Loading...
2021-02-04 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, February 04, 2021 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Lisa Holland Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Bill Cassinelli Commissioner Nick Grove Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Steven Yearsley Commissioner Maria Lorcher ADOPTION OF AGENDA - Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] - Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the January 21, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Village at Meridian Café Rio Drive-Through (H-2020-0116) by Layton Davis Architects, Located at 3243 E. Village Dr. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) by Gem State Planning, LLC, Located Directly West of Ten Mile Road, on Both Sides of the Proposed Pine Avenue Extension and East of the Tenmile Creek A. Request: Annexation of 23 acres of land with a request for the R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lots on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district and existing R-15 zoning district. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of a total of 216 residential units on 12.74 acres in the existing R-15 zoning district. - Continued to February 18, 2021 4. Public Hearing Continued from January 21, 2021 for Aviator Subdivision (H-2020- 0111) by The Land Group, Inc., Located Near the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Franklin Rd. A. A Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved. B. A Rezone of a total of 9.8 acres of land from the M-E zoning district to the R-15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment. C. A Modification to the Existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2018-079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan. - Recommended Approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled for March 9, 2021 5. Public Hearing for Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) by Kent Brown Planning, Located at 2490 W. Franklin Road and the Lot Directly North A. Request: Preliminary Plat for six (6) industrial lots on 43.87 acres of land in the I-L zoning district. - Recommended Approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled for March 9, 2021 6. Public Hearing for Human Bean (H-2020-0125) by A&C Ventures, LLC, Located at 3285 W. Nelis Dr. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expanded business hours for a drive- through coffee shop. - Approved 7. Public Hearing for Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) by Cole Architects, Generally Located East of N. Webb Ave. Between E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 30,000+/- square foot residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district. - Approved 8. Public Hearing for Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) by Breckon Land Design, Located on the east side of S. Meridian Rd./SH 69, midway between E. Amity Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) and R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. - Recommended Approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled for March 9, 2021 ADJOURNMENT – 8:45 p.m. Item 1. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting February 4, 2021. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of February 4, 2021, was called to order at 6:09 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Nick Grove and Commissioner Steven Yearsley. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson, Alan Tiefenbach and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Lisa Holland X Maria Lorcher X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley X Bill Cassinelli X Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: Okay. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for February 4th, 2021 . The Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff from the city attorney and clerk's offices, as well as the city planning department. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to make comments. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have a process question during the meeting, please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. If you simply want to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch the streaming on the city's YouTube channel and you can access that at meridiancity.org/live. And with that let's begin with roll call. ADOPTION OF AGENDA McCarvel: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We have Foxcroft Subdivision, H-2020-0113, that will only be opened for the sole purpose of continuing this item. It will open only for that purpose. So, if there is anybody here tonight to testify on that particular application we will not be taking testimony this evening. So, with that change could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended. Seal: So moved. Holland: So moved. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 5 Page 2 of 51 Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the January 21, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Village at Meridian Cafe Rio Drive-Through (H-2020-0116) by Layton Davis Architects, Located at 3243 E. Village Dr. McCarvel: Next item on the -- on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have two items on the Consent Agenda. We have approval of minutes for the January 21 st, 2021 , P&Z meeting and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for The Village at Meridian Cafe Rio drive-through, H-2020-0116. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Seal: So moved. Holland: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: So, at this time I would like to briefly explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After the staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the public testimony. The clerk will call on the names individually of those who have signed in on our website in advance to testify. You will, then, be unmuted. Please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our clerk will run the presentation. If you have established that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA where others from that group will not be speaking, you will have up to ten minutes. After all of those who have signed up in advance have spoken, we will invite others who may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may press the raise Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 6 Page 3 of 51 hand button on the Zoom app or if you are listening on a phone, please, press star nine and wait for your name to be called and, please, if you are listening on multiple devices, a computer and a phone, for example, please be sure to mute the extra devices, so we don't experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished, if the Commission does not have questions for you, you will be muted and no longer have the ability to speak and, please, remember we will not call on you a second time. After the testimony has been heard the applicant will have another ten minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully be able to make final decisions or recommendations to the City Council as needed. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) by Gem State Planning, LLC, Located Directly West of Ten Mile Road, on Both Sides of the Proposed Pine Avenue Extension and East of the Ten Mile Creek A. Request: Annexation of 23 acres of land with a request for the R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lots on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district and existing R-15 zoning district. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of a total of 216 residential units on 12.74 acres in the existing R-15 zoning district. McCarvel: So, at this time we would like to open the public hearing for Item H-2020-0113, Foxcroft Subdivision for the purpose of continuing. So, if we could get staff's comments on Foxcroft. They have requested continuance to February 18th in order to continue working through comments by staff. Does staff have any other comments at this time? Dodson: Madam Chair, no, I do not. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Okay. So, could I get a motion to continue Item H-2020-0113 to February 18th if that's -- Holland: So moved. Seal: Second. Cassinelli: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 7 Page 4 of 51 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2020-0113, Foxcroft Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 4. Public Hearing Continued from January 21, 2021 for Aviator Subdivision (H-2020-0111) by The Land Group, Inc., Located Near the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Franklin Rd. A. A Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved. B. A Rezone of a total of 9.8 acres of land from the WE zoning district to the R-15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment. C. A Modification to the Existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2018- 079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan. McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is H-2020-0111, Aviator Subdivision, and I would like to thank the applicants for coming back this evening, as we ran a very late meeting last time, so -- but we will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Madam Chair. I second that. Thanks to the applicants. Appreciate that very much working with this. As noted the subject application before you now is Aviator Subdivision. It's not really a subdivision, unfortunately. I guess it's just Aviator. The size of the property is 9.8 acres. It's currently zoned WE and it is located near the northeast corner at Black Cat and Franklin, as seen on the maps on the screen. It is the hashed parcel here north of the Compass Charter School and to the east of the Hensley Station. So, to the north is the railroad. North of that is some county residential land. To the east is also county residential. As noted south of the property is Compass Charter School and to the west is R-15 zoning with an approved attached single family residential project. The property was annexed in 2018 as part of the Compass Charter School annexation and comp plan map amendment. It is in the mixed employment future land use designation of the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan and does have an existing DA. Hence, the summary for this request is three parts and all of it hinges on the first one. The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan map amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of medium high density residential for the purpose of developing the site with a residential use and after that there is a request to rezone the property from WE to R-15 to match the existing residential property nearby and, finally, to modify the existing development agreement for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of that agreement and to enter into a Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 $ Page 5 of 51 new one consistent with this proposed residential development. Sorry. I was going to click and --there we go. This is the existing concept plan and the development agreement when Compass Charter School owned the property. In short, if the map amendment is not approved the associated rezone and development agreement modification are not applicable, because they are both contingent upon the future land use changing back to the residential designation. The applicant is requesting to modify the comp plan map for the subject parcel in order to allow for residential zoning and uses, instead of mixed employment or other industrial uses. The current future land use is mixed employment, as noted, which encourages research and development office, light industrial, information and other ancillary commercial uses. Instead, the applicant is requesting to return the property to its original future land use of medium high density residential. This designation allows for a mix of dwelling types, including townhouses, condominiums and apartments. So, with the 2018 annexation Compass Charter School --when they annexed into the city this was their path of annexation and they also requested a comp plan map amendment at the time, so that they could -- well, to be more specific, they received the approval for the Comprehensive Plan map amendment at the time to change the underlying land use from the medium high density residential to mixed employment. This request and subsequent approval to change the future land use was so that the new school could be constructed and an adjacent county landscaping business could also be annexed into the city and still comply with code. At the time it was determined that the map change was applicable, because the subject parcel was conceptually shown the sports field track and stadium and was the school's avenue for annexation. However, in 2020 Compass Charter received approval to modify their concept plan and DA to move their sports field to the parcel directly adjacent to their east. Therefore, this 9.8 acres is no longer part of their long-term plan and was subsequently sold to its current owners. Because the applicant is proposing to return the parcel back to its original future land use designation and becoming more compatible land use to its neighbors, staff supports this requested map amendment. Thus the subsequent MDA is to modify the concept plan and incorporate new provisions based on the new plat. The same can be said for the rezone request of R-15, which would allow future development of the property with the residential use in line with the proposed concept. To be clear, the applicant is not proposing a plat at this time. Future development will be driven by the development agreement and the provisions associated with this concept plan. Specifically it is important to discuss access for this project in a separate section, regardless of the fact that no preliminary plat is being proposed. Access is proposed to be extension of the collector street West Aviator and a subsequent local street off of said collector. Plus Aviator currently provides access -- one access for Compass Charter School to the south and will provide access to Hensley Station directly west. Due to the pattern of development Aviator would only be extended to the east boundary of this subject site, not connect to any other road until such time that more parcels to the east develop and annex into the city. This is one more reason why the applicant is not choosing to submit a plat at this time. Because of this it is imperative that the conceptual layout of Aviator is well thought out and shown in a position that allows for fair and convenient extension in the future. Staff shared these concerns with the applicant and they revised the concept plan to show a more appropriate extension. Staff is appreciative of the applicant's ability to work with staff and revise the layout for these above reasons. The revised concept plans now show Aviator heading northeast into the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 191 Page 6 of 51 parcel from its terminus in front of the Compass Charter expansion, crossing the drain once in this site and, then, stubbing to the east property line north of the irrigation pump station in the southeast corner of the site. This new configuration allows for future extension of Aviator to occur without a need to cross the drain again and not require this applicant to acquire land from either of the two county parcels directly to the south. This new layout generally depicts the same internal layout with some shifting of the site to the east to accommodate easements and some loss of the internal green space that is replaced with other green space. With the future preliminary plat staff will analyze the open space for the property and make sure it conforms with the UDC requirements. There is only one piece of public testimony provided in -- at least as of this afternoon and that was with the property owner directly to the south boundary parcel. Because the original concept plan showed Aviator continuing straight across and across her parcel. There has not been any agreement to acquire any land between the two owners, so that, in conjunction with my comment to the applicant, the applicant revised the layout and understands that this is a more appropriate layout for that. Once Mrs. Valerie spoke with the applicant and understood what was happening she voiced to me that she had no other concerns. The applicant has stated that they are in agreement with the staff report and staff does recommend approval of the subject applications. After that I will stand for questions. Yearsley: Madam Chair? Dodson: You are muted, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Yeah. Yeah. It wouldn't unmute for me. Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, the drain runs through the middle of the property. Are they going to relocate that drain or what's -- or -- because the -- the -- what they were showing concept wise looked like they were having houses on top of the drain. Dodson: Commissioner Yearsley, yes, sir, the -- you can kind of see it here. Yearsley: Okay. Dodson: If you can see my pointer. Yearsley: Yeah. Dodson: This black line is what they are kind of showing us, the gravity irrigation, and, then, you can kind of see that they are going to reroute it, so they can utilize -- Yearsley: Okay. Dodson: -- more of the site. That is the plan, yes. Yearsley: But this is just a concept plan, not a -- an actual plat; correct? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 Flo] Page 7 of 51 Dodson: Yes, sir. And the DA would be absolutely tied to this. Yearsley: Okay. McCarvel: Any other questions for staff? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I just -- I want to just bring up a point of -- a point of order. I just want to let everybody know -- my fellow Commissioners know that I serve on the board at Compass Charter School, so I have got a relatively close tie here, but I do feel I can be objective on this and impartial, so -- but I just wanted to let my fellow Commissioners know if they had a concern. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Cassinelli. Any concerns from the other Commissioners? Seal: No. Not here. McCarvel: No? Okay. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? McNeill: Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Joe, for a great review of the project. I do have a few slides to share and I'm not sure if they are going to get -- is the clerk going to post them or should I share my screen? Weatherly: Madam Chair. Kristen, if you could go ahead and share your screen. I have changed it so you should be able to bring your screen up on -- on your computer now and share. McCarvel: And thank you, again, Kristen, for coming back this evening. McNeill: No problem. It's going to take me just a minute to make sure I'm sharing the right screen. Okay. This is sharing a little bit differently. It shares a little differently than -- McCarvel: There we go. McNeill: Okay. That's not showing presentation mode though. Oh, there we go. Okay. Are you seeing the full screen of this slide? McCarvel: Yes. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 Fill Page 8 of 51 McNeill: Okay. Great. Thank you. So, thank you, again, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. I am Kristen McNeill with The Land Group, located at 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. 83616. As Joe -- as mentioned by staff, we are going for a Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezone, and subsequently a -- one second. And, then, a modification to the existing development agreement. This is another view of the project site. You can see Compass Charter School here and the project site is dashed in white. This is a new diagram that we added. This was not submitted with the original application. This graphic kind of shows a little bit more, as we are not submitting a pre-plat, as Joe mentioned, this graphic really highlights some of the more important parts of this application, which is, as Joe mentioned, a collector road going up through the -- through the parcel, as well as the general open space plan and blocking for residential areas and showing some pedestrian connections as well and as Joe mentioned, we originally anticipated that Aviator Street would continue directly along the southern part of the parcel, but after the meetings with staff, ACHD, as well as conversations with the neighbors, including Ms. Bowery, who spoke with on the phone, the neighbor -- she's the neighbor to the south here, based on that feedback we were able to resolve those concerns by moving the collector road up through the parcel, as well as there is a pump station in this corner here, so that way that -- it routes around that as well. Because of this, though, this site offers -- definitely offers some challenges for development with the Purdam Gulch stream running through the center and this pump station in the corner. But we actually feel that this offer is a great opportunity to stretch the creative imagination and explore dynamic solutions for site planning, housing type, and distinctive open space plans and here we have the concept plan that was submitted with the original application. This shows the townhouse -- townhouse style product on this parcel and it -- you can see it's -- what we are showing here is how it -- how it speaks to the development -- the future development on -- for Hensley Sub and the existing Compass Charter School, as well as the new parking lot that Compass Charter School is working on right now. So, we -- what we are showing here is just how this will fit in with that residential character of the neighborhood. These parcels down in the southeast corridor are not annexed yet. While this application does not formally include a preliminary plat, we have evaluated appropriate options to create a premier Meridian neighborhood that supports the Ten Mile interchange and specific area plan. This includes exploring a variety of products suggested for medium high density residential districts in the Ten Mile area, including townhouses, duplexes, four-plexes, et cetera. The area plan envisions residential lots of future walkable neighborhoods and a community feel with the intent to compliment existing and planned neighborhood developments nearby. With the site constraints mentioned before, this site offers unique and exciting opportunities for creating a dynamic and very original open space plan that will be unlike others in the area due to the layout of the site. We anticipate further exploration of integrating pathways and amenities to maximize open space, as well as opportunities for unique walking and gathering spaces involving natural play or potentially sport areas, all to encourage an interconnected community. In addition we would be exploring architectural characteristics, such as various facades and materials to create greater architectural variety and interest. So, in summary, the application, again, includes the Comprehensive Plan map amendment to medium high density residential, which will be bringing it back to its original -- original designation. A rezone to R-15 and -- from M-U and development agreement modification just subsequent to leaving the existing Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F12 Page 9 of 51 development agreement and as well as -- as for the staff report we are in agreement with the staff report. That one diagram that we -- that we included we think kind of further clarifies since the -- since it was not originally included in the documentation. So, we do think that that would be a -- beneficial to include in the staff-- along with the development agreement documentation, but -- but we are in full agreement with the staff report. So, with that we respectfully request your approval tonight and will stand for questions. Thank you. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just quickly. Just the diagram that was up there -- and I know it's a -- you know, not a plat, but it still looked like it was kind of going in on the corner of the -- of that lot -- the private property where that comes through there. Is that going to swing through there like that or is it going to be completely on -- I mean is it not going to breach that property line at all? McNeill: You are referring to this -- can you see my -- Seal: Yes, I can. McNeill: -- my mouse? Okay. So, you are referring to this corner right here? Seal: Correct. McNeill: Yes. No, I guess in -- this looks like it -- the way that it's drawn here it looks like it could be kind of going over that, but, ultimately, no, it would not. It will be routed so that -- so it will not go into that property line. There has not -- not been an agreement between that property owner and the owners of this parcel. So, that's why this --this will be routing up through the -- through our site completely. Which also, as Joe mentioned, helps out with an area further east where it would ultimately -- the original -- if it would just go straight across it would have had to cross the drain twice and this way we kind of skipped over and are able to continue it a little bit more cleanly further on. Not we. Future developers of those parcels. Seal: Thank you. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Adrienne, do we have any public testimony signed up? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F13 Page 10 of 51 McCarvel: Okay. Is there anybody on Zoom or in chambers that would like to testify on this application? Okay. I don't see any hand raises and I -- Commissioner Seal doesn't see anybody there, so we will move on. So, Kristen, did you have any other comments, since we don't have any public testimony? McNeill: No. McCarvel: Okay. One last chance at questions for the applicant, then, before we close public testimony. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just quickly, has there been any kind of engineering review on the modification to reroute the -- the drain or is this just completely conceptual? McNeill: I -- at this point I believe it's completely conceptual. If -- I think Matt is on here as well from The Land Group and if he has anything to add he can add, but I don't -- I don't -- I believe at this point we have -- we have just been doing conceptual. Seal: Okay. And the reason I ask that question is just the -- the concern that if that isn't going to meet engineering requirements for that reroute, then, is there a Plan B? Adams: Madam Chair, this is Matt Adams. Can I address that question? McCarvel: Sure. Go ahead. Adams: Thank you, Madam Chair and Commissioners. So, we have done analysis on three specific things. One is sewer and we have confirmed that the sewer stub from Hensley does, in fact, allow us to service the furthest lots to the east with adequate depth. So, we are good on sewer and that is -- it's shown in this conceptual plan. We have confirmed with Public Works that water service is adequate and will work just fine, which is also good for fire protection and drinking. And, then, we did do a grade analysis, because we do have a full topographic survey of this parcel and there is enough fall in the Purdam Drain that we can do what is clearly a little bit longer length than a pipe and we have --we have met with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and they are in agreement with piping this section, as it's very challenging for them to keep it clean from silt and things like that. So, Nampa-Meridian has seen this and is in favor and we have, in fact, confirmed the engineering on it. That's an excellent question. Thank you. Seal: Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you, Matt. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2020-0111? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F14] Page 11 of 51 Seal: So move. Cassinelli: So moved. Holland: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: Yeah. I think -- you know, I appreciate the question being asked about the drain, because that's certainly a concern seeing all that building going on on top of that, so -- and other than that I think they have done well to, you know, push that road to the north just a little and it does kind of solve some of those issues. But any other-- be happy to hear everybody else's comments. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: My only heartburn when I first read this was -- I remember when the project to the west of this came into us, we were excited about this being a sport field, because it allowed for more open space for kind of that neighborhood and for the -- the charter school. So, I was a little bit bummed to see it not stay a field and I always hate seeing houses right up against the rail line, but I know our Comprehensive Plan calls for houses to be right up against the rail line. So, I don't know that we have much -- much play there. But I would make the suggestion that when the applicant comes back to bring this forward that they would be cognizant of -- of how those houses against the -- the back of a lot interacts with the rail, because I know houses against the rail can be very noisy when rail is going through and right now we are lucky that that's kind of a quiet rail line, but it does still see some service that comes through there. I work in an office that's right next to a rail and I can just say that it's -- it's noisy and interruptive a lot of the day. So those were a couple of my comments. Otherwise, if -- if the Commission decides they want to allow this applicant to change the Comprehensive Plan map, I don't see a huge concern, because everything around it is already planned for that medium high density. I appreciate that they are trying to add some extra open space in there and be a little bit creative with it, but I would prefer to see more open space than less when we look at this project, especially because it was originally proposed that this was going to be an open field that was going to kind of help provide some green space for the surrounding community. So, it's always sad when the green space goes away. But those are my comments. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F15] Page 12 of 51 Seal: I completely agree with Commissioner Holland on the -- you know, trying to do something different with, you know, the property that lines up there with the rail. The only other comment I would make is the -- the shared driveway, hopefully, before that comes back before us that is a whole lot less than six lots sharing that -- that shared drive. I know that that -- I know code right now allows six, but that's really -- it really doesn't do our -- our services departments any -- any great favors to have that many there. Other than that I think everything is well in line. McCarvel: Yeah. I would -- I was actually surprised Commissioner Holland didn't mention that, because shared drives are usually her -- Holland: I was glad that you said it, because I remembered that after I stopped talking, so I was going to -- McCarvel: Yeah. Holland: Thank you. McCarvel: I was waiting -- I was waiting for it. But, yeah, the applicant should know that that-- that will give us heartburn, the shared common drive with all those homes on there. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yeah. Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Well, as long as we are prepping the applicant, we might as well address parking, too, so when they come to us with -- with a concept plan they will want to have adequate parking in there, because that's -- that's another one of our hot buttons. So, figured I would share that. Otherwise, the staff and the applicant are in agreement and it is being returned to its original, because I'm somewhat familiar, Commissioner Holland, I can say that the -- what Compass did was move their open field area adjacent, so that -- that neighborhood, if you will, still has some added green space because of that. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, I also echo Commissioner Holland's comments. I have to admit, looking at the concept plan, I'm not very well -- as compared to what they presented in the -- in the -- the -- their comments today. I hope that they come back with what -- what they are proposing. I think the open space and trying to make this together into a community would be really nice. Given what they are showing it's kind of hard for me to see that open concept plan like they are showing on their -- their photos. So, that's my only concern. I guess I'm in favor of the rezone and the land use map. McCarvel: Okay. Any other comments or motions? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F16 Page 13 of 51 Lorcher: I have one question. Does ACHD or I -- whoever owns the roads plan to make it a five lane? Dodson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yeah. Go ahead, Joe. Dodson: Thank you. I'm sorry, Maria, what is your last name? Lorcher: Lorcher. Dodson: Lorcher? Lorcher: Yes. Dodson: Okay. Commissioner Lorcher. Good to meet you. This is going to be a collector road, which is not five lanes. Collector roads are going to be -- at most it's going to be a three lane collector, but I believe it's actually a two lane. Commissioner Cassinelli, if he has been out there more than I have he might know more of what Aviator is currently. But it -- I think it's a 36 foot wide street section for a collector street. So, it will not be five lanes. And, then, furthering that, east of this property line of the subject site, the master street map does not call for the collector roadway to continue. So, it actually will likely get downgraded to a local street and then -- which would just be more residential internal local streets. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I know one of the concerns that's come up with this Commission in the past, too, is about Black Cat, not necessarily Aviator. Because I think Black Cat is slated to be a five lane road. Commissioner Lorcher's comment there. But I'm not sure what the timing of that is with ACHD. So, it's always nerve-racking when you put a lot of higher density projects in and that road is not improved yet. But the roads don't get improved until there is enough density to demand the roads be improved. So, there is always that Catch 22. Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: If it's okay I will just go ahead and put a motion forward. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2020-0111, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4th, 2021. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F17] Page 14 of 51 Seal: Second. McCarvel: Do we have a second? Seal: Second. Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Commissioner Grove, I don't know if you want to add any comments in there with recommendations to the applicant to reconsider their concept plan when they bring it back for a couple of the items we discussed or -- I don't know that we need to necessarily, since it's just a concept plan, but I don't know if you want to note that to Council, so that way make sure it gets across. Grove: I can do that. McCarvel: You thought you were getting an easy one. Grove: I know. I got one. Madam Chair, I would like to amend my motion to include Commission feedback on open space and shared -- or common drive recommendations as presented in this meeting. Is there another one? Commissioner Holland? Holland: I think you could just reframe it to say that we would prefer the applicant go back to the drawing board on their conceptual site plan before it comes back for the pre-plan request. Maybe that's a good way to put it. And I will second that. McCarvel: If you are okay with those words. Grove: I like Commissioner Holland's wording. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on H-2020-0111, Aviator Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: Thank you, Kristen. McNeill: Thank you. 5. Public Hearing for Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) by Kent Brown Planning, Located at 2490 W. Franklin Road and the Lot Directly North A. Request: Preliminary Plat for six (6) industrial lots on 43.87 acres of land in the I-L zoning district. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F18 Page 15 of 51 McCarvel: At this time we will open the public hearing for Item No. H-2020-0120, Chewie Subdivision, and we will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes. The application before you is only for a preliminary plat. It is for six industrial lots being requested to be platted for ownership purposes. The site consists of 43.87 acres of land that is already zoned I-L, which is Light Industrial, generally located at 2490 West Franklin, but as you can see in the maps it's a quarter mile or so east of -- no, that's about a half a mile I guess east of Ten Mile and just off of Franklin Road. To the north is railroad property, just like the last one. North of that is R-8 and R-15 city residential. To the east is the West Ada School District bus barn and Republic Services transfer station and existing I-L zoning. To the south is Franklin Road and, then, south of that is undeveloped C-C zoning and west is also I-L zoning and that contains the new FedEx distribution center. The property actually has two future land use designations on it, mixed employment and -- what was the other one? High density residential. It's about 20 acres of the mixed employment and about 23 and a half of the high density residential -- high future land use designations for reference can be floated across parcels -- that it is not parcel specific. The subject site is located within the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan and, like I said, has two future land use designations on it. However, the property has had I-L zoning for decades. It was annexed sometime in the mid '70s and this zoning entitlement actually predates the Ten Mile plan. In addition, Lot 1 of the subdivision, which is approximately 30 acres, has already received administrative approval of a large e-commerce delivery station that will be operated by Amazon. This is a good point to note that that project and its site design is not up for review at this public hearing, only the submitted preliminary plat. Because of the existing zoning and entitlements, strict adherence to the Comprehensive Plan is not feasible -- in that sense strict adherence to the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan. The existing industrial zoning and approved delivery station align with the mixed employment future land use designation that exists on site. Also because of the existing entitlements and zoning staff believes placing a high density residential project on the site would not be in the best interest of the city, as it is shown on the future land use map. The city should be getting this high density residential further to the west as part of the Gateway At Ten Mile project that we received approval from -- or we gave approval for last year. Despite not being able to strictly adhere to the Ten Mile plan, staff believes the proposed project generally complies with the Comprehensive Plan and those specific policies were outlined within the staff report. All proposed lots meet the dimensional standards for the I-L zoning district and access is proposed -- proposed via a new collector street extension from Franklin Road shown as north of New Market Avenue here, which will align with the New Market Avenue on the south side as part of the Ten Mile Crossing Ten Mile Center with 17 DAs to the south. The New Market is proposed to continue into the site and, then, head east and west as an extension of West Fred Smith Street, which already exists on the FedEx site to the west. As discussed, the applicant has already received CZC and design review approval for the new delivery station, which is 141,000 square foot warehouse. Yet that administrative application triggered the TIS and, therefore, this plat does not include the TIS. However, because the road extension and overall road layout circulation element of this area are the main issues of this project, I have included the main points of the TIS and ACHD comments, as well as analysis on the existing access Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 Fig] Page 16 of 51 points. The new collector street that is required to be constructed with a delivery station will have access to Franklin in two places in the future. The noted New Market Avenue here and further to the west Wayfinder Avenue. This offsite connection, the Wayfinder Avenue one, is not yet constructed and the timetable for when it will be is currently unknown, as the adjacent projects, FedEx and Gateway At Ten Mile as discussed -- so, FedEx is here on this parcel. This parcel here is the Gateway At Ten Mile. They do not include parcels that directly abut Franklin and, therefore, they cannot construct the required right of way. So, that would be these parcels -- I lost my cursor. There we go. These parcels here. So, these are still county parcels and, therefore, they cannot construct this collector street segment and connect to Franklin. The TRS did not include estimated traffic from -- oh, I guess, first of all, because the Wayfinder Avenue access is not constructed, all traffic from this site will go through the New Market Avenue connection to Franklin. TRS that was submitted with the CZC for the Amazon delivery station did not include estimated traffic from the additional industrial lots along Franklin, because no end users are currently known. Future developments should be monitored to ensure that the allowed trip count on one access for a collector street, which is 3,000 daily trips, is not exceeded without constructing the additional access point and right of way to Franklin further to the west. This may limit future development until such time the second access is constructed and the applicant is aware of this. In addition to the traffic volumes produced by the delivery station, the applicant's TIS did include traffic from the West Ada School District bus barn and the Republic Services transfer station. Because they should also access the new east-west collector street and the new signal at New Market and Franklin. The existing private road for West Ada School District and Republic Services is an exit only access to Franklin and cannot be closed with this application because it is not a part of this property or application. In addition, the city cannot force them to use this new collector roadway once it is constructed, because they already have their entitlements and zoning. However, this applicant and representatives from both West Ada and Republic Services are working on a binding agreement to close this exit only private drive and utilize the new collector street. So, this is the new private -- or the existing private as noted and they are working together to have access here and share the access. Not only share it, but also enter into a cross-access and maintenance agreement to maintain that collectively and not put it fully on this applicant. Staff is very appreciative of this work being done by the applicant and the other outside agencies, as, again, I noted that we cannot require that, because they are not part of this application. To help ensure that this access can occur for all parties involved, ACHD recommends constructing this segment of West Fred Smith Street as a private street east of the intersection of East -- East -- or West Fred Smith Street and New Market Avenue, constructed as a private street instead of a public road. This recommendation is being made because this segment of the collector roadway is over 150 feet in length and would require it to be terminated in a temporary cul-de-sac near the eastern property line, which would take up a lot of usable industrial space. Staff agrees with ACHD's recommendation to construct a short segment as a private street, instead of a public road. For that reason and also because this collector roadway did not expect to continue further east as a public road due to the existing industrial development already discussed and chances are this is not going to be developed anytime soon, so the chances of this continuing as a public road and, then, having a temporary turnaround would more than likely end up being a Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F20] Page 17 of 51 permanent turnaround. As noted, the applicant, West Ada, and Republic Services should also enter into a cross-access and maintenance agreement for this segment of the private street to ensure that there is shared costs with the maintenance and use of this access. Other than the road extension and access points discussed within the GIS, the submitted plat and landscape plan show existing accesses to West Franklin still existing. They are roughly around here. This does not align with code and they will have a lesser classified streets to take access off of. So, these accesses should be closed. In addition, this lot here is not part of the project as noted here and this plat surrounds it. They have -- it contains an existing home that is legal nonconforming in the I-L zoning district and this home currently utilizes Franklin as their access. Again, because it's not part of his application we cannot require them to close that, but this applicant is required to provide a curb cut for this property along the new collector street, so that when this outparcel does redevelop it will have access to the collector, instead of Franklin. The submitted plans do not show access being provided to this parcel and this should be corrected prior to final plat submittal. I do recommend approval of the subject preliminary plat with the conditions listed in the staff report. As of this afternoon there was no written testimony. So, I will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Do we have any questions for staff? Okay. Seeing none, would the applicant like to begin? Okay. Can't -- you are on our side, but you need to unmute. Brown: How about that? McCarvel: There we go. Brown: Does that work? McCarvel: Yes, we can hear you. Brown: Okay. McCarvel: And see you. Thank you. Brown: This is pretty simple. It's just a straightforward subdivision with existing industrial. Joe's covered how the accesses and the collector road work. Our New Market, when it comes out, it's a signalized intersection, which makes it better for everybody to enter and leave out of the -- out of the site. Our intent is just subdividing and trying to get this done as quickly as possible to help the construction of the existing building or the proposed building that's underway on the site. I can stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Hearing none, we will move -- Adrienne, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F21 Page 18 of 51 McCarvel: And is there anybody on Zoom currently or in Chambers that would like to testify? Okay. Hearing none -- and, Mr. Brown, I'm assuming you are not wanting to make any other comments? Brown: That's correct. We are in agreement with the conditions and -- McCarvel: Okay. Brown: -- that's all I have. McCarvel: I will ask the Commission one more time if they have any other questions for you or if somebody would like to make a motion to close the public hearing. Holland: So moved to close the public hearing. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close public hearing on H-2020-0120, Chewie Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: Any first comments or do we want -- Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I will just jump in. I think it seems like a fitting use and a -- I'm approved for -- I said I wasn't going to have words for it, so I can't come up with words. I think that this looks like a good proposal and I would agree with staff's recommendation that putting high density housing between the FedEx shipping center and what's in there would be kind of a clunky use. So, I would much rather see this stay industrial and I think it's a -- a good layout. There is definitely a need for more industrial land in Meridian and this will create some better shovel ready properties that they can help market to get some good users in there. So, I'm in favor of it and I think they have done a lot of work with staff on the roadway. So, I appreciate how much they have presented to us on that. McCarvel: Any other comments? And I appreciate -- oh, go ahead. Grove: I'm sorry. I just echo everything that Commissioner Holland said. I think anytime we can increase the industrial footprint in our city is -- where it makes sense it's good to do it. We don't have a lot of it and this seems like it makes sense to keep up with what's surrounding that area already. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F22 Page 19 of 51 McCarvel: Yeah. I appreciate all the property owners around and working together to do those easements on the road -- the east-west collector roadway. They are shown in green. I think that makes a lot of sense to not use up that space on a turnaround that's not going to be needed. Yeah. Any other comments or motions? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: About the only concern I have is the 3,000 vehicle trips per day and that's -- I mean it's going to be FedEx and Amazon and stuff like that, but, hopefully, that's -- it doesn't turn into an issue. You know, with Amazon right next to FedEx that is going to cut down somebody's trips for sure, so -- McCarvel: Yeah. Correct me if I'm wrong, but did they say it -- with what's going in there now they weren't concerned about it, it would be when those front parcels get developed they thought that would be the tipping point -- Dodson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: -- on the -- yeah. Go ahead, Joe. Dodson: Thank you. There is a couple things there. So, the TIS estimated 2,400 and that included West Ada School District, Republic Services, and, then, the Amazon facility. It did not include the FedEx numbers, because FedEx has their temporary driveway as shown here and, then, when the Wayfinder access gets constructed, you know, it would be -- it would waste their time to go all the way down further east, rather than they could use the access here. So, FedEx should not be using this New Market Avenue and this is the intersection that the 2,400 trips counts is being generated from within the TIS, so -- but to your other point, yes, as more industrial users come up along Franklin those may be limited depending on what those uses are. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Dodson: You are welcome. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I will just make a motion here. After all applicant and public testimony I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2020-0120 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4th, 2021. Holland: I will second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F23] Page 20 of 51 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval on H-2020-0120. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 6. Public Hearing for Human Bean (H-2020-0125) by A&C Ventures, LLC, Located at 3285 W. Nelis Dr. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expanded business hours for a drive-through coffee shop. McCarvel: Next we will open the public hearing for item H-2020-0125, Human Bean. We will begin with the staff report. Tiefenbach: Can you hear me and see my screen, Planning Commission? McCarvel: We can hear you, Alan, and we can see your screen. Tiefenbach: Terrific. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Planning Commission. This is a conditional use to allow a drive-through coffee shop to operate between the hours of 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The size of the property is roughly a little bit bigger than a half an acre. It is zoned C-G. You can see the little blue box here. I'm sorry, but it's kind of blurry. Seal: Alan? Tiefenbach: Zoned C-G. It's located at 3285 West Nelis, which is northwest of the West Ustick, North Ten Mile intersection. Seal: Hey, Alan? Tiefenbach: To the north is zoned R-8, although that's a little misleading. That's actually an Idaho Power substation. To the south down here is zoned C-G, which -- McCarvel: Alan? Seal: Madam Chair, yeah, we need to fix Alan's -- we can't -- can't quite understand. It's not coming through. McCarvel: Alan, it's a little warbly -- Tiefenbach Are you not seeing or not hearing? McCarvel: No. It's a little warbly on your sound, but I'm not sure -- to me -- I'm not sure if it's your sound or -- it looks like city clerk might be trying to connect to audio again and I'm wondering if that's causing interference. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F24 Page 21 of 51 Tiefenbach: I don't think it's on my side, because I actually saw that there was some problems and I checked my internet speed and I'm screaming fast over here. McCarvel: Yeah. I think -- right now we can hear you clearly, but I can see where -- Tiefenbach: Let me try moving in closer to my speaker. Is that better? Weatherly: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yeah. We will -- yes. Okay. Hold -- Weatherly: Madam Chair, the audio stays that way on our end. That has nothing to do with our audio connection. McCarvel: Okay. But, yeah, the warble seems to have gone away, whatever -- whatever anybody moved or touched, bravo. We will go ahead and continue, Alan. Tiefenbach: Well, just call me warble for the rest of the evening I guess. McCarvel: Okay. Tiefenbach: So, I will go back to the zoning. Warbles here. Adjacent zoning -- north is R-8, which is an Idaho Power substation, which is here. To the south is zoned C-G, which is a pawn shop and commercial. Directly east is zoned R-4 and RUT. That's a parking lot, Reta Huskey Park and the Five Mile Creek pathway and, then, we have single family residential here. Everybody still hearing me loud and clear? McCarvel: Yes. Thank you. Tiefenbach: Terrific. The property was annexed in 2004. There has been a couple of DAs that were there that have been modified. The most recent development agreement allows a drive-through establishment, but it allows the -- it limits the hours to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The Comprehensive Plan recommends it's for mixed use nonresidential. So, again, this is a conditional use to allow a drive-through coffee shop to operate between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. The reason why they are doing this conditional use purely is for those expanded hours. So, again, property is for a Human Bean kiosk. Based on the type of use the applicant requests these hours to be expanded -- expanded. I want to mention that the applicant has worked very well with staff. They have addressed everything that we have had concerns about and, in particular, they have done some -- they have done quite a bit of redesigns for us. We originally had some concerns with the access. This is the first version here. I just thought I would kind of show you a before and after. The first version was not very clear regarding the right turn, which -- which was here. There is a pawn shop down here and we wanted to make sure they had access and this was kind of messy here. It wasn't real clear about whether you could go left or whether you could go right. We also-- both of the accesses came from the same entrance here and, then, there was an issue with the parking lot where people backing into this Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F25] Page 22 of 51 would be coming into the same place as that drive aisle, so -- so, we had multiple issues with that one. The current version is what you see on the right. This one the cars will enter the site down here at the south and they will go in a counterclockwise orientation and they will come out to the north. There is also an escape lane that comes down to the south here and also allows these same cars from down here to enter in and sort of merge in past the kiosk and, then, even better what we liked is with this version these two are separate. So, the drive-through aisle and the parking lot are separate, so people can come in, park, back their cars out and not impede this drive aisle at all. This, again, was done sort of collaboratively. The applicant worked with staff and came up with this version that we thought was much much better. At the time of the staff report going out we had three additional recommendations. The first one is that the width of the two-way drive aisle, which, I'm sorry, you can't read the numbers. That was here. Be widened from 24 to 25 feet. That just is per the code. The second thing is that there is a pathway here, a bicycle pathway -- if you remember there is a regional pathway that runs over here that's ten feet wide. We wanted to -- you know, we, obviously, thought about bicyclists coming in here and picking up a cup of coffee. So, we wanted to make sure it was easy for them to do that. So, we asked them to widen this to ten feet. The third thing was that the --we didn't -- you know, drive-through aisles are not always the most visually appealing thing. We -- they originally had give us a screening fence, which you can see here on the top right, but we didn't think that it really screened it well enough from Five Mile, especially from the houses down to the southeast, so we requested that they add some additional screening, which they did here, and I apologize you can't really make this out on this particular plan -- is somebody bleeding into the -- sorry. I think I heard somebody else bleeding in the audio. That kind of confused me. There is additional landscaping here that -- it's hard to tell on this landscape plan, but this was updated today and this is, basically, Juniper type bushes, which are opaque up to four feet high. So, they -- bottom line is the applicant has addressed all of staff's comments. We don't have any other comments. It would be my recommendation to you tonight, Planning Commission, that because they have updated these plans today that if you were to support this with staff's recommendations, I recommend that you approve it with the plans that were submitted tonight with the Planning Commission. And with that I will take any questions if you have any. McCarvel: Okay. Do we have any questions for the applicant? Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Alan, just a question on the access point that's on the southeast corner coming into it. Tiefenbach: Yes, ma'am. Holland: Coming in and out of there, not able to jump into that drive-through lane, that was my only concern looking at it. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F26] Page 23 of 51 Tiefenbach: Well, I mean that was -- that was our concern with this one. Is it possible? I think it's possible, but it's not probable. I mean certainly they could put a sign there that was a do not enter and maybe I will defer that to the architect. I don't think they would have an issue putting a sign here saying one way or do not enter or something like that. It would be harder to do it on this one than it would be on this. Sure, it's possible, but it's not probable. But, yeah, easy enough to sign that. Holland: Yeah. The only reason I ask that is I'm pretty familiar with this area and a lot of people will drive through the parking lot side off of Ten Mile instead of the backage road. So, I was just worried about how many people would try to cut through there to get in the drive-through line. Tiefenbach: Well, I can't say it won't happen. Whether or not they are supposed to is a whole other story. