flow is committed Water • Distance to Water Services 0' • Pressure Zone 3 Page 2 Item 5. 135 Description Details Page • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water YES Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns No comments C. Project Area Maps .Future Land Use Map .Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend _ 0Project Location Project Location Medium_ Density " a ® Residential Commercial cit -Low Density � I Residential .Zoning Map -Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend 0 Project Location I Project Location C-1 y City Limits R-3 Planned Parcels i� ® C-N C-GEH RUT R-1_C R-2 R-1-A ____c-C _ ' a Rl R'-8 _R-_8 Rl ' -- - R;2� ,,� - -RUT-R-2 RUT o0 Rl R:1 R r% Y n o�p R-4 R11 _ --- 72 -A R-2-R-1 R-4 L-4 C"C R-40 4 --- `�R1 CKG rR,48n - Page 3 Item 5. F136] III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Brad Watson,Wadworth Development— 166 E. 14000 South, Ste. 210,Draper,UT 84020 B. Owner: Nate Ballard,Wadworth Development 166 E. 14000 South, Ste. 210, Draper, UT 84020 C. Representative: Kristen McNeill, The Land Group,Inc.—462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100,Eagle, ID 83616 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 10/30/2020 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 10/30/2020 Site Posting 11/5/2020 Nextdoor posting 10/30/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The subject property was annexed in 2003 as part of a larger annexation area(AZ-03-018). There was a Development Agreement(DA) associated with this annexation which was modified in 2019 to remove this property from that DA(H-2019-0082) and enter into a new one serving just this site(DA Inst.#2019-121599).The Applicant does not have to subdivide the property in order to develop it but is choosing to for future ownership purposes.The Applicant is required to comply with all existing DA provisions.Each building site will be evaluated for compliance with all applicable previous approvals at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application submittal on each building lot. A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) Mixed Use regional—In general,the purpose of mixed-use designations is to provide for a combination of compatible land uses within a close geographic area that allows for easily accessible and convenient services for residents and workers. The intent is to promote developments that offer functional and physical integration of land uses,to create and enhance neighborhood sense of place,and to allow developers a greater degree of design and use flexibility. Specifically,the purpose of the regional 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 supporting uses. The subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of E. Ustick Road(an arterial street) and N. Eagle Road/SH SS. Staff and the Applicant understand the importance of providing more commercial uses in this area, especially on an undeveloped corner. To the east and across Eagle Road are two large commercial centers; to the north is an additional Page 4 Item 5. F137] commercial center. These surrounding areas provide a plethora of commercial uses that are used at a regional level. Directly to the west of the subject site is intended to be a high-end indoor gym (Villasport) and further to the south of the site is existing residential and some community serving commercial.As these lots get developed over time, Staff believes that they will continue to add to the City's commercial base and will likely be a higher benefit to users of the future Villasport and residents to the southwest of this site. Staff is of the opinion that there is less need for these five relatively small commercial lots to serve a regional base than those sites to the north and east. In addition, this project, in conjunction with the approved uses to the west, should satisfy the comprehensive plan and mixed-use policies. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridianciV.or /�compplan): Some applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Require appropriate building design, and landscaping elements to buffer, screen,beautify, and integrate commercial,multifamily, and parking lots into existing neighborhoods."(5.01.02D). This subdivision has received previous approvals that have analyzed the required landscape buffers and site design.All perimeter landscaping will be constructed outside of each individual lot and outside of the platting process. The approved landscaping meets all code requirements and helps to beautify the property while keeping the building lots visible. The landscaping also creates the required buffer to the two adjacent busy streets. In addition, each future building site will add to the perimeter landscaping to enhance each of their sites. There are no directly adjacent residences and likely, the subject site will not be directly viewable from the nearest residential neighborhood once other properties redevelop in the near future. The Applicant chose to construct the parking on the interior of all the proposed building lots which helps screen the parking lot from public view. "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).As noted above, the site design hides the parking lot from adjacent uses to the extent possible and allows each building to be integrated into the surrounding properties. Commercial zoning exists in all directions around the subject site which lends itself to not requiring any major buffer to a residential development. Staff finds the approved site design meets the best design practices outlined in plan. "Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas."(3.06.02C).No end users are not known at this time for the proposed lots along the north of the subject site. However, the most recent approval on site was for an urgent care facility in the southeast corner and the expected building to the west of the urgent care facility is planned to be a multi-tenant building. The urgent care facility will be its own small employment center and very likely, other buildings within this commercial subdivision will spring up to be a supportive use to it. In addition, a large gym is approved(but not yet constructed) on the adjacent property to the west— it is very likely businesses will open up in this subdivision in response to that larger employer as well. "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A). Where feasible, each building site will have pedestrian connections to one another and will have connections to the sidewalks along the adjacent major roadways on the north and east sides of the overall site. So long as these connections are required with each CZC review, Staff believes the subject site will have adequate pedestrian circulation especially due to the relatively small size of this commercial development. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent and in alignment with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 5 Item 5. 138 C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject site is vacant at this time with basic site improvements completed(grading). All improvements along Ustick and Eagle Roads are existing. With the approved CZC,utilities and drainage will be completed. In addition,when each building lot develops, each development will be analyzed for compliance with city code. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The uses allowed on the subject site are those listed in UDC Table 11-2B-2 for the C-G zoning district. There has been an approved CZC on the property located on the building lot in the southeast corner of the site for an urgent care facility;this is a principally permitted use in the C- G district. Each future use will be analyzed for compliance when they are proposed over time. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The submitted Preliminary Plat proposes five(5)commercial building lots that vary in size from 0.39 acres to 1.02 acres. The C-G zoning district does not have a minimum lot size requirement but does have required landscape buffers and land use buffers. Because there are no adjacent residential districts,there are no required land use buffers. In addition, all landscape buffers are previously approved with the CZC for the overall site improvements(A-2019-0376). When future buildings are proposed on each building lot, Staff will analyze each building for compliance with other dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district. The proposed preliminary plat appears to meet the UDC requirements for the C-G zoning district outlined in UDC Table 11-2B-3. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access to and for this development will be via a shared driveway constructed with the Villasport improvements limited to a right-in/right-out access—this Applicant will be required to construct this shared driveway access for their development if it this site develops before the Villasport project. There are no public streets as part of this commercial development and therefore no stub streets are proposed. Instead,there are private drive-aisles as are standard for commercial developments. The Applicant has an existing cross-access agreement with the adjacent commercial properties(Inst. #106169335). The Applicant's plat and subsequent plans show the shared driveway access with the Villasport project as a named private lane, N. Cajun Lane. Further to the south of the subject site, there is a private street with this name and the commercial drive aisle will be a continuation of this driving surface but in fact will not be a named street. Therefore, the Applicant needs to revise the plat to show this lane as a drive aisle and not a named private street. In addition, because the Applicant is proposing to subdivide this property, cross-access between the five proposed lots is also required. In the recorded Covenant, Conditions, and Restrictions (Inst. #2020-075457) this cross- access is discussed and dictated for each lot and future user. The Applicant should note this and the instrument number on the plat for transparency. G. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B for nonresidential uses at the ratio of one (1) space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. In addition,if any restaurants are proposed,the parking ratio is one(1) space per 250 square feet of gross floor area.With the approved CZC, 109 parking spaces were approved but did not show any parking directly adjacent to the future commercial buildings on the north end of the site. Page 6 Item 5. ■ The revised site plan provided by the Applicant shows some changes to the parking lot that differ from the currently approved site plan. One of these changes include three additional trash enclosures for a total of four but none are proposed within the center parking area which is appreciated. The new locations of the trash enclosures should help minimize any blind corners when traversing the site. In addition, the Applicant is now showing reconfiguration of some of the parking spaces and additional parking adjacent to the northern building lots. These changes show a net positive gain of 16 additional parking spaces. Again, as each pad site is developed, the required number of spaces will be checked and the Applicant will be required to comply with code requirements. As noted above,parking for the whole site will be available for each building site per the recorded CC&Rs. Because the overall parking plan has changed since the original approval of the CZC, the Applicant will need to obtain approval of a new CZC outlining the changes made to the site improvements prior to obtaining any more building permits. H. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): The required multi-use pathway along Eagle Road will be constructed under the approved CZC from 2019 unless that expires and a new CZC will be required to be approved.No other pathways are proposed or required. Through the approved CZC, the Applicant is also required to construct the multi-use pathway with decorative street lamps as outlined in UDC 11-3H-4C. A portion of the multi-use pathway will be widened to 14 feet in width to accommodate a wide enough surface for city vehicles to access the city sewer main that the Applicant must pull from the corner of Ustick and Eagle. Public Works has reviewed approved this change from the approved CZC utility plans. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Minimum 5-foot wide sidewalks are required adjacent to all commercial buildings as outlined in UDC 11-3A-17. The one building site with an approval (American Family Urgent Care) showed compliance with this requirement. In addition, each building site will be analyzed for compliance with this requirement. The Applicant is required to construct 5-foot wide detached sidewalk within the landscape buffer to Ustick Road per the conditions of approval in the existing CZC. This sidewalk will connect to the multi-use pathway at the intersection of Ustick and Eagle Roads. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to E. Ustick Road, an arterial street,landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to N. Eagle Road/SH 55, landscaped per the standards listed in 11-3B-7C. All landscape buffers have been reviewed and approved with the existing CZC. K. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The Applicant has not submitted conceptual elevations for the future commercial pad sites because end users are not yet known. Future commercial buildings are required to obtain certificate of zoning compliance and administrative design review approval and each building will be analyzed against the UDC and Architectural Standards Manual at that time. Page 7 Item 5. F140] VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat application per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. B. Commission: Enter Summary of Commission Decision. C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 8 Item 5. F141] V11. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(dated: 09/28/2020) Wad r .311 Idnojp luewdOIBAOU 41AOMSPOM UO!S!A!pqnS uepiaw qpomspem iA :HHHHH[ E7 77 F -71 11 7: 4 'vy jig: lot —A ii -i .2 11, 11 1 4 s. 1 Nil low, ll fit 'All M ------ --------- f A Page 9 Item 5. F142] B. Updated Site Plan(date: 11/13/2020) Z O a U U z OJ 8 aJ w r.+ \ Ill Q� �U =' 1 W Z 0 $ W cm9 iOr a e � � 1 I�W I 4 I w� i(-4 I w a I� r 11 II g I A � -- 1"(hF�++�r III it - 11v� -J`__ q _ A l I I 9 — f V ! I�j III I ----------------------------------- I I ���� I I avreP secxn , I I ------------------------------ _�1----- = I I I I li I III lil+lil III .. rli1 1: f 1 Page 10 F143] C. Landscape Plans(date: 10/09/2020) IL C2 P-b AH dnojq jU9WdOj9A9[j qIJOMSPUM e3 non oNv m3usn iv sNowwo3 mon 0 E I a H NE I�t 12 AM5 B ON f o-I I A --A -01 CL Page I I F144] VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANMNG DiviSION 1. With the final plat submittal,the preliminary plat included in Section VII.A,dated September 28,2020, shall be revised as follows: a. Add a plat note prohibiting direct lot access to E.Ustick Road and N. Eagle Road. b. Add a plat note noting the existing cross-access agreement with the adjacent commercial properties(Parcel numbers S 1105110110& Sl 105110120)to include the recorded instrument number(Inst. #1061693 3 5). c. Revise plat note#11 to include the record instrument number for the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (Inst. #2020-075457). d. Remove the name of the shared driveway shown on the plat as N. Cajun Lane—this is not a named street in this location. e. Graphically depict the required landscape buffers along E.Ustick Road and N. Eagle Road on the plat per UDC 11-3B-7C.2. 2. The landscape plan included in Section VII.C, dated October 9,2020,is approved as submitted. 3. The Applicant and/or assigns has the ongoing obligation to comply with all current City of Meridian ordinances and previous conditions of approval associated with this site: H-2019- 0082;DA Inst. #2019-121599; A-2019-0376; and A-2020-0163. 4. The Applicant shall construct the multi-use pathway along N. Eagle Road with decorative street lamps in accord with UDC I I-3H-4C. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I I-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. 6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3C-6C for nonresidential uses. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 8. 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. 9. 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 I I-3B-14. 10. The Applicant is required to obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC)and Administrative Design Review(DES) approval for each new commercial building site. 11. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either 1) obtain the City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years of preliminary plat approval by City Council(date unknown at this time); or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC I I-6B-7. 12. Prior to submittal of a final plat for City Engineer signature,the applicant shall submit public access easements for the multi-use pathway along N. Eagle Road. 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 Page 12 F 145] public access easement. Easement checklist must accompany all easement submittals. Coordinate with Kim Warren from the City of Meridian Parks Department. 13. 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. 1.2 The geotechnical investigative report prepared by Material Testing&Inspection dated July 25,2019 indicates some very specific construction considerations. The applicant shall be responsible for the adherence of these recommendations to help ensure structural integrity. 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 ftom.Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available,a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC I I-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. Page 13 F146] 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services.Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-I 2-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.21 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public—works.aspx?id=272. Page 14 F147] 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse inftastructure 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(MFD) hyps:11weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinklDoc View.gv x?id=215566&dbid=O&roo=Meridian C _p ky D. POLICE DEPARTMENT(MPD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.a�px?id=216305&dbid=O&roo=MeridianC hty E. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinklDoc View.aWx?id=215841&dbid=O&roo=MeridianC hty F. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinklDoc View.gvpx?id=216454&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ity IX. FINDINGS A. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Stafffinds that the proposed plat, with Staff's recommendations, is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan regarding land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan policies and analysis in, Section V of this reportfor more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII of the StaffReportfor more details ftom public service providers) Page 15 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Stafffinds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvementfunds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon commentsftom thepublic serviceproviders(i.e.,Police,Fire,ACHD, etc). (See Section Wfor more information.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware ofany health, safety, or environmentalproblems associated with theplatting 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. Staff is unaware ofany significant natural, scenic or historicfeatures that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 16 Applicant Presentation Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision 0104-2020-H November 19, 2020Meridian Planning & Zoning Preliminary Plat Vicinity Map Current 8-R15-RG-C Future Land Use Map Existing Conditions THANK YOU