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Holland: And one more follow-up question. Does Nelis -- Nelis Drive to the north, is that already an existing road? Tiefenbach: Yes, ma'am. Holland: Okay. Tiefenbach: Actually, there is not much -- well, there is not much to it. It's -- it's a vacant lot. I believe that the -- I will probably have to defer to the applicant. To Kent. It's -- it's not super improved, but, yes, it is there now. Holland: Okay. Thanks. That's it. McCarvel: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Kind of follow up to Commissioner Holland's point there about traffic coming in from the pawn shop from the -- from the south to the -- to the north there and jumping in. Alan, is there anything that can be done to -- that you can require to make sure that that doesn't happen, that they can't come in that way? Because I could, then, see traffic backing up into Pawn One's parking area, if somebody trying to do that, and creating a messy situation. Can they -- can there be a -- some sort of a divider there that will force vehicles to -- to go around to the right and avoid the drive-through lane? Tiefenbach: I'm pausing because I'm looking at the -- the diagram and I'm trying to ascertain what kind of pork top or what kind of divider would be -- could be put in there Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F27 Page 24 of 51 that could keep cars from turning left while still allowing cars in the drive aisle to turn right. It's possible. I don't have an answer for that. That would be something that probably I and the architect would have to look at. I don't have a quick answer for that one, other than a do not enter sign at this point. It's not impossible, I just -- trying to think through it right now, I have to think about how it would go. Cassinelli: If there was some sort of a curb on the -- the drive-through aisle that would virtually make it impossible for somebody to come in there and turn left and, then, turn right into the -- into the drive-through -- Tiefenbach: There could be something in the middle I think. I'm just -- I'm just, again, kind of eyeing this. I think by -- it's possible that there could be a curb. If you see the two arrows there and the updated design -- I'm not a traffic engineer. I think it's possible you could have some kind of curve in between where those arrows are, so that the cars in the drive aisle could turn right still and go out and the cars coming north -- could they still do it? Possibly. But it gets harder and harder at that point. I'm trying to think of a way that you absolutely can't do it. It's possible, I just don't have a brainstorm right now, sir. Cassinelli: Okay. Parsons: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Go ahead. Parsons: Yeah. Bill Parsons. Cassinelli: Sorry. McCarvel: Go ahead, Bill Parsons. Parsons: Well, I just wanted just to remind the Commission this really is about hours of operation. Staff still has to continue to work with the applicant on the site design. If there was no restriction in the DA this application wouldn't even be before you. The applicant would be working with staff and complying with the code. In listening to Commissioner Cassinelli's concerns and the Commission's concerns about that, it's -- it was our understanding in working with the applicant that there is a requirement of that subdivision for that drive aisle to connect into this and it's really -- the difficulty here is when you have a drive-through use next to a retail use and the requirement of a CC&R that requires that connectivity. So, we can't -- we can't prohibit people from entering and exiting this site. We have to -- per our code we have to have an exit lane -- any drive-through that's over -- a stack lane that's over a hundred feet has to have an escape lane. So, I think it --what we might want to do, if you want, certainly put a condition on this CU to -- to me the enter -- just inform the customers leaving the pawn shop to access the drive-through from the western drive aisle. That's probably the easier way than them heading out -- out of that driveway heading north is merely an exit or an out only, as to Alan's point. But I think we can continue to work with the applicant on kind of massaging the site design and see if Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F28 Page 25 of 51 we can improve upon it based on some of the concerns that we are hearing from you. That's probably the best way to move forward on tonight's application. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Parsons: Both of the -- yeah. Both the restaurant use and the drive-through are principally permitted. So, it doesn't really require any action from this Commission. That -- the design -- the layout here, it's really hours of operation. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I do have some that's a little bit more pertinent to the hours of operation. Alan, directly across the street from this -- it would be across Ten Mile I guess, what is -- can you describe that parcel and what's going in there? Because my thought is at 5:00 a.m. it's headlights of cars coming in from that direction would be -- their headlights would be directly aimed to the lot directly to the east. So, can you speak to that parcel over there? Tiefenbach: Sure. Directly to the east is a parking lot. I believe that it is owned either by ACHD or ITD. I don't have -- don't have the GIS in front of me. So, that's basically the parking lot and I think it's being used as a park and ride and that's for the park and the regional pathway that's directly across the street. So, it -- it is vacant, it will continue to be vacant and that's one of the reasons even -- even being that, that's the reason why we have recommended that the applicant continue to beef up that screen along the drive aisle up to at least four feet to help -- and I was thinking more of to the south and the east -- about 250 feet to the southeast there is residential, but it's not directly across the street from this site. Cassinelli: Yeah. I see that -- I see that residential, but there is nothing -- so, it -- headlights at 5:00 a.m. aren't -- it doesn't look like they are going to shine into anything really. Tiefenbach: No. It's just parking there. Cassinelli: Okay. Tiefenbach: Parking for the park and parking for the trailhead and I think park and ride. Cassinelli: Okay. McCarvel: Any other questions for staff? Okay. At this point we will have the applicant come forward. I apologize for the noise before. I thought -- I had to go close the door, so -- Wallgren: Madam Chair, Commissioners, can you hear me? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F29 Page 26 of 51 McCarvel: Yes. Go ahead, sir. Wallgren: All right. My name is Jarrod Wallgren. I'm with JGT Architecture, 1212 12th Avenue South in Nampa and, you know, I don't have a whole lot to add. I think Alan did a great job of presenting the project. As he stated, we worked with him early on to iron out the circulation and I think, you know, based on some of the concerns we do have the application in for design review and CZC -- CZC review, so we can continue to iron that out with staff, perhaps some striping or -- or even a small median or maybe bumping the curve just a little bit to kind of guide traffic, but as far as the -- the intent of this application I think the -- the hours of use are compatible with the area. It does not adversely affect any surrounding properties with headlights and such. So, with that we just respectfully ask for your approval on this and I would be happy to answer any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Adrienne, do we have any public testimony? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have one person signed up to testify and that's Colby Halker. Colby, one moment. Halker: Yeah. Good evening. This is Colby Halker. I'm actually with A&C Ventures, LLC, and we will be the developer in the property. McCarvel: Okay. Colby, could you give me your address as well? Halker: Yeah. Sure. Address is 451 West Enchantment Street, Eagle, Idaho. McCarvel: Thank you. Halker: So, again, I'm representing the development --we are development partners with A&C. We will build and own the Human Bean restaurant and, then, lease it back to Human Bean as the operator. We are in agreement with staff and would ask for your approval. So, those are my only comments. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Any other public testimony in the Chambers or online? Okay. We will go back to the applicant. If you have any other comments or if the Commission has any questions for the applicant at this time. Halker: I do not have any other comments and I think we have met the staff's conditions and agree with the staff report. McCarvel: Okay. Halker: So, if you have any other questions. McCarvel: Okay. If there is no more questions from the Commission, could I get a motion to close the public hearing on H-2020-0125, Human Bean. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F30] Page 27 of 51 Seal: So moved. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2020-0125. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Any comments? Yes, Mr. Yearsley. Yearsley: I -- I think this is a good spot for this facility. I think the hours of operation -- expanded hours of operation are -- you know, it's in a good area to have those expanded hours of operation and I don't think there will be any issues from the neighbor. So, I'm in support of this project. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal I think first. Seal: I -- I live pretty close to this and I use the bike path and -- and ride along the Nelis Drive quite often, so I'm pretty familiar with all of that. One thing that I will put out there is this drainage area that they are putting in, it's nothing that's been talked about so far, but that's going to clean up a huge water holding area, for lack of better terminology, that's there. It's -- it's kind of an eyesore on the Ten Mile corridor there. So, this is going to really help clean that up. Number one. I like that staff put in the expanded -- basically walking-biking path that's in there, because this is -- there is a -- there is walking -- what do you call it? Signalized walking intersection there that connects the paths in and out and there is a park and ride parking lot that's across the street from it. One other remark I will make is the common street that's behind pond one -- it's actually behind pond one and the little strip mall there, as well as O'Reilly Auto Parts and everything. That's probably where the majority of people are going to be coming in and out of this off of Nelis Drive and if they come through the parking lots they are going to probably come through and hit this common street a little bit sooner to get into the drive aisle for that. So, I don't envision there is going to be a lot of people that are going to be coming through the -- on one parking lot over into it, because there is -- there is other drive aisles between the buildings already to get to that common -- that common drive. But I really like the plan and happy to see this going in there, so I think it's going to be a good fit. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F31 Page 28 of 51 McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Holland, you were off mute for a second. Did you have anything? Holland: I would just say ditto to Commissioner Seal's comments. He stole what I was going to say. I think he did a great job summarizing. I'm in favor. McCarvel: Okay. Any other comments or motions? Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Just a really quick thing, just because it's about hours. I will say I live a lot closer to a Human Bean than the neighbor that's going to be closest to this product and they have, you know, similar hours operation and it's not an issue, so -- McCarvel: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Yeah. I'm not -- I'm -- I'm in favor of it. There is a -- you know, just a couple hundred feet to the south you have the 20 -- you got 24 hour Maverick there, so if that's not an issue this certainly wouldn't be an issue, so I'm in favor of the hour -- hours and I would be willing to make a motion if we are ready. McCarvel: Always. Cassinelli: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend to approve file number H-2020-0125 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4th, 2021, with the only modification being a recommendation to work on that -- the traffic flow in there. Pogue: Madam Chair, this is Andrea Pogue. It's a CUP, so the Commission is the decision maker on this one. McCarvel: Okay. Cassinelli: And make that approve file number, instead of recommend to approve. Holland: Commissioner Holland seconds. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Oh. Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F32 Page 29 of 51 Seal: There was also -- Alan said that he would like the -- it to read that the modifications to the site plan and landscape plan as presented in the Planning Commission, because of the -- the current proposal that you see on the screen wasn't in the public record as of yet. McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Cassinelli, would you like to amend your motion as stated? Cassinelli: Madam Chair, love to. You bet you. Holland: My second stands. McCarvel: All right. It has been moved and seconded to approve file number H-2020- 0125 with recommendations. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 7. Public Hearing for Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) by Cole Architects, Generally Located East of N. Webb Ave. Between E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 30,000+/- square foot residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district. McCarvel: Next item on the agenda -- we will open the public hearing for H-2020-0126, Northpoint Recovery Center, and we will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Give me just a moment here. Get my presentation up. Can you all see my presentation? McCarvel: There we go. Yes. Allen: Alrighty. The next application before you is a request for a conditional use permit. This site consists of 3.86 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and it's located east of North Webb Avenue between East State Avenue and East Pine Avenue. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north are apartments that are in the development process, zoned R-40. To the east is office zoned I-L and to the west and south is vacant undeveloped land zoned C-G. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is mixed use community. A conditional use permit is proposed for a new 30,000 square foot single story residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district as required by the UDC. The facility will be an in-patient, out-patient addiction treatment provider with 48 beds and administrative and treatment uses. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of mixed use community in that it will contribute to the mix of uses in this area and a variety of healthcare options available in the city. It will provide for the physical and mental healthcare needs of the community in relation to addiction recovery and is in close Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F33 Page 30 of 51 proximity to housing, arterial streets, and businesses. The use should be compatible with residential uses to the north, as well as the industrial use to the east and future commercial uses to the west and south. A segment of the city's multi-use pathway system is proposed along the boundary of the site between State and Pine Avenue as a public amenity, which will connect different land use types and that is this road right here, which doubles as an emergency access. Only the eastern 315 foot wide portion of the property is proposed to develop with this application. The western 70 foot wide strip, the shaded area of land, is proposed to develop at a later time. Access is proposed via State Avenue, with an emergency only access via Pine Avenue. Parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards. Based on the number of beds, which are 48, a minimum of 24 spaces are required. A total of 43 spaces are proposed, resulting in 19 extra spaces. Street buffer landscaping is required along State and Pine Avenue in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends buffers are installed with this development for the full width of the property, including the western portion proposed to be developed in the future. Building elevations were submitted as shown that incorporate materials consisting of horizontal fiber cement siding and stone with vertical wood siding -- McCarvel: Sonya? Allen: Yes. McCarvel: Sonya, we are still on your first slide. Allen: Oh. It's -- hum. It's saying my screen sharing is paused. I don't know how to unpause it. McCarvel: Yeah. We didn't -- Allen: Oh, wait a minute. McCarvel: -- see the mouse moving or anything. Allen: Oh, I'm so sorry. McCarvel: Yeah. Allen: Let me know when you can see the elevations. Can you see them? McCarvel: No. We are still -- okay. Keep going. There we go. Thank you. Allen: Were they moving? We get that lag. McCarvel: We have elevations now. Thank you. Allen: All right. Did you -- did you guys see the site plans at all or no? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F34 Page 31 of 51 McCarvel: No. Allen: Okay. McCarvel: It was stuck on the first slide. Allen: Let me back up here and, again, this -- the shaded area is the western portion of the site that's not proposed to develop with this site. The access is from State, with an emergency access from Pine, and the driveway that's shown along the east boundary of the site and, then, the parking area. McCarvel: Okay. Allen: Again, it is in excess of UDC standards. Staff is recommending that the entire width of the buffer along State and Pine, even on the portion that's not proposed to be developed at this time, is constructed with this development. All right. Hopefully that catches us up and we will go on to the elevations. Building elevations incorporate materials consisting of horizontal fiber cement siding and stone with vertical wood siding and exposed wood beam accents and standing seam metal roofing. The development agreement requires windows, awnings, or arcades, totaling at least 30 percent of the length of the facade to be provided for faces that are viewable from other structures. Final design should comply with this requirement and the design standards listed in the architectural standards manual. The design review application will be processed separately with the certificate of zoning compliance application. No public testimony was received on this application. Jennifer Mohr, the applicant's representative, submitted a response in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the report. Staff will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. Hoffman: Yes. My name is Ian Hoffman. I'm not Jennifer Mohr, but I am the applicant. Cole Architects. So, thank you so much for having us. McCarvel: And could you give us your address as well? Hoffman: Absolutely. 1008 West Main Street, Boise, Idaho. McCarvel: Okay. Hoffman: And as Sonya mentioned -- I think she summed everything up pretty good with everything and we do have some additional slides that we could present if we need to to kind of give you a little bit better sense of the site development, but we just wanted to speak in favor of this project and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you all. Northwest -- Northpoint Recovery is a growing business that's been around since 2009. They fit a very specific market that currently the City of Meridian does not seem to have Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F35] Page 32 of 51 a large amount of these kind of facilities. So, we think that this will be a great use for the city and great amendment to this property and so we really do appreciate the opportunity to be a part of this project with the owner. Sonya, I do have additional images that we can share if we would like, but I think you have pretty much covered everything. McCarvel: Would the Commission prefer to see the additional photos or are we good with the staff report? Seal: Madam Chair, if they have different elevations and stuff that could be presented that -- that would be good to see that. McCarvel: Okay. Sure. Yeah. So, if you would like to load those pictures, would be happy to take a look at them. Hoffman: Just let me know when you can see my screen. Is that all coming up -- McCarvel: We -- yeah, we can see your screen. Hoffman: All right. So, the site as currently proposed for Northpoint, as Sonya mentioned, is between Pine and State Avenue. This kind of large green dot here. We are showing a lot more facilities towards the Boise area. So, we really do feel like this is creating a -- or filling a need that the city has in Meridian and that's what we wanted to show you here. As Sonya mentioned, this is a one story facility in a future developed area. It's currently a -- kind of green site that's going to be developed with existing commercial use off to the east over here. That fire lane pedestrian pathway connection between Pine and State Avenue is on the east side of the street and that will be landscaped with -- in the guidelines of the city and the CUP and development agreement. We will be developing along State Avenue for the landscape and Pine Avenue on the south side of the site with -- in agreement with the development agreement and the city's recommendations. The facility itself, as I mentioned, is a one story facility. Sonya talked briefly about the architecture of the site. We are going to be complying with any recommendations for the design review application when we submit later after approval and also approval of the CUP application. So, these are not finalized at this moment and this is -- the earlier image is the image of the main entry off of State Street and, then, the next image is the image off of Pine. So, this is that pedestrian walkway here. And, then, one of the interior courtyards that it will be used only for facility staff and patients and that is all I had to share. I do appreciate the opportunity and, hopefully, we have your consideration. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Could you go back to that overview? Hoffman: Yes, ma'am. McCarvel: Oh. Hoffman: There we go. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F36 Page 33 of 51 McCarvel: The one -- yeah. So, I think in the staff report, too, it made comment about taking care of the landscaping, so the -- those things that are out of scope there on the west side wouldn't become kind of trash areas. Hoffman: Yes. That is all -- and we have agreed to the -- the requirements of the CUP and so that was part of that report, is that we maintain that area. So, yes. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Do we have public testimony on this application? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Seal, do you have anybody in Chambers or is there anybody online who would wish to speak on this application? Seal: Nobody in chambers, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Okay. Okay. If the applicant has no more comments, do we have anymore questions for the applicant? Can I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2020- 0126, Northpoint Recovery Center? Holland: So moved, Madam Chair. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2020-0126. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: So, again, we have a conditional use permit and the final okay on this. So, any comments from the Commissioners? We are a quiet bunch tonight. Okay. I -- yeah, I think it's a great use, especially in that area. It seems to have all the accesses it needs and the surrounding should be good for what's going on there. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Yeah. I think -- I agree, I think it's a good location for the facility. I mean good -- good access and everything. I mean if I had a concern it would just be maintaining hours for anybody that's going to be coming in as an in-patient, out-patient, that kind of thing. But that's --that's about it. It's good to see something like this coming into the community. I think it's going to be helpful as we continue to grow. McCarvel: Any other comments or motions? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F37 Page 34 of 51 Holland: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I think it looks like a good use and looks like they have done a nice job with the site plan. So, I didn't hear anybody else jumping up to make other comments, I'm happy to make a motion if we are ready for that. I believe -- it's just a conditional use permit, so that's our body to decide that, so after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve the conditional use permit request for Northpoint Recovery Center, H-2020-0126, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4th, 2021. Grove: Second. Seal: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2020-0126, Northpoint Recovery Center. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 8. Public Hearing for Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) by Breckon Land Design, Located on the east side of S. Meridian Rd./SH 69, midway between E. Amity Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) and R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. McCarvel: And moving on through, before we even get to the two hour mark, We will open the public hearing for Item H-2020-0117, Shafer View Terrace, and we will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Let me just make sure my presentation is caught up to me this time. Can you all see the zoning maps? McCarvel: No, we are still -- oh, there we go. Allen: Alrighty. The last application for you tonight is a request for annexation and a preliminary plat. The site consists of 39.01 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and it's located on the east side of South Meridian Road, State Highway 69, midway between East Amity Road and East Lake Hazel Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north, east, and west is future single family residential, zoned R-4 and R-8, and to Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F38 Page 35 of 51 the south is single family rural residential zoned RUT in Ada county. This property is part of Shafer View Estates Subdivision to the south recorded in 2002. It was deed restricted and was only allowed to be used for open space for a period of not less than 15 years from the date of recording of the plat. That time period has since elapsed and it is now eligible for development. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is low density residential, which calls for three or fewer units per acre. The proposed annexation is for 40.48 acres of land, with R-2 zoning, which consists of 10.66 acres on the east end of the site and R-4 zoning, which consists of 29.82 acres on the west side. This does include a -- adjacent right of way to the section line of South Meridian Road and State Highway 69 and to the centerline of Quartz Creek Street to the north. A total of 50 residential dwelling units are proposed to develop on the site at an overall gross density of 1.76 units per acre, consistent with the associated -- McCarvel: Go ahead. Allen: Okay. The density is consistent with the associated low density residential future land use map designation for the site. Although the proposed density is more consistent with an R-2, low density residential zoning district, the applicant is requesting R-4 in order to provide a transition in lot sizes between the existing rural residential subdivision to the south, Shafer View Estates, and the future urban residential subdivision approved to the north, Prevail Subdivision, zoned R-8. Larger lots are proposed along the southern boundary adjacent to rural residential lots that gradually transition to smaller lots to the north. A common lot that contains a 41 foot wide easement for the McBirney Lateral, separates the proposed lots from the existing rural lots. You can see a little bit better on this color map. The McBirney Lateral is right there, if you can see my pointer. McCarvel: Yes. Allen: And the proposed plat is a subdivision of Lot 4, Block 1, Shafer View Estates, as previously mentioned, and is proposed to consist of 50 buildable lots and ten common lots on 39.01 acres of land and be developed in three phases, as shown on the phasing plan. The third phase is under separate ownership and it consists of one 10.66 acre lot that is proposed to develop separately with the Apex Development to the east. If you will remember, this corner section was -- was previously included in the Apex annexation application, but it was later withdrawn, because that parcel was split off through means that we don't recognize as a legal parcel. So, they withdrew that annexation request and that parcel from their application and now it's being included in this application. But will develop in the future with the Apex development. Two accesses are proposed via East Quartz Creek Street, a planned collector street along the northern boundary of the site. Direct access via East Shafer View Drive, an existing local street along the southern boundary of the site, is proposed for the lot south of the McBirney Lateral. An emergency only access is proposed between the cul-de-sac and East Shafer View Drive and that is this area right here, if you can see my pointer. Access to the R-2 zoned portion of the site is anticipated to be provided from the east, as I mentioned, with the Apex development. Direct lot access via South Meridian Road and State Highway 69 is prohibited. The proposed street sections accommodate on-street parking on both sides Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F39 Page 36 of 51 of the streets, which should be sufficient to serve guests, in addition to driveway parking on each lot. Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards in the UDC, which include block face standards. The face of block three -- and that is this block right here where my pointer is at -- exceeds the maximum block length allowed and does not provide a pedestrian connection, other than the emergency access driveway and, again, that's right here, which may serve as a pedestrian connection between the proposed subdivision and Shafer View Estates to the south. The applicant is requesting a Council approval of a waiver to allow Block 3 to exceed 1,200 feet due to existing site constraints that include the following: The narrow configuration of the subject property. The location of the McBirney Lateral, a large waterway irrigation facility that runs along the southern boundary and through the western portion of the proposed subdivision. And the existing Shafer View Subdivision that abuts the site to the south, south of the lateral, which does not include any pedestrian pathways or stub streets to this property. If not approved the plat should be reconfigured to comply with this standard. An emergency access road for Fire Department is proposed between the end of the cul-de-sac and East Shafer View Road, but it's not a public access. Again, that's just right here. A ten foot wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed along South Meridian Road and State Highway 69 within the street buffer as required in the pathways master plan. A detached sidewalk is proposed along East Quartz Creek Street. A combination of attached and detached sidewalks with parkways is proposed within the development. A 35 foot wide street buffer is required along South Meridian Road, an entryway corridor, and a 20 foot wide buffer is required along Quartz Creek, a collector street. Noise abatement is required to be provided for residential uses adjacent to State Highway 69. A four foot tall berm and six foot tall Simtek wall is proposed as noise abatement in accord with UDC standards. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space, 3.9 acres, and one site amenity is required to be provided with the subdivision. A total of 4.05 acres or 14.27 percent is proposed, along with four site amenities, consisting of a multi-sport court, tot lot, gazebo shade structure and segment of the city's multi-use pathway system in excess of UDC standards. A mix of six foot tall wrought iron and six foot tall solid vinyl fencing is proposed adjacent to common areas. Wrought iron fencing is proposed along the McBirney Lateral. Two waterways cross this site. As I mentioned earlier, the McBirney Lateral, it's a large open waterway within a 41 foot wide easement along the southern boundary and through the western portion of the site and a 38 foot wide slough or drain on the eastern portion of the site that the applicant has confirmed with Boise Project Board of Control is not within an easement and that is this area right on the backside of these lots right here. The UDC allows waterways to remain open when used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined. The 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 is not proposing to improve the McBirney Lateral as required in order for it to remain open and request a Council waiver to allow it to remain open and not be piped, as allowed by the UDC. A six foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed along both sides of the waterway to deter access to the waterway and to ensure public safety. No public testimony was received on this application. The applicant requested some corrections to the staff report, which have been made. Staff is recommending approval with the requirement of a development agreement per the provisions in the staff report, with the following added conditions that are contained in Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F40 Page 37 of 51 your hearing outline. The 38 foot wide drain on the eastern portion of the site shall be contained -- contained entirely within common lots. Fencing is required on both sides of the drain consistent with the standards in the UDC. If piped, the common lot containing the drain on the eastern portion of the site shall have vegetative ground cover to prevent fire hazard and unsightliness and modification to condition number nine to allow the option for the waterways on the site to be improved as a water amenity as an alternative to being piped, as allowed by the UDC with submittal of construction drawings and relevant calculations prepared by a qualified licensed professional registered in the state of Idaho that demonstrates compliance with the requirements for water amenities as defined in the UDC. Staff did discuss these recommended changes with the applicant and they are in agreement with the proposed changes and the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions -- Allen: I did forget to mention the conceptual elevations -- excuse me, Madam Chair -- that were submitted as shown for this development. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Sonya, can you go back to that -- the -- I think it was the previous slide, the color -- one more back. The color seems to be the easiest one to view. There you go. Lot -- what did -- what are the lot widths on 15, 16, 17 in there? Allen: I'm not sure. Give me a moment and I will pull up the plat. Cassinelli: Okay. I'm just curious the transition between the properties to the south. Allen: Did you say 15, 16 and 17? Cassinelli: Yeah. Allen: Okay. Cassinelli: They are going to lineup to the ones along the north, too. Two. Three. Four. Allen: Lot 15 is 90 feet wide. Actually, they all are. Fifteen, sixteen and seventeen are 90 feet wide. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F41 Page 38 of 51 McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to begin? And, please, state your name and address for the record. Breckon: Yes. Jon Breckon. Breckon Land Design. 6661 Glenwood Street, Garden City. McCarvel: Thank you. Breckon: I have a PowerPoint presentation. Can I share that? McCarvel: Sure. Get Adrienne to let you do that. Weatherly: Jon, you should be able to share your screen now. Breckon: Okay. Okay. Can you see that? McCarvel: Yes. Breckon: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Sonya. I think Sonya did a great job explaining a few intricacies to the project and it's a little bit challenging due to the odd shape and there is a substantial grade change across the site as well that has led us to this latest concept. We worked with staff, as well as the neighbors to the south, to come up with this concept. You know, our goal was to provide a quality development and to allow or provide appropriate transition from the larger lots to the south and to the smaller lots to the north, which -- which is the R-8. So, that's why we have chosen the R-4 zoning designation and I will explain that a little bit more here as we go. Here is an overview of the site location and you can see the larger lots to the south and Meridian Road on the west. You may be familiar with the Prevail Subdivision to the north. That's -- that's the R-8. Apex, then, wraps the east side and here is a quick shot that depicts the existing city limits that wrap around the property in the light gray. Our project is the dark gray. So, here is a snapshot of the current zoning. You can see Prevail to the north, R-8. Apex development on the east is R-4. We have the parking lots in the county to the south of us and, then, I believe Apex is proposing R-2 -- or would like to do larger lots, so that's why we have included that as R-2 zoning and, then, we have R-4 and I should note that even though we are proposing R-4 for phase one and phase two, that 32 of those 50 lots actually exceed 12,000 square feet, which is the R-2 minimum lot size and that was intentional to provide larger lots particularly adjacent to our neighbors to the south and, then, here, again, the color plan. So, you can see these lots on the south here are fairly large and all these lots that are directly adjacent to the neighbors are of that larger variety. And, then, we have transitioned lots to the north of -- that will border Prevail to the north of us, are a little bit smaller. The McBirney Lateral, I would like to speak to that a little bit. That's a really relatively large irrigation ditch. It's owned by the Boise Project Board Of Control and initially our intent was to beautify that so that it could be utilized as an amenity with a pathway on the side. We met with -- out on the site with Boise Project and they informed us that we would not be allowed to provide any improvements within their easement there. Due to the size of it -- we did research what it would require to pipe that Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F42 Page 39 of 51 and it would be a minimum of a 30 inch pipe for over 2,000 feet and the cost of that would be substantially prohibitive. The initial estimate is about a half a million dollars to -- to pipe that. You can see that we have a pond here. That would be for irrigation purposes. Our water supply comes from the east and there is an existing pump station kind of right where my cursor is shown. We also did quite an exploration to -- in an effort to provide a better connectivity. One of the thoughts was to extend this road -- this dead end road here and connect it up to the Shafer View Drive and that proved to be very challenging. There is some substantial grade change there and there -- there are all the existing irrigation improvements. There is a pump station, as well as large irrigation pipe that comes through and feeds in McBirney from east, all -- it comes together with diverge boxes, et cetera, right at that location. So, it would make it extremely challenging. Let's see. Other items to maybe explain. There was some concern by the neighbors down in -- in this area regarding, you know, density and adjacency to open space and so one of the changes we made from the original design was to provide a landscape buffer between the new lots and they are all -- other things I can share are that --we have tried to provide additional improvements in the form of amenities. One -- I believe one amenity is required and we are -- we are proposing three, with a tot lot, a multi-sport court, and a picnic gazebo. Here is another shot just to kind of depict that -- that transition that we were trying to achieve. You can see the -- the Prevail laid out to the north and how the lot sizes transition as you -- as you move to the south. Here is a slide that touches on the schools. That would -- where, you know, children would attend. The Mary McPherson Elementary School that just finished up a classroom expansion. There is Victory Middle School and, then, the Mountain View High School. Here are emergency services located on this map. Project site. Fire Station Number 6. This location. And the police station. And response -- response time is three to five minutes. So, here is a shot of what that multi-sport court might look like. Along Meridian Road -- no, that -- Meridian Road, as you know, comes busier and busier every year and in an effort to mitigate that we are proposing a berm, as well as a solid Simtec type fence on top of the berm. The berm would be four feet in height and, then, the fence six. So, that would provide a net ten foot buffer, as well as the landscape and a ten foot path. Here is a shot of what we would like the -- the homes to look like and, then, this is just a compilation of what Sonya already spoke to about the waivers and exceptions that we are -- we are requesting. McCarvel: Thank you. Breckon: Thank you. McCarvel: Do we have any questions for the applicant? Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I just have some questions on some of the open space that's there on the -- the open space that's south of the lateral, it looks like there is another pond there. Yes. What is that? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F43 Page 40 of 51 Breckon: Yes. That's a -- that's an existing drainage area that -- that takes -- it's a stormwater swale and it takes runoff from this existing street and right now it's kind of a dryland seed mix and so what we would like to do is green that up and, then, retain the drainage swale. Seal: And, then, the common area on the -- kind of the northeastern side, same thing, there is an irrigation -- I mean a pondish area there. Is it for irrigation? Breckon: Yes. This is a proposed irrigation pond. That was one of the requests from Boise Project when we were researching how to utilize water right -- surface water right for pressurized irrigation. They recommended we provide an irrigation pond. Seal: That will be dry during the wintertime? Breckon: No. We intend to -- it would just -- the water would lower during the wintertime. Seal: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Jon, did you get any feedback from the neighbors on the south there about those -- I brought up those lots, 15 to 17, that are kind of -- they are 90 foot wide. So, kind of long and skinny there. Did you -- that puts about a two to one transition. Did you get any feedback and, if so, what was -- can you talk about that from the neighbors to the south? Breckon: No. The neighbors directly the south of those didn't really give us any feedback. We did get some feedback from the folks here over on the west side. They were mostly concerned and so, like I said before, we were just trying to mitigate that by providing a -- more of a landscape here for them. These lots, you know, I mean -- I think we are all used to seeing the -- the R-8 variety that's very prevalent or smaller and, you know, these are -- these are actually pretty nice size lots in today's marketplace. While these are 90 feet wide and look a little skinnier, they are pretty close to 200 -- you know, one of them is 215 feet deep. The other one is 194. So, they are --they are not what you see typically these days. Cassinelli: Yeah. Not the depth, though, it's -- the width that -- because you are getting a two to one transition. That's my only -- when I looked at that that's -- that was the question I have. But if you are not getting any -- if you weren't getting any feedback, any opposition from the neighbors -- Breckon- Yes, sir. No, we did not. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F44 Page 41 of 51 Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Madam Chair, I have a follow-up question. McCarvel: Sure. Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just on the -- the lots that border the subdivision to the south there, are they going to be limited to one story or is there any limitation on the height that you are going to put on those? Breckon: Wasn't planning on it. You know, that -- I remember back in the neighborhood meeting I don't know that -- we talked about that. Just touched on it. That, you know, we are planning on a variety of home styles and that they would be of a similar design to -- to what exists to the south of us. You know, that--that style and stature. But I could add, too -- and say that, you know, the intent is to have a tight architectural control standard there to maintain the quality. McCarvel: Great. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Lorcher: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Yes, Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: The lateral that runs between the two subdivisions, I think, Jon, you mentioned that's being run by the irrigation company; correct? Breckon: Yes. Lorcher: So, they will not let you do an improvement, so do you anticipate that just being a dirt road? Breckon: Yes. Unfortunately, we do. Yes. It was our hope that we could beautify that and provide a pathway and green that up, but they were very specific. If there is some way to persuade them we would be interested in pursuing that. Lorcher: And will the homesites on the edges of that road have fencing behind it or would be open view? Breckon: Correct. That was one of the items that came up with conversation with staff that the edges of this entire ditch would be fenced, so that it's essentially inaccessible from a safety standpoint. Lorcher: Would homeowners be eligible to make a gate, so they have access to it? I assume that becomes a -- kind of a walking path or is it completely inaccessible to people? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F45 Page 42 of 51 Breckon: I think -- I suppose you could. I -- you know, I think the intent was that it would, essentially, be gated off due to safety, since we want to keep it open. Lorcher: Open canal? Breckon: Correct. Lorcher: Got you. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for staff -- or for the applicant? Sorry. Seal: Madam Chair, I have got one more question. Sorry. McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: The -- the waterway that's on the -- the northeast side of it, that's on the other side of the homes there -- yes. Is that going to be covered or improved or what -- what is the -- it sounded like from the staff report there was no improvement, but no plan to cover it as well. Breckon: Correct. That's a -- that's a great question. We were looking at that today, because it's -- it's not what you were used to seeing. It is an historic drainage way runoff route, if you will, that collects field runoff. It's an open facility. It's -- it's kind of a broad open drainage way and the -- we had talked about potential for piping it. However, since it accepts runoff --just historic runoff -- natural runoff from -- from side -- from the sides, piping it does not seem to be a feasible option. Yeah. The -- the intent there would be to seed it and not improve it. I think that -- did that answer your question? Seal: And the reason I asked that question is because -- and, especially, after if you said you would seed it and not improve it. I mean it's a part of the subdivision that's behind those houses. That seems like it's just -- it's going to be something that's going to be a hassle for them to maintain. It doesn't really serve a purpose it sounds like, but it can't be filled in and it can't be covered over, so, then, it just becomes a weed patch that's going to sit behind these homes. Breckon: Yeah. I guess our intent would be to plant it with a natural grass and -- and allow it to continue to function the way it has. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Jon, I had another question on the -- the emergency access there at the end of the cul-de-sac on the south -- I guess the southeast portion. I'm assuming there is a -- there is an easement through to -- through the -- those properties there. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F46 Page 43 of 51 Breckon: There is. There is a -- well, the property -- that property actually connects here, but it allows for irrigation access -- irrigation -- there is an irrigation access easement that, you know, encompasses the McBirney and it also extends over to the east. Cassinelli: Okay. So, that irrigation easement, that's where you will be taking the emergency access? Breckon: Yes. McCarvel: Okay. Cassinelli: Okay. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Hearing none, do we have any public testimony, Madam Clerk? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have two people in house. The first of which is Marvin Ward. McCarvel: Okay. Please state your name and address for the record. Ward: Sure. Marvin Ward. McCarvel: And if he could pull that microphone real close to you. Ward: This one? McCarvel: Sorry. Ward: How is that? McCarvel: Yeah. Ward: Is that better? McCarvel: There you go. Ward: Okay. Marvin Ward. 152 East Shafer View. I am the first house in the subdivision of Shafer View there coming off of Meridian Road. Several concerns that we mentioned during the neighborhood meeting that we were hoping would be kind of looked at maybe a little bit better. These first four lots here I can't see on here the lot numbers that are adjacent coming off of the Shafer View. The access there would be into our subdivision and that also is a blind corner coming in off of Meridian Road and if you have been off of Meridian Road into that subdivision, getting across there sometimes the traffic is moving quite fast, we are pretty concerned about safety of children and residences on that corner with those four lots there. I appreciate the little access pathway there, but it's still -- you Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F47 Page 44 of 51 know, I'm -- I'm concerned -- we are really concerned about the -- the safety of the -- of the people in that little corridor right there in -- in coming into the subdivision and adding that much more traffic to the subdivision as -- as it is -- as it is right now. It might be too many lots. I don't know. Of course when we all bought into this Shafer View Subdivision we were one acre lots, with the idea that the plan going forward around us would be minimum of one acre lots and, of course, times change and now we are looking at lots that are much smaller than that, which seem to kind of go against our grain a little bit, of course. But, you know, working on half acre lots we kind of understand that. The buffer of the canal is making some difference. But I remember, at least in my mind, from the neighborhood discussion that we had, that the -- the lots to the south that bordered the canal and Shafer View were going to be one story, so we -- they would not block the views that we have of the mountains at this point. We have some nice views of Shafer View. Thus Shafer View Subdivision. Shafer Butte. Excuse me. And so we were, you know, kind of hoping on that area there. The -- the emergency access is there at the end of the cul-de-sac, comes into where that -- the no access is allowed from the canal company and we are -- we are coming across that access there with all the irrigation and the pumphouse and all that stuff and make it an access road through the -- the Boise Board of Control access. So, anyway, some of the lot widths and stuff, trying to get through there, so -- a little concerned about those things and the development around the entryway and those four lots coming in as a safety concern for children and stuff playing there, that is a very volatile -- it's coming around the corner and it's an up hill. It's a blind corner coming around there and it sometimes gets a little -- a little worrisome there, so -- McCarvel: Thank you. Ward: Thank you. McCarvel: Madam Clerk? Weatherly: Excuse me. Sorry, Madam Chair. Next is Gayle Ward. McCarvel: Thank you. G.Ward: My name is Gayle Ward. 152 East Shafer View. Also my husband. We live in that very first house. You know, I know progress brings all these homes into our neighborhoods and, you know, you want a country atmosphere and it's getting taken away and it's getting gobbled up real fast. But what really concerns me, too, is those four lots in the beginning of our subdivision. Like Mark said, safety is an issue first and the other thing is you are coming into acre lots. You are putting four little houses coming into acre lots and I don't know why. I mean you could easily put, you know, two houses in an acre each. I just think it kind of starts tearing down our subdivision and it's not meant to be that way. It's supposed to be acre lots in that section. So, that's my opinion. I don't think it's appropriate to put four houses there. So, thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F48 Page 45 of 51 McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else in Chambers or online that wishes to speak on this application, if you would press the raise hands if you are online. Okay. Seeing no other public testimony, Jon, would you like to address those comments? Breckon: Yes, please. Actually, I'm going to switch screens, pull up the landscape plan. Here is the preliminary plat landscape plan, which depicts these four lots and you can see the landscape buffer here we are proposing. Also like to -- you know, I didn't actually talk about this, but I would like to address it. You can see here the vision triangle on the one side. This landscape plan we have only addressed the area immediate -- or included in the plat. However, I would also like to just speak to the entrance and we talked about this at the neighborhood meeting and there -- there definitely is some concern about visibility coming in or going out as there is a substantial grade change coming up Shafer View from Meridian Road. There is some landscaping that is fairly mature March trees and it is our intent -- we would like to redo this area, actually, on both sides. I would be glad to make it a condition of approval -- to address that to increase the visibility and to mitigate any of the safety concern there and to beautify this frontage at the same time. The other item mentioned is these four lots here, with the exception of number five, are all approximately a half an acre in size. Five is a little bit smaller. However, it's adjacent to the -- to the open space. Additionally, you know, there was some discussion about the views to Shafer Butte -- and I'm going to flip back to the overall view here. But there is quite a bit of grade change through this property. It all slopes down from Shafer View Drive down to this drainage and, for example, across these lots through here there is approximately five to seven feet of fall and there is also a grade change across these lines as well and so it's our feeling -- strong feeling that even though we would have two story homes there, it will not impede views to the north. There is about -- as you go -- as you transition here to the east there is even more grade change, approximately 15 feet across this, and -- you know. And that was one of the reasons here to provide some of this open space in between, just to provide as much buffer as possible to the existing homes. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, Jon. If you don't have any other comments, it looks like we don't have any other questions for you, so at this time I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing on H-2020-0117, Shafer View Terrace. Seal: So moved. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2020-0117. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. McCarvel: Okay. I know we had a lot of questions for the applicant. Did we get -- do we have comments going on from there? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F49 Page 46 of 51 Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Question for staff. Sonya, was there any feedback from ITD on -- on this? Were they requiring anything -- any upgrades to the entrance to the -- to Shafer View Drive or anything? Because there is --there is nothing in the agency comments from ITD. Since Meridian Road is theirs. Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, no -- Cassinelli. Excuse me. No, there were no comments from ITD submitted. Cassinelli: Okay. So, does that mean they didn't review it or they just didn't have any comments? Allen: No idea. Cassinelli: Okay. McCarvel: Okay. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: This -- this is a tricky one for me. So, there is some things about it that I like. I do like, you know, the fact that there is a transition that's happening in here and there is a grade change that will help with that. It would be nice if they were, you know, sensitive to -- to the view scape. I mean we have had several applications come in where, you know, I mean we -- we are not the protectors of viewscapes, so, unfortunately, if you are on the south side of something that faces Bogus Basin or that area, eventually, there is going to be something in your way, which is unfortunate, but it's also inevitable at this point in time. But the open space is what's kind of got me tied up a little bit on this, where there seems to be an abundance of it, but it's more -- I mean we have drainage, we have irrigation facilities and things like that, where, you know, a tot lot here, considering what it is and the size of the lots, I don't -- I don't know if that's really a good fit here. I mean the multi-sport area I see that as something that would probably be more utilized and I have kind of got an issue with that drainage or whatever it is on the -- on the northeast corner of it where that's -- to me something needs to be done with that, so that it's not a burden on the subdivision itself. I have lived in a subdivision where there was an area like that that was just an afterthought, where we are just going to seed it and see what happens and it ended up just being a huge mess that, you know, was a burden on the subdivision that I lived in. So, I just think something needs to happen there. Plus there is several waivers that they are asking for in order to get this thing in there. So, it just seems like there is an awful lot to it that doesn't quite -- doesn't quite match up yet. To me it's just -- it's -- it's not quite ready for -- for some of those reasons. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F50] Page 47 of 51 McCarvel: Other thoughts? I -- you know, I appreciate what they are trying to do and I think we add that recommendation into the motion about the landscape on the entry on the north and south side of Shafer View Drive. I appreciate them being willing to address both sides of that. I guess the open space is not as big a deal to me, just because they are a little bit bigger lots, but it would be -- like to hear other comments on that and, yeah, that grassy area should probably be addressed and I think, you know, with the elevation difference, I think some of those views are naturally going to be a little bit protected as much as they can be. But, yeah, we are not the protector of people's view sheds. I would comment that the four lots at the entry, I might -- I agree that maybe as the entrance to that subdivision maybe that should be two or three lots. That's my take on it at this point. I'm happy to hear what others have to say. Commissioner Holland, you came off mute. Holland: My -- my biggest concern was around ITD, since we didn't receive comments from them. I know that this road is a very busy road with a lot of people growing in subdivisions that connect off of it. So, whenever you can limit accesses off of the main highway the better and I know this one does put a few more cars on the highway, but relatively speaking it's -- it's more appropriate in density to enter, because you are not going to have a lot of cars in an R-2, R-4 type subdivision than you would in an R-6, R-8. So, I'm okay with it. But I would love to see your interconnectivity with trying to route cars off of using the highway directly, if that's possible. I would have liked to have seen these two neighborhoods actually looped and have one access point off the highway instead of two. But I don't think that that's something we can necessarily do. Let me make sure that I'm understanding that. Do they have -- that northern subdivision that's the newer part, they have an access point on the north that's going to connect. They don't? Okay. McCarvel: Yeah. I think they -- Holland: They are connecting to the R-8. McCarvel: To the north instead. Holland: Okay. Thanks. I just wanted to click back. So, it looks like there could be a rode there and I got confused on that one. I don't see a huge issue with adding the homes to the Shafer Butte Subdivision, but I agree that there is not really a need to have four. Maybe they could compromise and come in with three, instead of four. I don't know that I necessarily want to restrict them on that. I don't see having four additional houses being a huge burden on the traffic coming in out of that loop, but I'm -- I'm open either way on that. And I don't see a huge issue with the green space or open space, just because they are larger lot sizes, so they probably don't need as many community amenities either. Sorry. Those are a kind of some rambling thoughts. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: I was going to say, Commissioner Cassinelli, you are off mute now. Go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F51 Page 48 of 51 Cassinelli: I'm -- I'm really surprised ITD didn't weigh in. I would -- coming in off of-- this is their opportunity with more development there to require an accelerate -- you know, accel-decel lane and there really isn't one there at Shafer View. I would -- you know, I would kind of like to condition for at least something. If ITD says we got nothing, then, they got nothing. But I would like to hear from them or have Council hear from them. Personal opinion looking at this -- I mean I -- I have got a couple of concerns about the transition. I'm okay with the open space. I don't think it really -- I do think the tot lot is probably not necessary, but I think that sport court would be -- would be well utilized, as Commissioner Seal said, but I would like to see a little bit better transition on the -- along the canal and the north, those -- specifically those lots that I mentioned, maybe pulling a lot there. They are only 90 feet wide backing up to acre lots and, then, just -- I get that they are long, so they are larger lots, but they are narrow and, then, maybe lose a lot, you know, at least just one of those four coming in on Shafer View, the -- the developer can certainly put -- put houses that -- that are fitting of those lots and -- and -- and I think the comments we always hear, you know, it's got a pencil, it's got a pencil. I think that if they pull a couple of lots in here that the homes that they put on them will -- will sell accordingly and they can put -- put the homes that they need to -- I mean this is -- again, it's, you know, R-2 and R-4, it's going to be larger homes and I think they can afford to lose a couple lots in there and do it properly and have a better transition. That's what I would like to see. McCarvel: Okay. Other thoughts? Commissioner Grove? Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I'm largely in favor of this project. The lots looks small or smaller in comparison to the lots that are to the south, but when we start looking at some of the other projects around town, like these lots are pretty big and so I -- when I first looked at it I had a hard time adjusting, I think, because I was trying to compare it to the lots directly next door versus kind of what normally would go into an R-4 like size or the R-8 size to north of it. So, I'm not as concerned. The only-- like small concern that I had would be with the four lots on the south side, it feels like they are completely disconnected from the rest of the subdivision, because there is no direct access to the rest of the other, what, 46 homes and so that was my -- my only concern, is that, you know, even with like a footbridge or something across the canal it would be nice to be able to connect, but with four homes it -- I don't -- I don't know if it's feasible, but that would be my -- my biggest concern there. Other than that I mean I'm okay with the open space on this project and I hear the concerns that have been addressed, but to me I don't have as much heartburn about some of the concerns that have been raised. McCarvel: Thank you. Commissioner Yearsley? Commissioner Lorcher? Anybody else have any comments or does somebody want to take a poke at a motion? I don't know that we are in a place where -- and correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not hearing like we are in a place where we want to recommend denial or a continuance, but maybe an Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F52 Page 49 of 51 approval with some thoughts on conditions. But we are a quiet bunch tonight, so any comments or motions to move it along? Wow. Commissioner Yearsley, you came off mute. Yearsley: I was just going to say I agree with most of what everyone's talking about. So, I'm not as -- you know, I think it's -- you know, it's kind of hard to compare to the other ones, because the lots are so big. I think these lots are pretty good size. I think it will be a good comparison to them. It might be a little bit smaller, but they are still bigger homes. So, I think it's fairly complimentary to the other homes. McCarvel: Okay. Would anybody like to take a shot at a motion? Grove: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I will do my best. McCarvel: You and Commissioner Holland were having a grin warfare there who was going to jump in. Grove: Commissioner Holland, you can correct me as I go. Holland: I will let you have this one. Grove: Yeah. All right. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2020-0117 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date February 4th, 2021, with the following modifications: That an ITD review be completed before going to Council. That the applicant improve the southern entrance off of Meridian Road and that the -- that we recommend removal of one of the lots -- four lots two through five. McCarvel: Do we have a second? Allen: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Oh, yes. Sonya. Allen: Excuse me. Is that motion to include staff's recommended new conditions and modification? Grove: Yes. Allen: Thank you. Yearsley: I will second that. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F53 Page 50 of 51 McCarvel: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to recommend approval of H-2020- 0117 with modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Seal: Nay. Cassinelli: Nay. McCarvel: Madam Clerk, did we -- did you get the recorded votes there? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we did. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO NAY. Pogue: This is Andrea Pogue. Would you just confirm, Commissioner Cassinelli, you were the nay vote? Cassinelli: I was an nay. That is correct. Pogue: Thank you. Seal: Commissioner Seal as well. McCarvel: Okay. Great. I only heard one. Thank you. So, I would just like to take just one minute before the final motion and welcome our new chairperson -- or new chairperson -- new Commissioner Maria Lorcher. So, thank you for being here with us and we look forward to having you with us the next several years. Lorcher: Thank you very much. McCarvel: And can't wait to see you in person. Lorcher: I know. Cassinelli: You're all fuzzy. Lorcher: I know. I will have to get better equipment. McCarvel: I think we are almost turning the corner. We might be able to meet in Chambers -- and you are welcome to meet in Chambers, by the way, whenever you are comfortable, so -- Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. McCarvel: So, with that do we have one more motion? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 4,2021 F54 Page 51 of 51 Yearsley: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:45 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 2 118 12021 RHONDA McCARVEL DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 1. 4 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the January 21, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. January 21,2021 F88] Page 84 of 84 Pogue: Thank you, Ryan. Fitzgerald: The honor of the final motion goes to -- Parsons: Ryan. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Pogue: I like the fireworks. Cassinelli: I will second that. Fitzgerald: To my fellow Commissioners I love you all. Thanks for all the fun. It's been a blast. Carry on and do good work. McCarvel: All right. It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED 11:17 AT P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 2 I 4 12021 RHONDA MCCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 2. 89 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Village at Meridian Cafe Rio Drive- Through (H-2020-0116) by Layton Davis Architects, Located at 3243 E. Village Dr. Item 2. F90-1 CITY OF MERIDIAN w IDIAN;_-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ! DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-Through Establishment within Three Hundred Feet(300') of another Drive-Through Establishment in the C-G Zoning District for Village at Meridian Cafe Rio,by Layton Davis Architects. Case No(s).H-2020-0116 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. January 21,2021 (Findings on February 4,2021) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 21, 2021,incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 21,2021, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 21, 2021, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 21, 2021,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. It-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S).H-2020-0116 Page 1 Item 2. F-91 upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of January 21,2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of January 21, 2021, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)year period.Additional time extensions up to two (2)years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions,the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight(28)days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67,Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of January 21,2021 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S).H-2020-0116 Page 2 Jufn!3/:3 By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the ___________ day of ________________, 2021. COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL, VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER LISA HOLLAND VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER NICK GROVE VOTED_______ COMMISSIONER RYAN FITZGERALD VOTED_______ VOTED_______ ____________________________ Attest: __________________________________ Chris Johnson, City Clerk Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By:__________________________________ Dated:________________________ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2020-0116 Page 3 Item 2. ■ EXHIBIT A C� E IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT f D A H 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 1/21/2021 Legend DATE: Iff Prdject Lc=ton 1 , TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner - 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0116 Village at Meridian Caf6 Rio Drive- Through-CUP LOCATION: 3243 E.Village Dr. (Lot 1,Block 2, CenterCal Subdivision),in the SW 1/4 of Section 4,Township 3N.,Range 1E. di F I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of another drive-through establishment on 0.97-acre of land in the C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 0.97-acre Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant with a drive-through in a multi-tenant building Current Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Proposed Zoning NA Lots(#and type;bldg/common) NA Amenities NA Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 11/11/20;no one from the public attended the meeting attendees: History(previous approvals) AZ-07-012(DA Inst.#108131103);MDA-11-012(1 It Addendum Inst.#111056292 and 2nd Addendum Inst. #112025435) Page 1 Item 2. F94] EXHIBIT A A. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend Legend J 0Prajeot Lflcfliion lei Proient L4Mo-o id i Q �sSll+i'r�u A A - �rc4 3q iU A I!lil ill � 4` I U T' Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend RL Legend oQ a Project Laofliion Project Lccfl-fion I 4 _'2 Rp �T { i Cat} Lines 1 R-4 RU — Planned Parcels -- � 4 RU I I I I I I R- IF Y n Page 2 Item 2. ■ EXHIBIT A III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: John Davis, Layton Davis Architects—2005 E. 2700 S., Ste. 200, Salt Lake City,UT 84109 B. Owner: Meridian Centercal, LLC—7455 SW Bridgeport Rd., Ste. 205, Tigard, OR 97224 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. STAFF ANALYSIS A conditional use permit is requested for a drive-thru establishment for Cafe Rio in a 10,000+/- square foot multi-tenant building on 0.97-acre of land in the C-G zoning district. Cafe Rio will occupy the southern tenant space in the building. The proposed drive-through is within 300-feet of another drive-through(i.e. Chick-fil-a to the north),which requires conditional use approval per UDC Table 11-2B-2. The existing drive-through is separated from the drive-through to the north by a public street(i.e. E.Village Dr.);therefore,no traffic conflicts exist between the two sites. The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. Staff has reviewed the proposed site design as shown on the site plan in Section V.A for consistency with the specific use standards and determines the following: 1) the stacking lane has sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons; 2)the stacking lanes are separate lanes from those needed for access and parking; 3)no residential district or existing residence abuts the site; 4)an escape lane is proposed because the stacking lane is greater than 100' in length; and 5)the drive-through is visible from N. Eagle Rd. for surveillance purposes. Therefore, Staff deems the proposed drive-through in compliance with the specific use standards as required. Access is proposed via a driveway from a right turn lane from Eagle Rd. on E. Village Dr., along the northern boundary of this site across the abutting lot; direct lot access via N. Eagle Rd. is prohibited. ACHD's traffic engineers have reviewed and approved the proposed turn lane configuration. A reciprocal cross-access easement for vehicular and pedestrian ingress/egress to the public right-of- way is depicted on the plat for this subdivision and included in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions(CC&R's)(Inst. #112048054). A minimum of one(1)parking space is required to be provided for every 250 square feet of gross floor area for restaurant uses; a minimum of one(1)parking space is required for every 500 square feet of gross floor area for other non-residential commercial uses in the multi-tenant building. A 10,000 square foot multi-tenant building is proposed;no calculations on the square footage of the proposed restaurant were submitted. Based on the area of overall building, a minimum of 20 parking spaces would be required with more for the restaurant use. Only 12 spaces are depicted on the site plan on this property/lot—additional spaces are depicted off-site adjacent to this property. A non- exclusive easement exists in the CC&R's for the CenterCal development that allows cross- access/parking(Inst. 112048054). Bicycle parking is proposed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6G. A landscape plan was submitted, included in Section VII.B,that depicts parking lot landscaping for the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. Street buffer landscaping was installed with development of the subdivision along N. Eagle Rd. and E. Village Dr. Because the drive- through lane and back of the building(with mechanical equipment)will be highly visible from N.Eagle Rd., Staff recommends additional landscaping(i.e.coniferous trees/bushes)is provided Page 3 Item 2. F96] EXHIBIT A within the street buffer along N.Eagle Rd.to screen this area and these functions while preserving a clear view of the drive-thru window for surveillance purposes.Where pedestrian walkways cross vehicular driving surfaces,the walkways should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. There are a couple of existing trees on this site in planter islands in the parking area around the existing pad site.They should be relocated elsewhere on the site if possible.If removed,they will require mitigation per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-19C.5. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VLC that incorporate materials consisting of EIFS in two different colors,tile,metal and concrete trim/accents and standing seam metal roofing. All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service and equipment should be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12.Final design shall be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application to ensure consistency with UDC standards and design standards. V. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions included in Section VII per the Findings in Section VIII. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on January 21,2021.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing a. In favor: John Fink, CenterCal(Applicant); John Davis,La on Davis Architects (Applicant's Representative) b. In opposition:None C. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: John Davis.Layton Davis Architects in agreement with staff report) e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. The Applicant testified that although another restaurant use may_ be located in the multi- tenant buildings, another drive-through will not be proposed. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 4 Item 2. F97 EXHIBIT A VI. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 10/9/2020) &Conceptual Engineering Plan(dated: 12/10/20) P�ie�f inremarian: TIE ORR�IIIP -- £ iILLAG6'UWl'h'(yU8L7C1 "" y .. -- a ------------- c a,axo,uzn Maten M tegefd:na 0 CC w -.'��.•DTI-_ _ � .b� K}.r�eo..,�e�..,A,: 4 C. I' / CJff nq _ a� -- i awenxeaa..0 f LU L WJ C a YCinid Mw i CI -aille Plan T.s C1.00 Page 5 Item 2. F9-8 EXHIBIT A LAND GROUP A; �m�amu� �v nnw oanim � a�Y Q r w - r rr�m.r�mm�aa� J O J Trash Enclosure , w Zf cl w Q ( BallarAatirashEnclosure ��,iypi_alBollard � � ys' ;.;...,.; .., �E='i�B.m;l, 4 &�le Rack C1.50 Page 6 Item 2. F9-q EXHIBIT A .. y. Sheer N—: °n HE LAND T WCROUP PRDGRESS SET . s r• ���r.�cs carve�ruauc� I .€ $ � , se.FrNer�oie,�,K.� ■ �El 4 II FY 26292h � � Water NeYn[•t�� A[�w,r r0 I j I€ •1 ® �u �rock : W Jill I e Cl) D 7�tilitYKeTnalm: A n Q iwaoNOJorr a PROJECT NO nIOA owN ericRc sr CRIJ� _ QF i SIIEIIIILIIY RAN I Z4][ia SHEETS CUP-bencepteal Engineering Plan ® C5 00 ®Q ,s Page 7 - Item 2. FoolEXHIBIT A B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 10/9/2020) T-T-0.011.,— P-1-9 Wdmq.nW. 7—INK.S.�IIA. THE LAMD "m 6RWP ul..ec = m M --- x viarscn•uwvz(ruxucl P,a^��^���"�• PLANT SCHECIIIf�e LLJ ri Ud unary...e WdFft.rrc ,•�.��.��...� a ,�,CM-Landscape Pkle 6 L1.00 li i io 6RWP 0 a a ca a� o� s y W w f t a a W y, R J(.1 7 e� m L1.50 Page 8 Item 2. 1 EXHIBIT A 101 C. Proposed Building Elevations,Rendering and Floor Plan i - v 4 1 w �`Nwu uHwLEVAiION ---"-__e.- r$ k w >4 �5 yo �w y 5mb i°e l° ! a �I — - -• ---- --------- /1 EA8T 9.EYATpM1I � �� r A201 _eeieacxNevnmN-m�cr.NTcs renrnes � <- �g� w mo io� A202 Page 9 Item 2. EXHIBIT A F102] Ln H 7 7 7 W, L--- OIL' Page 10 Item 2. F103] EXHIBIT A VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #108131103,AZ-07-012)as amended with MDA-11-012 (Pt Addendum Inst. #111052692 and 2'Addendum Inst. #112025435). 2. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. The stacking lane, menu and speaker location, and window location shall be depicted in accord with UDC 11-4-3-IIB. b. Where pedestrian walkways cross vehicular driving surfaces, the walkways should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. c. All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service and equipment areas should be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. d. Include additional landscaping(i.e. coniferous trees/bushes)within the street buffer along N. Eagle Rd.to screen the back side of the building and mechanical equipment while preserving a clear view of the drive-thru window for surveillance purposes. e. Include mitigation information for any existing trees that are removed from the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-19C.5. 3. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 — Drive-Through Establishment is required. 4. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49—Restaurant is required. 5. A non-exclusive easement exists in the Covenants, Conditions & Restriction's for the CenterCal development that allows cross-access/parking between lots in the subdivision(Inst. 112048054). 6. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structure shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 7. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6.A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-513-6F. B. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=219002&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty Page 11 Item 2. F104] EXHIBIT A C. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aVx?id=219011&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X VIII. FINDINGS Conditional Use(UDC 11-5B-6) 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. The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds the proposed restaurant with a drive-through will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions noted in Section VII of this report. 3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The Commission finds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VII of this report. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The Commission finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Commission finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. Page 12 Item 2. EXHIBIT A 105 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. b. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. Page 13 Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Hearings Changes to Agenda: th  Item #3: Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) – Applicant requests continuance to Feb. 18 in order to continue working through comments given by Staff. Item #4: Aviator Subdivision (H-2020-0111) Application(s):  Comp Plan Map Amendment (CPAM), Rezone, and DA Mod. Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 9.8 acres of land, zoned M-E, located at near the northeast corner of Black Cat and Franklin (Directly north of Compass Charter school and east of Hensley Station along the railroad corridor in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP). Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – Railroad; north of that is County residential;  East – County residential;  South – Compass Charter School on M-E and R-15 zoning;  West – R-15 zoning and approved attached single-family residential History: H-2018-0048 (Compass Charter School AZ, CPAM; DA Inst. #2018-079763). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Employment (TMISAP) Summary of Request: 1. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved; 2. Rezone a total of 9.8 acres of land from the M-E zoning district to the R-15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment; and 3. Modification to the existing development agreement (Inst. #2018-079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan. In short, if the CPAM is not approved, the associated Rezone and MDA are not applicable because they are contingent upon the future land use changing back to a residential designation. The Applicant is requesting to modify the comprehensive plan map for the subject parcel in order to allow for residential zoning and uses instead of Mixed Employment or other industrial uses. The current future land use is Mixed Employment which encourage research and development, office, light-industrial, information, and other ancillary commercial uses. Instead, the applicant is requesting to return the property to its original future land use of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR). This designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. The subject 9.8 acres were annexed into the City of Meridian in 2018 with the Compass Charter School application and received CPAM approval at that time to change the underlying land use from medium-high density residential to mixed employment. The 2018 request and subsequent approval to change the future land use was so the new school could be constructed and an adjacent county landscaping business could be annexed into the City and still comply with code. At the time, it was determined that the map change was applicable because the subject parcel was conceptually shown with a sports field, track, and stadium and was the school’s avenue for annexation into the City of Meridian in 2018. However, in 2020, Compass Charter received approval to modify their concept plan and Development Agreement to move their sports field to a more adjacent parcel to the new school. Therefore, this 9.8 acre parcel is no longer part of the long-term plan for the school and was subsequently sold to its current owners. Because the Applicant is proposing to return the parcel back to its original future land use designation and become a more compatible land use to its neighbors, Staff supports the requested map amendment. Thus, the subsequent MDA is to modify the concept plan and incorporate new provisions based on the new plan. The same can be said for the Rezone request of R-15 zoning which would allow future development of the property with a residential use in line with the proposed concept plan. To be clear, the Applicant is not proposing a plat with these applications and future development will be driven by the DA and its provisions and associated concept plan. Specifically, it is important to discuss access for this project in a separate section within this staff report regardless of the fact no preliminary plat is currently being proposed. Access is proposed via extension of a collector street (W. Aviator Street) and a subsequent local street off of said collector. W. Aviator currently provides one of the accesses to the Compass Charter School and will provide access to Hensley Station Subdivision, directly west of the subject site. Due to the pattern of development, Aviator will only be extended to the east boundary of the subject site and not connect to any other road until such time that more parcels develop to the south and east of the subject site. This is one more reason why the Applicant is not choosing to submit a preliminary plat at this time. Because of this, it is imperative that the conceptual layout of Aviator is well thought out and shown in a position that allows for fair and convenient extension in the future. Staff shared these concerns with the Applicant and they revised the concept plan to show a more appropriate extension of Aviator. Staff is appreciative of the Applicant’s ability to work with Staff and revise the layout for the above reasons. The revised concept plans now show Aviator heading northeast into the parcel from its terminus in front of the Compass Charter expansion, crossing the drain once, and then stubbing to the east property line north of the irrigation pump station in the southeast corner of the subject site. This new configuration allows for future extension of Aviator to occur without a need to cross the drain again and not require this Applicant to acquire land from the two county parcels to its south. This new layout generally depicts the same internal layout with some shifting of the site to the east to accommodate easements and some loss of the internal green space that is replaced with other green space. With a future preliminary plat, Staff will analyze the open space for the property. Written Testimony: Linda Bowery (neighbor to the south) – Clarification of road extension and irrigation ditch along shared property line. Applicant reached out to resident and clarified all questions—Mrs. Bowery is satisfied with the answers. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject applications. 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- 0111, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4, 2021, 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- 0111, as presented during the hearing on February 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0111 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: Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) Application(s):  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 43.87 acres of land, zoned I-L, located generally at 2490 W. Franklin Road. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – Railroad property; north of that are Residential uses and R-8 and R-15 zoning;  East – West Ada bus barn and Republic Services Transfer Station – I-L zoning;  South – Franklin Road; south of that is undeveloped C-C zoning;  West – I-L zoning and a new FedEx distribution center History: A-2020-0194 (DID3 Delivery Station); Property annexed and zoned I-L sometime in the 1970s (exact ordinance unknown). Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Employment and High Density Residential Summary of Request: Applicant is requesting a Preliminary Plat to subdivide the property into 6 industrial lots for ownership purposes. The subject site is located within the TMISAP and has two future land use designations on it (as noted above). However, the property has had I-L zoning for decades and this zoning entitlement vastly pre-dates the Ten Mile Plan. In addition, Lot 1 of the subdivision (the largest lot, approx. 30 acres) has already received administrative level approval of a large E-commerce delivery station operated by Amazon (NOTE: that project and its site design are not up for review at this public hearing, only the submitted preliminary plat). Because of the existing zoning and entitlements, strict adherence to the comprehensive plan is not feasible. The existing industrial zoning and approved delivery station align with the Mixed-employment future land use designation on the site. Also because of the existing entitlements and zoning, Staff believes placing a high-density residential project on this site would not be in the best interest of the City. The City should be gaining this high-density residential further to west as part of the Gateway at 10 Mile project that received AZ approval last year. Despite not being able to strictly adhere to the Ten Mile Plan, Staff believes the proposed project generally complies with the comprehensive plan and those applicable policies were outlined in the staff report. All proposed lots meet the dimensional standards for the I-L zoning district and access is proposed via a new collector street extension from Franklin Road, shown as N. New Market Avenue. New Market is proposed to continue into the site and then head east and west as an extension of W. Fred Smith Street. As discussed previously, the Applicant has received CZC and Design Review approval for a new 141,000 square foot E-commerce delivery station on Lot 1 of this proposed subdivision. That administrative application triggered the TIS and, therefore, this plat does not include the TIS. However, because the road extension and overall circulation element of this area are the main issues of this project, Staff has included the main points of the TIS and ACHD comments as well as analysis on existing access points. The new collector street required to be constructed with the delivery station will have access to Franklin in two places in the future; the New Market Avenue connection discussed and one off-site and to the west, Wayfinder Avenue. This off-site connection is not yet constructed and the timetable for when it will be is currently unknown as adjacent projects (Fed-Ex and Gateway at 10 Mile) do not include the parcels directly abutting Franklin and therefore cannot construct that right-of-way at this time. The TIS did not include estimated traffic from the additional industrial lots and so future development should be monitored to ensure the allowed trip count on one access (3000 daily trips) is not exceeded without constructing the additional access point and right-of-way to Franklin; this may limit future development until such time the second access is constructed. In addition to the traffic volumes produced by the new delivery station, the Applicant’s TIS also included the traffic from West Ada School District (WASD) bus yard and Republic Services’ transfer station located directly west of the subject property. These volumes were included because the new east-west collector roadway and new signal at the intersection of Franklin should also serve these sites when constructed. The existing private road for WASD and Republic Services that is restricted to an exit-only access cannot be closed with this application because it is not a part of this property. In addition, the City cannot force WASD and Republic Services to use this new collector roadway once it is constructed because they already have their entitlements and zoning. However, this Applicant and representatives from both WASD and Republic Services are working out a binding agreement to close this exit-only private drive and utilize the new collector street. Staff is appreciative of this work being done by the Applicant and outside agencies. To help ensure this access can occur for all parties involved, ACHD recommends constructing the segment of W. Fred Smith Street as a private street east of the intersection of New Market and Fred Smith instead of a public road. This recommendation is being made because this segment of the collector roadway is over 150’ in length and would require to be terminated in a temporary cul-de-sac at the eastern property line. Staff agrees with ACHD’s recommendation to construct this short segment of the collector roadway as a private street instead of a public road for the reasons stated and because this collector roadway is not expected to continue further east due to existing industrial development that may never redevelop. In addition to the private street, the Applicant, WASD, and Republic Services should enter into a cross-access agreement for this segment of private street to ensure continued access to the collector roadway, W. Fred Smith Street. Other than the road extension and access points discussed within the TIS, the submitted plat and landscape plan show the existing accesses to Franklin to remain which does not align with code as they will have a lesser classified street (Fred Smith Street is a collector) to take access from. In addition, there is a lot that this preliminary plat surrounds and contains an existing home that is legal nonconforming in the I-L zoning district; currently, this home also takes access from Franklin. The Applicant should provide a curb cut for this property along the extended W. Fred Smith Street so that when this “outparcel” does redevelop in the future, it will have access to the collector street instead of to Franklin, an arterial. The submitted plans do not show an access being provided to this parcel and this should be corrected prior to Final Plat submittal. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject preliminary plat with the conditions listed in the staff report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2020-0120, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4, 2021, 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- 0120, as presented during the hearing on February 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0120 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #6: Human Bean (H-2020-0125) Application(s): Conditional use permit (CUP) to allow a drive through coffee shop to operate between the hours of 5 AM to 10 PM Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of .59 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 3285 W. Nelis Dr., northwest of the W. Ustick Rd / N. Ten Mile Rd. intersection Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North R-8 (Idaho Power Sub Station and Industrial north of that), south C-G (pawn shop and commercial), east R-4 (directly across from parking lot and Reta Huskey Park and the Five Mile Creek pathway, single family residential south of that). History: Annexed in 2004, DA modifiied several times, most recent DA allows drive through establishment but limits hours to 7AM – 10PM. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Non-Residential Summary of Request: Conditional use to allow a drive through coffee shop to operate between the hours of 5 AM to 10 PM Written Testimony: None - Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes:  Property is for a Human Bean coffee kiosk with drive through establishment.  Existing DA limited hours of drive throughs to 7AM – 10PM.  Based on the type of use, applicant requests hours be expanded to 5AM – 10PM.  The applicant worked with staff well to address our concerns regarding access with the southern lot.  First version was not very clear regarding right turn only from the southern lot, had both primary ingress and egrees to the site occurring from the same point, and the drive aisle had cars going past the parking lot where cars would be backing and people would be walking.  Current version has access to this development occurring from W. Nelis Dr. (two points) and running along a one-way drive- aisle in a counter-clockwise direction.  Cars will enter the site and will either park in a lot or continue along a “u-shaped” 12’ drive aisle to the coffee kiosk and exit back to W. Nelis Dr. There is also a point of access through the property at the south (the pawn shop).  This access will serve as an escape lane for cars that have entered the drive-though aisle, and will also allow cars from the pawn shop to merge into the drive aisle past the coffee kiosk and leave the development at the same northern exit point.  Enough room is provided between the parking lot and the one-way drive aisle to separate the lot from the drive aisle and prevent cars from backing into the drive aisle when leaving the site.  Staff had three recommended changes to the final plan. o Increase the width of the two way drive aisle to 25’ to meet Code. o Increase bicycle connection to 10’ since there is a 10’ pathway across N. Ten Mile Rd. o Add additional screening for the drive through lane as viewed from N. Ten Mile Rd. o This morning the applicant sent staff revised plans addressed all recommended changes. o If the PC supports this project, staff recommends the PC mention the plans there were displayed in tonght’s meeting. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend to APPROVE File Number H-2020-0125, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of Februray 4, 2021, with the modifications to the site plan and landscape plan as presented in the Planning Commission meeting. Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to DENY File Number H-2020-0125, as presented during the hearing on February 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0125 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #7: Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 3.86 acres of land, zoned C-G, located east of N. Webb Ave. between E. State Ave. & E. Pine Ave. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Apartments, zoned R-40 East: Office, zoned I-L West & South: Vacant/undeveloped land, zoned C-G Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-C Summary of Request: A CUP is proposed for a new 30,000+/- square foot single-story residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district, as required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The facility will be an in-patient/out-patient addiction treatment provider with 48 beds with administrative and treatment uses. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation of Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) in that it will contribute to the mix of uses in this area and the variety of healthcare options available in the City. It will provide for the physical and mental health care needs of the community in relation to addiction recovery and is in close proximity to housing, arterial streets and businesses. The use should be compatible with residential uses to the north as well as the industrial use to the east and future commercial uses to the west and south. A segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system is proposed along the eastern boundary of the site between State and Pine Avenue as a public amenity, which will connect different land use types. Only the eastern 315’+/- wide portion of the property is proposed to develop with this application; the western 70’+/- wide strip of land is proposed to develop at a later time. Access is proposed via State Ave. with an emergency only access via Pine Ave. Parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards; based on the # of beds (48), a minimum of 24 spaces are required, a total of 43 are proposed resulting in 19 extra spaces. Street buffer landscaping is required along State & Pine Ave. in accord with UDC standards. Staff recommends buffers are installed with this development for the full width of the property, including the western portion proposed to be developed in the future. Building elevations were submitted as shown that incorporate materials consisting of horizontal fiber cement siding and stone with vertical wood siding and exposed wood beam accents and standing seam metal roofing. The DA requires windows, awning or arcades totaling at least 30% of the length of the façade to be provided for faces that are viewable from other structures; final design should comply with this requirement and the design standards listed in the ASM. The Design Review application will be processed separately with the CZC application. Written Testimony: No public testimony was received; Jennifer Mohr, Applicant’s representative submitted a response in agreement with the staff report. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2020-0126, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4, 2021, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2020-0126, as presented during the hearing on February 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0126 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #8: Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) Application(s):  Annexation  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 39.01 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located on the east side of S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 midway between E. Amity Rd. & E. Lake Hazel Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North, east & west: Future SFR, zoned R-4 & R-8 South: SFR rural, zoned RUT in Ada County History: This property is part of Shafer View Estates subdivision to the south, recorded in 2002. It was deed restricted & was only allowed to be used for open space for a period of not less than 15 years from the date of recording of the plat. That time period has since elapsed and it is now eligible for development. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: LDR (3 or fewer units/acre) Summary of Request: The proposed annexation is for 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) & R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts, which includes adjacent ROW to the section line of S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 & to the centerline of E. Quartz Creek St. A total of 50 residential dwelling units are proposed to develop on the site at an overall gross density of 1.76 units per acre consistent with the associated LDR FLUM designation for the site. Although the proposed density is more consistent with an R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district, the Applicant requests R-4 in order to provide a transition in lot sizes between the existing rural residential subdivision to the south (Shafer View Estates) and the future urban residential subdivision approved to the north (Prevail Subdivision), zoned R-8. Larger lots are proposed along the southern boundary adjacent to rural residential lots that gradually transition to smaller lots to the north; a common lot that contains a 41’ easement for the McBirney Lateral separates the proposed lots from the existing rural lots. The proposed plat is a re-subdivision of Lot 4, Block 1, Shafer View Estates and is proposed to consist of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land and be developed in 3 phases as shown. The third phase is under separate ownership & consists of one (1) 10.66-acre lot that is proposed to develop separately with the Apex development to the east. Two (2) accesses are proposed via E. Quartz Creek St., a planned collector street along the northern boundary of the site; direct access via E. Shafer View Dr., an existing local street along the southern boundary of the site is proposed for the lots south of the McBirney Lateral. An emergency only access is proposed between the cul-de-sac & E. Shafer View Dr. Access to the R-2 zoned portion of the site is anticipated to be provided from the east with the Apex development. Direct lot access via S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 is prohibited. The proposed street sections accommodate on-street parking on both sides of the streets which should be sufficient to serve guests in addition to driveway parking on each lot. Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design & improvement standards in UDC 11-6C-3, which includes block face standards. The face of Block 3 exceeds the maximum block length allowed & does not provide a pedestrian connection other than the emergency access driveway which may serve as pedestrian connection between the proposed subdivision & Shafer View Estates to the south. The Applicant requests Council approval of a waiver to allow Block 3 to exceed 1,200’ due to existing site constraints that include the following: 1) the narrow configuration of the subject property; 2) the location of the McBirney Lateral, a large waterway/irrigation facility, that runs along the southern boundary and through the western portion of the proposed subdivision; and 3) the existing Shafer View subdivision that abuts the site to the south, south of the lateral, which does not include any pedestrian pathways or stub streets to this property. If not approved, the plat should be reconfigured to comply with this standard. An emergency access road for Fire Dept. is proposed between the end of the cul-de-sac and E. Shafer View Rd. but it’s not a public access. A 10’ detached multi-use pathway is proposed along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 within the street buffer as required in the PMP; a detached sidewalk is proposed along E. Quartz Creek St. A combination of attached & detached sidewalks with parkways is proposed within the development. A 35’ wide street buffer is required along S. Meridian Rd., an entryway corridor, and a 20’ wide street buffer is required along Quartz Creek, a collector street. Noise abatement is required to be provided for residential uses adjacent to SH-69. A 4’ tall berm and 6’ tall Simtek wall is proposed as noise abatement in accord with UDC standards. A minimum of 10% qualified open space (i.e. 3.9 acres) and one (1) site amenity is required to be provided with the subdivision. A total of 4.05 acres (or 14.27%) is proposed along with (4) site amenities consisting of a multi-sport court, tot lot, gazebo shade structure and segment of the City’s multi-use pathway system, in excess of UDC standards. A mix of 6’ tall wrought iron & 6’ tall solid vinyl fencing is proposed adjacent to common areas; wrought iron fencing is proposed along the McBirney Lateral. Two waterways cross this site - the McBirney Lateral, a large open waterway within a 41’ wide easement along the southern boundary of the site & through the western portion of the site; and a 38’ wide slough/drain on the eastern portion of the site that the Applicant has confirmed with Boise Project Board of Control is not within an easement. The UDC allows waterways to remain open when used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined; the 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 is not proposing to improve the McBirney Lateral as required in order for it to remain open and requests a waiver from Council to allow it to remain open and not be piped. A 6’ tall wrought iron fence is proposed along both sides of the waterway to deter access to the waterway and to ensure public safety. Written Testimony: No public testimony was received on this application. The Applicant requested some corrections to the staff report, which have been made. Staff Recommendation: Approval with the requirement of a DA per the provisions in the staff report with the following added conditions:  The 38’ wide drain on the eastern portion of the site shall be contained entirely within a common lot(s). Fencing is required on both sides of the drain consistent with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7A.7b per UDC 11-3A-7A.7a;  If piped, the common lot containing the drain on the eastern portion of the site shall have vegetative groundcover to prevent fire hazard and unsightliness;  Modify condition #9 to allow the option for the waterways on the site to be improved as a water amenity as an alternative to being piped as allowed by UDC 11-3A-6C.2 with submittal of construction drawings & relevant calculations prepared by a qualified licensed professional registered in the State of Idaho that demonstrates compliance with the requirements for water amenities as defined in UDC 11-1A-1. Staff discussed the recommended changes with the applicant and they agree with the proposed changes. 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- 2020-0117, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 4, 2021, 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- 0117, as presented during the hearing on February 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0117 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 February 4, 2021 FLUMPLANNED DEV. FLUMPLANNED DEV. FLUM FLUM FLUM R2-R4- Item 3. L106 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) by Gem State Planning, LLC, Located Directly West of Ten Mile Road, on Both Sides of the Proposed Pine Avenue Extension and East of the Tenmile Creek Applicant is Requesting Continuance A. Request: Annexation of 23 acres of land with a request for the R-8 zoning district. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lots on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district and existing R-15 zoning district. C. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of a total of 216 residential units on 12.74 acres in the existing R-15 zoning district. Item 3. 107 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) by Gem State Planning, LLC, Located Directly West of Ten Mile Road, on Both Sides of the Proposed Pine Avenue Extension and East of the Tenmile Creek Request: Annexation of 23 acres of land with a request for the R-8 zoning district. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lots on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district and existing R-15 zoning district. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of a total of 216 residential units on 12.74 acres in the existing 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 DATE: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 3 PROJECT NAME: Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) 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 15 Item 4. L108 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing Continued from January 21, 2021 for Aviator Subdivision (H- 2020-0111) by The Land Group, Inc., Located Near the Northeast Corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Franklin Rd. A. A Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved. B. A Rezone of a total of 9.8 acres of land from the M-F zoning district to the R-15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment. C. A Modification to the Existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2018-079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan. Item 4. 1 o9 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing Continued from January 21, 2021 for Aviator Subdivision (H-2020- 0111) by The Land Group, Inc., Located near the northeast corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Franklin Rd. A. A Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved. B. A Rezone of a total of 9.8 acres of land from the WE zoning district to the R- 15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment. C. A Modification to the Existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2018-079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan. 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: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 PROJECT NAME: Aviator Subdivision (H-2020-01.11) 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 15 Item 4. ■ STAFF REPORT WE I COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING January 21,2021 Legend %9M 0 DATE: Project Location m TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0111 Aviator Subdivision h LOCATION: The site is located near the northeast corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. Franklin Rd., directly north of Compass '----- Public Charter School,in the SW '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 10,Township 3N., Range 1 W. VV I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted requests for the following: • Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to return the subject site back to the future land use designation of Medium-High Density Residential(MHDR) for the purpose of developing the site with residential instead of a school site as previously approved; • Rezone a total of 9.8 acres of land from the M-E zoning district to the R-15 zoning district to align with the proposed map amendment; and • Modification to the existing development agreement(Inst. #2018-079763) for the purpose of removing the subject property from the boundaries and terms of the previous agreement and enter into a new one, consistent with the proposed residential concept plan,by the Land Group, Inc. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 9.8 acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Employment—Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP). Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Single-Family Residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) No plat is being requested at this time Physical Features(waterways, Purdam Gulch Drain runs diagonal through site from the hazards,flood plain,hillside) southeast corner to the northwest corner.Applicant intends to tile a majority of this drain and realign it to make better Page 1 Item 4. F111 Description Details Page utilization of the property and green space with future plat application. Neighborhood meeting date;#of October 13,2020,on-site meeting—3 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2018-0048(Compass Charter School AZ,CPAM;DA Inst.#2018-079763). B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via future extension of W.Aviator Street, Hwy/Local)(Existing and designated as a towncenter collector street on the Master Proposed) Street Map(MSM)and within the TMISAP(two lanes of travel with on-street bike lanes). There is no plat proposed with this application but there will be local street connections off of the Aviator extension. Traffic Level of Service Black Cat Road—Better than"B"(446/575 VPH) W.Aviator Street—no known traffic counts at this time. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Applicant is proposing to extend W.Aviator Street and bring Access it through the subject site and stub it to the eastern property boundary north of the irrigation district pump station in the southeast corner of the site upon future submittal of a preliminary plat. Existing Road Network W.Aviator ends in a temporary turnaround approximately 200 feet along the property's southern boundary.Next closest street is N.Black Cat Road,an arterial,and is in the ACHD CIP for widening in 2031-2035. Proposed Road Improvements Applicant is not proposing any road improvements at this time.When a preliminary plat is requested in the future,the applicant will be required to extend W.Aviator Street and stub it to their east property boundary. Distance to nearest City Park(+ Fuller Park(21.96 acres)— 1.3 miles by foot;approximately size) 1.7 miles by vehicle. Fire Service Comments Because no plat is being proposed,MFD did not offer any comments at this time.In general,project will be limited to no more than 30 homes off of singular access unless all homes are s rinklered. Police Service • Distance to Station Approximately 5 miles from Meridian Police Department • Response Time Approximately 4 '/2 minute response time to an emergency. • Call Data Between 12/1/2019- 11/30/2020,the Meridian Police Department responded to 1,209 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development. The crime count on the calls for service was 111. See attached documents for details. Between 12/1/2019- 11/30/2020,the Meridian Police Department responded to 35 crashes within a mile of the proposed development. • Additional Concerns None Page 2 wBig ■■■'� ■o:-■■1111111 nun • �� '-,„ f,3',F- rno - v1 IIIII=_ --� • �' ,,. --- Y_' 1- ` I I �•IIIII==_e=°°° � - r IIn\�\�II�Clllt lli111111111111111 I L -`� - _. I -' �Z' ■1 I � � fRANKLI�N I� - 1 � �FRANKLIN ■111 __ 11 - l f. 1111,� I11"IG Ito • • - �1111111 1111111__� 01�1 - .p;� � nos ;�; 4q - �:•1»� _ I ' 1 ' •! 1 I I 1 ■ -- R~ •���� •i' fir' ��Illlp� -•" �i:� �:'� IIIII RIIIIIIII � " ^• em''■ ly'1�■■■■■■■■■i-��-pI1n1 111 n■1■111n111 1II1nl llllllul I��i4�'= ', U9�UCJ • • 1l1l1u11�■�.�111/'- _' • 1■11■■11 11111111■I►�%ile= _��� � w� ■■ ■��v1•nnlm ' Ilnu"'� v1•nlTllnl,pn Innuli s•Imll IIIIIII ■ IIIII='- __--}I III 'I - --�i ■ IIIII ee.�---■� 711111 -r IIIIr „ 'I� ♦,IIIII==�•--- IIIII r•�� ■■ .IIIII=-., -7N11111 � Innl.____99�='.nmum■ \•�' ■,r =: :..IIIII"'+ L■n\\�II�CIII�IIIIIIInlnnllnnln �Ii~� 1 R►�\\u=Cl1�mm�nmm�nnm nmu�I I�, I"IIIIIII, '�, n■ r nun -- Illln ".e. Ilnll nn■IId11n111111111111 ■ IIIII jjjj, ..IIIII tl..IIIII IIIII nnm nnm rr■■� =nmm nnl== ill 11 Item 4. F113 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification l/l/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 12/29/2020 Public hearing notice sign posted 1/11/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 12/29/2020 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT(CPAM) The Applicant is requesting to modify the comprehensive plan map for the subject parcel in order to allow for residential zoning and uses instead of Mixed Employment or other industrial uses. The current future land use is Mixed Employment which encourage research and development, office, light- industrial,information, and other ancillary commercial uses. Instead,the applicant is requesting to return the property to its original future land use of Medium-High Density Residential(MHDR). This designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses,condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to fifteen dwelling units per acre. 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 subject 9.8 acres were annexed into the City of Meridian in 2018 with the Compass Charter School application and received CPAM approval at that time to change the underlying land use from medium- high density residential to mixed employment. The 2018 request and subsequent approval to change the future land use from residential to more of a commercial or industrial land use was so the new school could be constructed and an adjacent county landscaping business could be annexed into the City and still comply with code. Currently,these mixed employment parcels are the outliers in an area surrounded by parcels designated for medium-high and high density residential. At the time, it was determined that the map change was applicable because the subject parcel was conceptually shown with a sports field,track, and stadium and was the school's avenue for annexation into the City of Meridian in 2018. However,in 2020, Compass Charter received approval to modify their concept plan and Development Agreement to move their sports field to a more adjacent parcel to the new school. Therefore,this 9.8 acre parcel is no longer part of the long-term plan for the school and was subsequently sold to its current owners. In addition to the outcomes of the subject parcel,directly west of this site Hensley Station is currently under construction as a medium-high density residential subdivision and less than a half mile to the east of the subject site additional high-density residential projects are currently underway. In addition, directly south of Franklin Road is a larger area of the Ten Mile Plan with a mix of residential, commercial, employment,and industrial zoning. If this parcel is to remain with its current zoning and future land use, Staff believes it would essentially be a random area of commercial zoning and would be very difficult to properly mitigate any noxious uses from occurring. Because the Applicant is proposing to return the parcel back to its original future land use designation and become a more compatible land use to its neighbors, Staff supports the requested map amendment. Page 4 Item 4. F114 B. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) The subject parcel is still subject to the existing Development Agreement and concept plan from the Compass Charter School annexation(Inst. #2018-079763)that shows this site containing the football field,track, and stadium for Compass Charter. As noted,the school is no longer going forward with this plan and received other approvals from the City to annex an adjacent parcel and construct a play field on it instead. Therefore,in conjunction with the CPAM to change the future land use from mixed employment to residential,this DA Modification request is for the purpose of removing this parcel from that agreement to enter into a new agreement consistent with the proposed residential concept plan(see Section VII. The proposed concept plan includes the required extension of W. Aviator Street along its southern boundary and then its eventual stub to the east property line within the property. Further analysis of this extension is below in the Rezone analysis. In addition,the concept plan shows single-family attached homes that are a mix of alley-loaded and front loaded homes; a large number of the homes are proposed to have front porches facing green space within the development and along the buffer to W. Aviator. The applicant is showing a local street that loops through the site and connects to Aviator near the southwest and southeast corners of the property allowing for an easy flow of traffic through the site. If the Applicant does not receive the requested map amendment approval,this concept plan,requested R-15 zoning, and conceptual residential use would become null and void. Because the development plan for this site has completely changed from the school site development previously approved and the terms of the agreement are therefore no longer applicable, Staff is amenable to the request for a new DA to replace the existing agreement based on the proposed concept plan;the provisions for the new DA are included in Section VIII.A.1 and the concept plan for the overall site is included in Section VII.D. REZONE(RZ) Lastly,the Applicant is requesting a Rezone of the 9.8 acre parcel, currently zoned Mixed Employment (M-E). This request hinges on the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Mixed Employment to Medium-High Density Residential(MHDR). If the map amendment is approved,the Applicant is requesting to rezone this property to the R-15 zoning district to allow for a future single- family residential development—no preliminary plat application is being proposed at this time because development of the property as residential hinges solely on receiving the map amendment approval. As discussed in the CPAM analysis section above, Staff is supportive of a residential development at this location. This property also lies within the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP) and the Applicant has revised the concept plan numerous times in order to better meet the guidelines and preferences of the Ten Mile Plan. Specifically, the Applicant's concept plan depicts a mix of homes that will be alley-loaded or rear-loaded with the dwellings fronting on green space and homes that are more garage dominant. However, even the garage dominant units are proposed to meet the Ten Mile Plan by bringing the building closer to the street to establish a more uniform street presence and support a pedestrian environment as seen in the conceptual elevations and floor plans in Section VILE. Specific guidelines and policies within the Ten Mile Plan and the general Comprehensive Plan will be analyzed with a future preliminary plat. However, because the Applicant is not concurrently applying for a preliminary plat, these conceptual elevations,floor plans, and site plan will be made part of the Development Agreement to ensure substantial compliance with what is currently being proposed. Furthermore, Staff believes the proposed elevations are more in line with the Ten Mile Plan than previous iterations. Staff anticipates some tweaks to the site plan but nothing substantial-if the site plan changes substantially, a new DA Modification application will be required. Page 5 Item 4. 115 Transportation: Concept plans within Development Agreements are heavily driven by road layouts and the transportation element of society. Therefore, it is important to discuss access for this project in a separate section within this staff report regardless of the fact no preliminary plat is currently being proposed. Access is proposed via extension of a collector street(W.Aviator Street)and a subsequent local street off of said collector. W. Aviator currently provides one of the accesses to the Compass Charter School and will provide access to Hensley Station Subdivision, directly west of the subject site. Due to the pattern of development,Aviator will only be extended to the east boundary of the subject site and not connect to any other major road until such time that more parcels develop to the south and east of the subject site. This is one more reason why the Applicant is not choosing to submit a preliminary plat at this time. Because of this, it is imperative that the conceptual layout of Aviator is well thought out and shown in a position that allows for fair and convenient extension in the future. The original concept plan submitted by the Applicant depicts Aviator continuing on its current path and heading due east through two parcels that are not currently annexed into the city and terminating at the western boundary of an irrigation parcel with unknown owners (a parcel containing a segment of the Purdam Gulch Drain). Both City Staff and ACHD believe this conceptual configuration for Aviator would be both costly and very difficult to execute because it would have to cross the drain in more than one location and there is no guarantee those permits would be allowed by its administrator. Staff shared these concerns with the Applicant and they revised the concept plan to show a more appropriate extension of Aviator. Staff is appreciative of the Applicant's ability to work with Staff and revise the layout for the above reasons. The revised concept plans (Section VII.D) now show Aviator heading northeast into the parcel from its terminus in front of the Compass Charter expansion, crossing the drain once, and then stubbing to the east property line north of the irrigation pump station in the southeast corner of the subject site. This new configuration allows for future extension of Aviator to occur without a need to cross the drain again and not require this Applicant to acquire land from the two county parcels to its south. This new layout generally depicts the same internal layout with some shifting of the site to the east to accommodate easements. In addition, the revised concept plan appears to lose much of its central green space but has more green space in other areas of the site. If possible, with future development applications, the Applicant should work to utilize more of the site to provide more central open space. The revised road layout and land area lost to right-of-way may lend itself to a mix of single family and multi family to help the property reach the density range for MHDR. Staff believes tying the DA to this revised concept plan is applicable but all parties should be aware that any significant changes will require a future DA Modification application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment,modification to the existing Development Agreement, and Rezone per the provisions included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. Page 6 Item 4. F116 VII. EXHIBITS A. Conceptual Development Plan Included in Existing Development Agreement ni I i C•103Q Page 7 Item 4. F117 B. Rezone Legal Description and Exhibit Map �, �� LEGAL DESCRIPTION =. •••A} THE ■s Page 1 OF 1 LAND GROUP November 10,2020 Project No.:120D35 R/Z EXHIBIT CITY OF MERIDIAN REZONE FROM M-E TO R-15 DESCRIPTION An area of land situate in Southwest Quarter of Section 10,Township 3 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the West Quarter Corner of said Section 10[from which the Southwest Corner of said Section 10 bears South 00"38'57"West,2653.05 feet distant];Thence on the west section line of said Section 10,South OD°38'57"West,1565.22 feet;Thence leaving said west section line,South 89'15'44" East,25.00 feet to a point common with the easterly right of way line of North Black Cat Road and the northerly right of way line of West Aviator Street;Thence on said northerly right of way line,South 89"1544"East,470.45 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Thence leaving said northerly right of way line,North OD'36'41"East,626.77 feet to a point on the centerline of the 200 foot right of way of the Union Pacific Railroad; Thence Dn said centerline right of way line,South 88'25'50"East,824.18 feet; Thence leaving said centerline right of way line,South 00"36'4 1"West,614.80 feet; Thence North 89'15'44"West,101.63 feet; Thence North 00'44'16"East,46.00 feet; Thence North 89'15'44"West,32.00 feet; Thence South 00'44'16"West,46.00 feet; Thence North 89'15'44"West,484.59 feet to a point common with the northerly and easterly right of way line of West Aviator Street; Thence on said easterly right of way line,South 00'36'4 1"West,27.50 feet to the centerline of said West Aviator Street; Thence on said centerline of West Aviator Street,North 89'15'44"West,205.91 feet; Thence leaving said centerline,North 00'44'16"East,27.50 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described area of land contains 11.84 acres,more or less. PREPARED BY: ",pl.LAJy The Land Group,Inc. WH O��GENSE G� Michael Femenia,PLS a 13 ❑ �6 '5 T OF\DA ARL S. 402 East Shore Drive.Suite 100,Eagle,Idaho 83616 208-939.4041 ihelandgrouplm-rom Page 8 Item 4. 118 W1/4 COR. ccr SEC.10 x4� R/W— R/W R/VJ --R/W- R/W —R/W o UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIC,HT—OF-WAY 1 S88°25'50"E 824. 8� nni— PN88°25'50"W 495.26 — — — — -- - Line Table �yAL LA N APN31210325951 I \C Ns s�� w COMPASS PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL INC W G N BLACK CAT RD `r LINE BEARING LENGTH o 9.85 Acres± n r, 5 02� °� L1 N89°15'44"W 101.63' 0 REZONE AREA:17.84 Acres± �I L2 N00°44'16'E 46.00' 1�L c.r FROM:M-E S. I L3 N89°15'44"W 32.00' TO:R-15 q `t2 t1/1C/?07U L4 S00°44'16"W 46.00' O �cm o S89°15'44"E 25.00' POB L3� 'i L5 S00°36'41"W 27.50' ` = N R89v15'44"E 470.54'R /// L7 N89°15'44"W_484.59' L1 m �W. AVIATOR STREET ; LS 1 L6 N89°15'44"W 205.91' R/W 32.00' L7 N00°44'16"E 27.50' Rezone = r for cc Compass Public w ��SW COR. "� F, SE0.16 Charter School, Inc. W A Situate in a Portion of the SW 114 of Section 10 .� 5 Township 3 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian W R m City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho ram+ N RIZ Exhbit 2020 0 200' 400' i� cc 4 ``\ Horizontal Scale-1 =200' Pmiecl No.:120035 1 of 1 Date of Issuance:Number 10,2020 Page 9 Item 4. C. New Concept Plan(date: 8/03/2020)NOT APPROVED -rLAN' THE GRODUP IU 111W-11WAY Ff) -T T T7- T-1-7T- L -1717t j IF -4iu L[Lt-.a Pmpmy 0-- —'aIENTA—MCRCW�uc CM—i f.gi.—,L..d—p.A.hit.d,Planner -LTi- T THE LAND 3—P NC Call_T rAj__.IPMM(_F_ �V" i%LL J—L LLL�-i al I--'T _T, ........... CONTAOT 11.1.- A -- OMPO IRSCHOOL JN CONCEPT SITE PI iL :1 C6.00 Page 10 Item 4. F 4 D. Revised Concept Plan and Revised Road Layout(dated: 1/13/202 1) MTHE LIFIA11 Proles Summary: GROUP --77T -FT-M-77TITT T 41 Z..Irg RSq.lre..Pk- 'j �j trTT-1 Ll IT, Ropirty O-mr: I xEPT M—S UP FIA�S I L P 4bD E3 So SL le. SS S Engirmar,Landscape Ar.hfiart,Plaamm: T CD�HE LAPT GPOU— STFf I �P 4 M-11 I'?,=LH: Ca I, � L�'?7 00—W—T—SPLA—ES COI ESUTVfYQXj 1—ID"Sl E 1H 11,"1 7 I�b�p� , ',�OMPASS F—F I L c �RTEK SCHOOL I Ll H JU C.CE"SIR Pw CONCEPT SITE PLAN C6.00 Page 11 Item 4. Fl 21 ' THE THE GROUP V.P,RR.PoGHT-0E-WAY 6 PLAN LEGEND: ME NEM-HIGH GnIVNISIG1TN PASIDE NTIAL �� •++„�-� RRAC AVIATG—TIGHT RGLLECTOTING —, RfaAn L1A991FILATION'.COLLECTOR AVIATOR SUBDIVISION PARCEL wEET nvInTOR srREETxw+ - APPROXIPIAIEfFUfVRE 0.LIGXMEM' •£I I� RDAG GASSIFIGATIGN',CGLLECTGR i•� - �MnNraAT PLINTnn � 3ytERS1 EFERj�E.pIF�� Pro er Owner: � p CI RT rtVfATVR STREET-FO veestlnerrtmuattas caoua.LLc y iV SEIo-2sr tYN O J o J �F { En sneer Landsna a Archdeci Planner: (— _ 1 9 P a T4-NRIM4IAONNLLmIAnNERJ C.fe _I mz LONT.L E' MS FL.'IAX]9 HI]FLf' a 4i CPGLTL, JIPA URN.L' NC SIFDR j i 611E00 DID •„„ 5 f 41 BOWERY PARCEL ICI ROXM PARCEL qqq� d1k a ,¢OMPASS TER SCHOOL �. 11 -_ _- II IT - I LL I,, caacErlrnlPu:' CONCEPT SITE PLAN C6.00 Page 12 Item 4. 122 E. Conceptual Building Elevations and Floor Plan r r .y t rf, i J� II OA AG DRIVGWAY STREET SIDE STREET SIDE Conceptual Neighborhood Housing Type Pion Page 13 Item 4. 123 - �rt Pit UNIT I L�N EAST ELE VLTICN Conceptual Neighborhood Housing Type Elevation VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Development Agreement Modification: — Page 14 Item 4. E 1. The subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the existing Development Agreement (DA) (Inst. #2018-079763)upon the property owner(s)entering into a new agreement. The new DA shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the City within six(6)months of City Council granting the approval of the rezone. The new DA shall include the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual site plan, conceptual road layout, and conceptual elevations and floor plan exhibits included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. Future development shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of application submittal. c. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the neighborhood design elements outlined in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP) and the guidelines for the Medium-High Density Residential future land use designation within the TMISAP. d. Future residential development shall be constructed within a gross density range of 8-12 dwelling units per acre. e. The Applicant shall construct W. Aviator substantially consistent with the configuration shown on the Revised Road Layout(Exhibit VII.D). f. No building permits shall be issued for this development until the property has been subdivided. g. At least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing, The Applicant shall submit revised Rezone legal descriptions that include the NMID pump station parcel that was illegally split from this parcel in the past. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No proposed changes to public sewer and water Infrastructure have been presented within this record. Any changes or modifications,to the Public Sewer Infrastructure, shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. C. POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinklDoc View.aspx?id=218962&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCity&cr =1 D. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=218983&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianQ E. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219210&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX Page 15 Item 4. 125 IX. FINDINGS A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment(UDC 11-511-71)) 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 amendment to the comprehensive plan,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. Staff finds the proposed map amendment is consistent with other elements of the comprehensive plan as discussed in Section V. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. As outlined in Section V, Staff finds the proposed map amendment is an improved guide to future growth for the subject property. 3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the goals,objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan. Staff finds that due to the adjacent development and order of development, the proposed map amendment will be consistent with the comprehensive plan. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with this Unified Development Code. No development is proposed with this application but Staff f nds the proposed use of residential is consistent with the Unified Development Code. 5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Staff finds the map amendment makes the subject property more compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Because the Applicant will provide public utility extensions at their own cost with future development applications, Staff finds the proposed map amendment will not burden any service capabilities. 7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. Staff finds the proposed map amendment allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated or unanticipated impacts associated with future development of the site. 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. As outlined in Section V, Staff finds the proposed map amendment is in the best interest of the City. B. 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: Page 16 Item 4. F126] 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the Applicant's proposal to rezone the 9.8 acre property to the R-15 zoning district is consistent with the requestedfuture land use designation ofMedium-High Density Residential as noted above in Section V.B with Staffs recommended provisions. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment and concept plan comply with the purpose statement of the residential district in a conceptual nature as no specific development is currently proposed. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety,and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed use should be compatible with adjacent existing residential properties to the west and the school property to the south. 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 City services are available to be provided to this development. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed rezone is in the best interest of the City. Page 17 Applicant Presentation • Avato i r • • • Subdivision Meridian Planning & Zoning Rezone, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Development Agreement Modification February 4, 2021 ' T H E t 'i iW LAND GROUP Chaparral Fuller Park Vicinity Map j - - PROJECT i S ITE M I rraphss {{ Ton Mile . 1 is rt 14. st - Ch ristlan Church T tii!LT �' THE �- fi LAND �_ GROUP Conceptual Site Plan LOCA .. Diagram o - ---------- ......... RESIDENTIAL � 3 � W C COLLECTOR COLLEC TOIL ''�' T H E r% it �i LAND �_ GROUP l4 i I i o� r77T7TTTTTTT7TL7 -- I — . LLL�j _ - 39 TV, my M I "Mr I +F 4 JIIf+II +II 1 I I I �- - - .. A1EWrY SPACE patll — i mmrvgPXE J �\ o~ 1 tlrlq- - - = - e• GNP fJF41 9 GI7 :IPA C1Rl � 7 86—` Str RI} 110—Sp is lY TA'.1.1L1R ST i 1I c 1 2 Ell y OMPASS iER SCHOOL --J [y I I Conceptual Design Elements e y �� Ali +� F � •` ����. "�'C r74 p ` � ��` T _ gip` -.�':. ri ".'.�A i .t!'--s,?�.'• = F Conceptual Housing Densities : ;.. Y Ci THE LAND -_ s� GROUP Conceptual Design Elements r1 IV n 1y Y y i � 1 ' JIM Conceptual Architectural Characteristics and Amenities 4r14 , y : *44 r— =' rTHE�= 01 01 I LAND ;- OU G R P Aviator Subdivision Application includes: • Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to MHDR • Rezone to R- 15 • Development Agreement Modification Staff Report • We are in agreement with staff report THANK YOU ''�' T H E ri it "i LAND GROUP Item 5. L127 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) by Kent Brown Planning, Located at 2490 W. Franklin Road and the Lot Directly North A. Request: Preliminary Plat for six (6) industrial lots on 43.87 acres of land in the I-L zoning district. Item 5. 128 (:�N-WE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) by Kent Brown Planning, Located at 2490 W. Franklin Road and the lot directly north A. Request: Preliminary Plat for six (6) industrial lots on 43.87 acres of land in the I-L 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 RING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 5 i PROJECT NAME: Chewie Subdivision (H-2020-0120) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO i 1 i 2 i i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 5. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 2/4/2021 Legend EH LEI] DATE: TF FEIIP,,i,ct Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 _- _ 1 u 1 SUBJECT: H-2020-0120 Chewie Subdivision LOCATION: The site is located at 2490 W.Franklin Road and the lot directly north,in the S '/2 of Section 11,Township 3N.,Range 1w. [Wit, �� E I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Preliminary Plat consisting of six (6) industrial lots on 43.87 acres of land in the I-L zoning district, by Kent Brown Planning. IL SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 43.87 acres—zoned I-L Future Land Use Designation High Density Residential(+/-23 acres)and Mixed Employment(+/-20.5 acres) Existing Land Use(s) Single-family residential and agriculture; Small engine M repair shop;bus barn;disposal site;and new FedEx distribution center. Proposed Land Use(s) Industrial Warehousing/Distribution(DID3/Amazon delivery station is currently under construction on Lot 1). Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 6 total lots—all industrial building lots Physical Features(waterways, Railroad property abuts property along entire northern hazards,flood plain,hillside) boundary. Neighborhood meeting date;#of October 20,2020—4 attendees; attendees: _ History(previous approvals) A-2020-0194(DID3 Delivery Station);Property annexed and zoned I-L sometime in the 1970s(exact ordinance unknown). Page 1 Item 5. F130] B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action es/no Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via a new collector street(shown as N. Hwy/Local)(Existing and New Market Avenue)connection to W.Franklin Road(an Proposed) arterial)in line with the collector street connection on the south side of Franklin. Traffic Level of Service- Franklin Road—Better than"D"(282/1,780 VPH) PM Peak Hour Traffic Count Ten Mile Road(zero frontage)—Better than"D"(942/1,780 VPH) Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Applicant is proposing to construct a new collector street Access through the development stubbing at the west property line and eastern property line via the already approved CZC for DID3 (A-2020-0194).The 6 industrial lots are proposed off of this collector street.Cross-access along Franklin is unknown with the submitted application.Further analysis is below. Existing Road Network No(Franklin Road abutting the site is only existing road) Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is no existing buffer to Franklin Road(the abutting Buffers arterial street)but there is existing detached sidewalk along the property's entire frontage on Franklin Road.The required landscape buffer will be installed with this project. Proposed Road Improvements Via the approved CZC for DID3,the Applicant is required to construct a new collector street across the site(west-east)and ' connect to Franklin Road in line with New Market on the south side of Franklin. Distance to nearest City Park(+ 1.7 miles to Fuller Park(21.9 acres in size) size Fire Service—No Comments Police Service—No Comments Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.06 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Flow is committed Water • Distance to Services Directly adjacent • Pressure Zone a 2 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan Page 2 Item 5. 131 Description Details Page • Impacts/Concerns Utilities are being reviewed under DID3 (Amazon) application. COMPASS— Communities in Motion 2040 2.0 Review Housing w/in 1 mile 3,180 Jobs w/in 1 mile 3,270 • Ratio 1.0(ratio between 1-1.5 is considered healthy ratio) Nearest Bus Stop 0.7 miles Nearest Public School 1.3 miles Nearest Public Park 1.7 miles Nearest Grocery Store 2.2 miles Recommendations See agency comment section for link to full file. Section VIIII C. Project Area Maps -Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend g i nsi 0 Legend EIProject Location siddntial Project Locatic i y. M ® "a,T I General Hi ity Industrial _ R mnra MU-Res Commercial € _U Lowt en ill High Density !ill lilt a E " F Employment Residential Zoning Map .Planned Development Map Legend R� ® 0 Legend ® 0 Project Location RUT Project Location K-13L-O R`40 L����G�i ;_i City Limits RUT C-C R-:1 C-N § Planned Parcels T.R1 R_ -RUT C ,_L R�1 _ C-N RUT Ril I=L L O C-C C_C .IFS' I-L ----- - � R-4U RUT TN=C C-C T RUT R-15 RUT R-40 TN^R TN-G �R1 RT$ R-$R-8 RUT R-8 R 4 TN-C FT I Ill ffi E ® E H-E WJ1llR1 � E 11 � t R1 RUT _� M-E RUT Page 3 Item 5. F132] III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Same as Representative B. Owner: Michael Adler,Adler AB Owner XI, LLC— 10259 W. Emerald Street, Ste. 100,Boise,ID 83704 C. Representative: Kent Brown Planning—3161 E. Springwood Drive,Meridian, ID 83642 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 1/15/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 1/12/2021 Site Posting 1/18/2021 Nextdoor posting 1/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) The subject property lies within the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP) and contains two future land use designations that are approximately even in area across the site— Mixed Employment(+/-20.5 acres) and High-Density Residential(+/-23 acres). Mixed-Employment—The purpose of the Mixed Employment areas is to encourage a diversity of compatible land uses that may include a mixture of office,research and specialized employment areas, light industrial including manufacturing and assembly, and other miscellaneous uses. Mixed Employment areas should provide a variety of flexible sites for small,local or start-up businesses, as well as sites for large national or regional enterprises. High-Density Residential—High Density Residential areas are multiple-family housing areas where relatively larger and taller apartment buildings are the recommended building type. High Density Residential areas should include a mix of housing types that achieve an overall average density target of at least 16-25 dwelling units per gross acre.Most developments within the High Density Residential areas should fall within or below this range, although smaller areas of higher or lower density may be included .As noted above the property was annexed and zoned prior to the adoption of the TMISAP. The current zoning allows the property to develop with the freight terminal and other industrial uses. Because much of the development has been approved at an administrative level based on the current zoning, adherence to specific elements of the plan are not feasible. However, the proposed 6-lot industrial subdivision and the existing approval of a large warehouse and delivery station operated by Amazon complies mostly with the Mixed-Employment future land use on this property. This land use and designation ofMixed-Employment also blend better with the adjacent uses and I-L zoning to its west and east. Directly to the west is a new Fed-Ex distribution center and to the east is the bus yard for West Ada and Republic Services'disposal site. Staff believes incorporating a high-density residential Page 4 Item 5. ■ project on this site with the surrounding development would not be in the best interest of the City. Furthermore,further to the west and along Ten Mile Road, the City has an approved mixed-use development that will incorporate the type of high-density residential envisioned within the HDR future land use designation and along the railroad corridor. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancioy.o- Icompplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices"(3.07.01A). The proposed site design is typical of an industrial area with large warehouse type structures, as is the case with this property.By extending the collector roadway system through the site from the west, the Applicant is creating an additional way for traffic to flow through these industrial parcels. Specifically, the Applicant is working on an agreement with both West Ada and Republic Services (located to the east) to allow them to use the new collector street to access the required signal at New Market and Franklin and close their existing private access to Franklin along the eastern property line. This is a great benefit for this area as it will combine access points into to minimize curb cuts and access points to Franklin. The Applicant is required to construct a landscape buffer along the entire frontage of Franklin which will help mitigate any noxious uses proposed within this I-L zoning district. "Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water, sewer, police,transportation, schools,fire, and parks"(3.02.01 G).All public utilities are available for this project site due to the existing arterial network abutting the site to the south and the utility stubs provided by Fed-Ex to the west,per Public Works comments. This project also lies within the Fire Department response time goal. Ten Mile Road and Franklin Road are built at their ultimate width (5 lane arterial);subject property has excellent access to Interstate 84. ACHD has provided data on the nearby roads and traffic levels of service and provided their support for the proposed subdivision and use. Therefore, Staff finds that the existing and planned development of the immediate area create conditions for adequate levels of service to and for this proposed project. "Explore development and implementation of architectural and/or landscape standards for geographic areas of the City."(5.01.02F).As noted, the proposed project site lies within the TMISAP which has specific architectural requirements for new buildings. Again, because this application is not for annexation and zoning and the existing zoning controls,full compliance with all of the requirements in the Ten Mile Plan isn't feasible. However, in order to maintain some compliance with the Ten Mile Plan and ensure elevations along Franklin meet the intent of the plan, Staff is recommending that future buildings along Franklin (Lots 2-6) are held to the Commercial standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. "Plan for industrial areas with convenient access to state highways or the rail corridor,where appropriate."(3.06.02D). The proposed subdivision abuts the rail corridor and is within a half mile of Interstate 84. Future uses on this site will have adequate and convenient access to both facilities which make this industrial area a great location within the City. "Preserve the industrial base within designated industrial land use areas by discouraging non- industrial uses and focusing on light manufacturing, distribution, flex-space, and base- employment." (3.07.01D).As discussed, of the proposed 6-lot industrial subdivision, one of the lots has already been approved for a large warehouse/delivery station for Amazon. This approved use is in line with what is envisioned for industrial areas, especially those near the interstate and the rail corridor. Because other users are not yet known for the remaining building Page 5 Item 5. ■ lots, those uses will be evaluated with each future Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Staff will continue aiming to preserve this area for the envisioned industrial uses. Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies and objectives. Preliminary Plat Analysis C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The site currently houses a dilapidated home and some accessory buildings that were used as a small commercial business in years past. These structures are proposed to be removed upon approval of the preliminary plat. Other than the existing right-of-way improvements along Franklin Road,no other site improvements exist. The proposed plat surrounds an existing residence that is also zoned I-L but is not part of this plat. As part of this plat and roadway extensions,the Applicant is required to provide an access to this property(2340 W. Franklin Road.) from the collector street so that when this outparcel redevelops in the future,their access to Franklin can be closed. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The general proposed use is industrial but end-users are not yet known except for on Lot 1;this 30 acre lot will contain a large delivery station approximately 141,000 square feet in size. This delivery station will be operated by Amazon and was given Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Administrative Design Review(DES)approval in Fall 2020. This use is a permitted use within the existing I-L zoning district. Because no uses are currently known for the remaining building lots, Staff cannot review those uses for compliance in the I-L zoning district. However, industrial buildings require CZC and Design Review approval so at that time Staff will evaluate uses for compliance with code on each building lot. E. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The industrial building lots appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards per the submitted plat. hi addition,all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3). The proposed preliminary plat and submitted plans appear to meet the UDC requirements of this code section. F. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4)&Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4): Access is proposed via a new collector street extension from Franklin Road, shown as N.New Market Avenue.New Market is proposed to continue into the site and then head east and west as an extension of W. Fred Smith Street and act as a frontage road for this industrial area.As discussed throughout,the Applicant has received CZC and Design Review approval for a new 141,000 square foot E-commerce delivery station on Lot 1 of this proposed subdivision. That administrative application is for that use as well as the road improvements and subsequent Traffic Impact Study(TIS)that was required. Therefore,this plat does not include the TIS and ACHD referred to their previous approval on A-2020-0194 (DID3 Delivery Station)within their response to the subject plat application. However,because the road extension and overall circulation element of this area is so important, Staff has included the main points of the TIS and ACHD comments as well as analysis on existing access points. Other than the road extension and access points discussed within the TIS, the submitted plat and landscape plan show the existing accesses to Franklin to remain which does not align with code as they will have a lesser classified street(Fred Smith Street is a collector) to take access from. Therefore, these accesses should be closed with curb and gutter upon construction of the new Page 6 Item 5. ■ collector roadway.As noted, there is a lot that this preliminary plat surround and contains an existing home that is legal but nonconforming in the I-L zoning district; currently, this home also takes access from Franklin. Commensurate with Staffs previous comment, this access should be closed but because this parcel is not part of this application, Staff cannot require this access to be closed. However, this Applicant should provide a curb cut for this property along the extended W. Fred Smith Street so that when this "outparcel"does redevelop in the future, it will have access to the collector street instead of to Franklin, an arterial. The submitted plans do not show an access being provided to this parcel and this should be corrected prior to Final Plat submittal. Traffic Impact Study Analysis(accepted and analyzed by ACHD under the DID3(Amazon) administrative application): The proposed preliminary plat does not have any known users outside of the approved delivery station. This lone use triggered the requirement of a TIS because it was estimated to generate more than an additional 1,000 vehicle trips per day.DID3 proposed their use thru the CZC process because this property already has zoning and is a permitted use within the I-L zoning district.ACHD reviewed the submitted TIS and generally agreed with the finding and recommendations contained therein. The new collector street required to be constructed with the delivery station will have access to Franklin in two places in the future;the New Market Avenue connection discussed and one off-site and to the west, Wayfinder Avenue. This off-site connection is not yet constructed and the timetable for when it will be is currently unknown as adjacent projects(Fed-Ex and Gateway at 10 Mile) do not include the parcels directly abutting Franklin and therefore cannot construct that right-of-way at this time.Because of this, Fed-Ex was approved(at staff level due to existing zoning) with a temporary driveway access to Franklin—this Applicant and the TIS have indicated that the Amazon DID3 traffic will not be using this driveway for any access. Since Wayfinder will not be constructed, the traffic volumes for the collector street and New Market access to Franklin is an estimated 2,405 vehicle trips per day, according to the TIS. ACHD policy allows up to 3,000 trips per day on a collector street that is the sole access to a development therefore,future uses within this subdivision cannot increase the daily trip count by more than 595 combined. Future development should be monitored to ensure the overall trip count is not exceeded without constructing the additional access point and right-of-way to Franklin;this may limit future development until such time the second access is constructed In addition to the traffic volumes produced by the new delivery station, the Applicant's TIS also included the traffic from West Ada School District(WASD)bus yard and Republic Services'disposal station located directly west of the subject property. These volumes were included because the new east-west collector roadway should also serve these sites when constructed. Therefore, these sites would also utilize the new signal at the intersection of Franklin and New Market. The existing private road for WASD and Republic Services that is restricted to an exit-only access cannot be closed with this application because it is not apart of this property. In addition, the City cannot force WASD and Republic Services to use this new collector roadway once it is constructed because they already have their entitlements and zoning.However, this Applicant and representatives from both WASD and Republic Services are working out a binding agreement to close this exit-only private drive and utilize the new collector street and remove an existing arterial access point.Staff is appreciative of this work being done by the Applicant and outside agencies. To help ensure this access can occur for all parties involved,ACHD recommends constructing the segment of W. Fred Smith Street as a private street east of the intersection of New Market and Fred Smith instead of a public road. This recommendation is being made because this segment of the collector roadway is over 150'in length and would require to be terminated in a Page 7 Item 5. F136] temporary cul-de-sac at the eastern property line. This cul-de-sac would require a large area of buildable industrial land and still be providing an access to WASD and Republic Services. Staff agrees with ACHD's recommendation to construct this short segment of the collector roadway as a private street instead of a public road for the reasons stated and because this collector roadway is not expected to continue further east due to existing industrial development that may never redevelop.In addition to the private street, the Applicant, WASD, and Republic Services should enter into a cross-access agreement for this segment ofprivate street to ensure continued access to the collector roadway, W. Fred Smith Street. 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 industrial buildings based on gross floor area(1 space per 2,000 square feet of area). Compliance with this standard will be reviewed upon future proposed uses and CZC applications. The already approved delivery station is providing parking well in excess of code minimums. H. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Detached sidewalks are proposed along the public collector street extension as part of the overall pedestrian circulation and landscape plan,in accord with the standards listed in UDC 1I-3A-17. Dedicated multi-use pathways are not required or proposed in this industrial area but the addition of detached sidewalks would connect to new signals and existing pedestrian facilities which will help pedestrians and cyclists nearby get to these future uses and add an element of safety by being detached from the right-of-way. Staff supports the sidewalk and pedestrian circulation plan for this development. I. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to W. Franklin Road, an arterial roadway, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 25-foot wide buffer is depicted on the landscape plans starting at the edge of right-of-way and includes the existing detached sidewalk along Franklin,meeting the UDC requirements. There is also a required 20-foot wide landscape buffer on both sides adjacent to W. Fred Smith Street,the proposed industrial collector roadway. The submitted landscape plan shows a compliant buffer on the south side but the plans to do not show the north side buffer because it is being constructed with the DID3 site improvements. Commercial and Industrial areas do not require the landscape buffers to be within common lots and instead can be within easements. The submitted plat does not appear to show the required easements for these buffers but does show the correct amount of landscaping per the UDC standards. Staff is recommending a condition of approval to show the required buffers within easements prior to Final Plat submittal—the plat should show the easements on both sides of the collector roadway regardless of when it is being constructed. Note: The Amazon (DID3)delivery station received design review exceptions for their south facing loading docks by incorporating additional architectural elements and landscaping above code requirements directly abutting W. Fred Smith Street. See Section VII.Cfor those approved landscape plans. J. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): No fencing appears to be proposed but any future fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Page 8 Item 5. F137] K. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): No buildings are proposed with this preliminary plat application.As discussed above,Lot 1 has already received both CZC and Design Review approval for a large delivery station. Because this previous approval exists and no new buildings are proposed with this application, Staff does not find it appropriate to discuss the approved elevations for the DID3 warehouse. Future industrial buildings require Design Review approval and as discussed in the Comprehensive Plan section above, Staff believes future buildings along Franklin Road should be held to the commercial architectural standards instead of the industrial to ensure adequate integration with Franklin Road and those residential and commercial zones on the south side of Franklin. 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 9 Item 5. F138] VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(dated: 11/13/2020) Af I I k I k I I IM I I} I� � F I � I I� LOT 1 a M-3t ACRES i i I I I �I f I 5 96_�9'14_E 22209' I 15 89'19'2S- E t I I �I I I I {I a I IQ 22B' -'--—Y-- 6,--'�-F i2' I i zw.11' Ie I { NOT LOT c l a I- LOT 2 LOT 3 g LaT # 8 LOT 5 A I _ 6 I 1.9t ACRES �ri 1.9t ACRES Iki 1-9f ACRES I+s 1.9f ACRES I PART w I ' I i'k", 2-5f ACRES �I I ems__ .a � � .$, N 80'tw1z, w ow-ay W 991 2'W W a73-as' Page 10 Item 5. Fl 39 N 444M PAEW C RAKM A0 x '�-- ;i ' •ra•nim,a C+,lIOII COr!'TCUR INT RY&= Y I II 4� I, r` 30_3f ACRES I IIII w oflr6FiRr STR££F fF I F'S NOT LOT 2 LOT II IIII , I LOT 15� f � L13 TA& �.� CR E$S1.9f ACRES 1 A 19f ACRE PART T I+I ' : , 4L _ Page 11 F140] B. Landscape Plans(date: 10/16/2020) --------------------- CL LL IN N Ni 11 uj Lu �---------- 9aoc |2 Item 5. Fl 41 I D r m h 1d m 1I •m 7 ` •3 is s-: > a I i pz D m EmC ® aooCoOOao "F?�tJC Cf) . �zm Fn rn a5 s s eg n CHFWIF SUBDIVISION 1 � FHANKLIN ROAD m MERIDIAN, IDAHO � 1 LANDSCAPE PLAN - AREA ONE PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL Page 13 Item 5. F142] r " n x: I co - _ y N. D ` z f. i 1 I o m a � m ���J.��i��J t.1�� Cn � a � � , $ s � g 4 �� � €• c gm m j m 0. CHEWIE SUBDIVISION FRANKLIN ROAD Y iv ns� MERIDIAN, IDAHO ' LANDSCAPE PLAN - ARE TWO = PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL _.,.- Page 14 Item 5. ■ ... _ -_----------- F .r: am d8 `I m r / m f m _ y A o , a I'1 f/I1 tRf C'l. i :o o d OATH LILAC AVENUE .._..._..._..._..._...0 v� —,J7 .iy�•• iw 9Y � - �" 4 ,ugIWO h p Z z m �� r g � �➢ � � � 9 E o s Vie€ � a� £� a �s � $��m `�. 77 J D m , ,x � . r x s m - I s — CHEWIE SUBDIVISION 1 m S FRANKLIN ROAD w s _ MERIDIAN, IDAHO 3 ao LANDSCAPE PLAN — ARE THREE _ PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL Page 15 Fl 44] '711 T1111INUE ... N6 I it z EXISTING WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT ACCESS DRIVE c ED C�)0 0 -A cj) 6) o o 0 o s 9m 0 2m Fn 71 0 9- q 1 K 4 Fn 53 . . . . . . . . . . �,-u N� z CHEWIE SUBDIVISION FRANKLIN ROAD 7- -7 4� MERIDIAN, IDAHO LANDSCAPE PLAN - ARE FOUR PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL Page 16 Fl 45] -4 �-r- 4-1- 4 MIN T'NjIH 0 BE 'p 0 v4 c U) id�� im AN R m 'F z iqg I�'-'i� )'� H�jv� if z L 33 ZIZI c co m go 0 z ull 1-6�R Pq om k m 0 lz- Ig I G) o 0 z --i z CHEWIE SUBDIVISION FRANKLIN ROAD MERIDIAN, IDAHO LANDSCAPE DETAILS U75- i -1- PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL Page 17 Item 5. F146] C. DID3 (Amazon)Delivery Station Approved Landscape Plans LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LEGEND RECUREMENTS Y"•II" rw. wt Plfifl1911tt PEAIEl9t LY�9G/E -__ ,. -------- --- - .-x I� ...• _ ... ._.._ - V ix rx.n 111 I': i1i i.nlliil�i' I I , � 111111111111 1�11111111.-1 1�11111111111 1�� gig I [ 1 I I , it I 1 . b / OVERALL LANDSCAPEPLAhI .w.. Page 18 Item 5. F147] 1cm ---- a I ; 1 _J 1 A I u 1 l 3 O ¢ > 4¢ ¢4 O e a Q e O ¢ } O Oe ap ¢pe •� I mmmw i { LANDW,"E PLAN-AREA FIVE VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.A,dated November 13,2020, shall be revised as follows prior to Final Plat submittal: a. Close the existing access points to Franklin Road shown on Lots 3 &4,per UDC 11- 3A-3. b. Provide and visually show an access to the Morrow property(Parcel#S1211438440) from the new collector street,W. Fred Smith Street. c. Revise the plat to show the collector street(W. Fred Smith Street) segment east of N. New Market Avenue as a private street commensurate with ACHD recommendations. d. Depict the required landscape buffer easements on the plat where applicable (adjacent to Franklin Road,New Market Avenue, and W. Fred Smith Street). Page 19 Item 5. ■ e. Revise the plat to show the required lot AND block for the proposed subdivision— submitted plat does not list any block numbers. 2. The landscape plan included in Section VII.B, dated October 16,2020, shall be revised as follows prior to submittal of the Final Plat application: a. Show the required 20-foot landscape buffer on the north side of the collector street (W. Fred Smith Street)regardless of if it will be constructed with a different application. 3. Future buildings along Franklin Road shall meet the Commercial standards outlined in the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). 4. With Final Plat submittal,the Applicant shall provide the recorded cross-access and maintenance agreement with West Ada School District(WASD) and Republic Services to allow these agencies to utilize the private road segment of W. Fred Smith Street. 5. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2C-3. 6. Future development shall be consistent with the standards listed in UDC 11-2C for the I-L zoning district. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6B for industrial uses based on the gross floor area of buildings. 8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 9. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval for all future structures within the subdivision,where applicable,prior to applying for building permits on each site. 10. Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 12. 11. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-15,UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 12. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 13. 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 the date of the approved findings; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 The angle of the sanitary sewer pipe into and out of manhole SSMH-Al needs to be 90- degrees minimum. 1.2 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6 of the City's Design Standards. Streetlights shall be installed and operational prior to any new occupancy. 1.3 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). By entering into a development agreement with the City of Page 20 Item 5. F149] Meridian,the applicant agrees to use the City of Meridians recycled water supply as the source of irrigation water.Further,the applicant agrees to provide for secondary backup water to provide service when recycled water is not available. 1.4 Once development plans have been submitted to the city for review,the city will model the recycled water system and make a final determination regarding our ability to supply reclaimed water to the development. If the city can serve the development with recycled water then recycled water must be utilized as the irrigation source of water, and a secondary or backup source must also be provided. If the city can't serve the development then the primary source of irrigation water should come from surface water irrigation sources if available. 1.5 The applicant shall be responsible to construct the recycled irrigation system in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ)recycled water rules and regulations, and Division 1200 of the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications and Drawings to the Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction. 1.6 These requirements do not wave the applicants responsibilities or obligations to irrigation districts. 1.7 Applicant shall enter into a Shared User Agreement for use of the recycled water system. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 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. Page 21 Item 5. F_15o] 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches,canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services.Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B.Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. Page 22 Item 5. 551 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. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=219142&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv D. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:11web1ink.meridianciU.or,g/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=219528&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty Page 23 Item 5. F152 E. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https://weblink.meridianciU.or,g/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219003&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=219010&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty G. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=220316&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty H. ITD MEMO https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=218494&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC Ry 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; Staff finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, generally complies with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; 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 VIII for more information.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis and has issued a staff report outlining their conditions of approval. Page 24 Item 5. ■ 6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 25 Item 6. Ll 54 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Human Bean (H-2020-0125) by A&C Ventures, LLC, Located at 3285 W. Nelis Dr. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expanded business hours for a drive-through coffee shop. Item 6. 155 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Human Bean (H-2020-0125) by A&C Ventures, LLC, Located at 3285 W. Nelis Dr. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow expanded business hours for a drive-through coffee shop. 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 INSHEET 3 DATE: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 6 PROJECT NAME: Human Bean (H-2020-0125) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 i I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 6. ■ STAFF REPORT C� fE RIDIAN*-- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 2/4/2021 ` Legend DATE: ff I P }Lucnfikon TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner 208-489-0573 SUBJECT: H-2020-0125 Human Bean CUP L E �a LOCATION: 3285 W.Nelis Dr 8 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This is an application for a conditional use permit(CUP)to allow a drive through coffee shop to operate between the hours of 5 AM to 10 PM. The subject property is located at 3285 W.Nelis Dr.,northwest of the W. Ustick Rd/N. Ten Mile Rd. intersection. The subject property is zoned General Retail and Service Commercial(C-G) and is .59 acres in size. The property is bordered by a pawn shop to the south(with other retail uses beyond),Idaho Power Sub-Station and industrial uses across W.Nelis Dr to the north, single family across N. Ten Mile Rd. to the southeast,and is located directly across N. Ten Mile Rd. from parking associated with Reta Huskey Park and the Five Mile Creek pathway. The property was originally annexed in 2004 and zoned to C-G as part of the McNelis Subdivision. The Development Agreement that was associated with this annexation(Inst. #104093293)required all uses on the subject lot to be approved by conditional use permit. hi 2011,the subject property was part of a larger rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment and DA modification(CPAM-10-002,RZ- 11-001,MDA-11-002,Instr. # 112054621). As part of this,the allowed uses on the subject property were relaxed to allow all uses in the C-G Zone District,but hours of operation were limited from lam to I Opm,unless approved by a conditional use permit.As the hours of this drive through establishment are proposed to begin at 5am,the conditional use permit is required. Page 1 Item 6. r157] II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 0.59 acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Non-Residential Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Drive-through coffee shop(restaurant) Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1 building lot Neighborhood meeting date;#of December 2,2020 attendees: History(previous approvals) Annexation and Preliminary Plat AZ,PP 04-004,FP 05- 047,DA Instr.#104093293,Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment CPAM 10-002,RZ-11-001,and DA Modification Instr.4112054621 B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District No site-specific comments submitted Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access will occur from W.Nelis Dr.a local street.There Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) will also be an internal connection with the property to the south at 3393 W.Nelis Dr(pawn shop) Existing Road Network Yes Fire Service No comments submitted Wastewater • Distance to Sewer N/A Services • Sewer Shed Ten Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.06 • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Comments • Flow has been committed • No proposed changes to public sewer infrastructure within record.Any changes or modifications,to the public sewer infrastructure, shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. Water • Distance to Water Services 0 • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality No concerns • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan Page 2 �1 ■ ■�I r LU mew IIN• 11■11Jill Lrj NMI No MEIJI I ■■■ III■■IIN■ — .... 111 1111 — i Y�Z■. in •■ gy� III ■ __ -- 99 INS '� 1■. ■ �: �"till _ ' `7 y - .. on i. - 1 men1111 • R[ � ME • 1 a�■N■ 1NI 1111 1 11111 1111 1 11111 1INi NoII■I1�1 � 1INi II■I1�1 I■I■II-;1 111 ■I �I■I■II-;1 111 ■I r 1 II11aI1a r 1 uuua 1 IIINII 1 IIINII 11 ■ IIIIII {'i No on 11■ •• on 11■ ■■ III■I■■N■ ��•■■ II■■■■lull ■■IN■■■■■�r . ■■IN■■■■■��i1 ■■■■ 1.... ■ ■ II • III ■ -uur w 1111 ■ ■ ■ x II • 411 I ■■■ I 1 ■ 1■■... •■�■ I ■N ■■■ ililNll 111 ■ ■■■■■. it■ 1 ■N ■ui a u■ ��■' •■■■ ■�a�'1 �� r 'ii.. soms ■ a ■■ ■■■■:�i■■� ■i ■1 ■■ ■■■■.oJ■i� ii x■■■■ ■�i'■ ��I■ lollu ■1 11 R+ u I.=�PuwII OQ._=i-r_::.' �IIII II■ milli NINE ON NINE ■■u■ �■1■ ■ milliP nutIN � uu ■■■■R IN■■ ____ ■■■■R IN■■ xu uu Item 6. F159] III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Jerrod Wallgreen,JGT Architecture— 1212 12"Ave South,Nampa,ID 83651 B. Owner: Edward McNelis, Ten Mile Investments—621 N. Robinson Blvd,Nampa,ID 83687 C. Representative: Colby Halker,A&C Ventures LLC—855 W. Broad St, Ste 300,Boise,ID 83702 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 1/15/2021 Radius notification mailed to 1/12/2021 properties within 300 feet Site Posting Date 1/25/2021 NextDoor posting 1/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan) Mixed Use Non-Residential-The purpose of this designation is to designate areas where new residential dwellings will not be permitted,as residential uses are not compatible with the planned and/or existing uses in these areas. For example,MU-NR areas are used near the City's Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility and where there are heavy industrial or other hazardous operations that need to be buffered from residential. Sample uses, appropriate in MU-NR areas would include: employment centers,professional offices, flex buildings,warehousing, industry, storage facilities and retail, and other appropriate non-residential uses. The subject site is zoned General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G). This allows a broad range of commercial uses. The property is directly adjacent and north of a pawn shop, is across W. Nelis Dr(south) of an Idaho Power Sub-Station and industrial uses, and is across N. Ten Mile Rd. (west) of a parking lot, Reta Huskey Park, and the Hartford Subdivision to the southeast. A drive-through coffee shop and restaurant is a use determined to be appropriate in this zone district as well as the existing Development Agreement, subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 and restaurant specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-49. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies (ht(ps://www.meridiancity.org/compplan): Goals, Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): Page 4 Item 6. ■ • 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 is a vacant lot surrounded by existing development on all sides.As mentioned above, this includes a pawn shop with additional retail uses to the south of that,power sub-station, industrial uses,parking lot and City park, and residential area across N. Ten Mile Rd. The property has available water and sewer. This project would be considered infill development. • Preserve private property rights and values by enforcing regulations that will prevent and mitigate against incompatible and detrimental neighboring uses. (3.05.01 C) The conditional use is a process to ensure any impacts associated with a particular use are mitigated. All uses directly adjacent to the subject property are commercial and industrial. Restaurants and drive-through establishments are principally permitted uses in the C-G zone district. • Require appropriate building design, and landscaping elements to buffer, screen,beautify, and integrate commercial,multifamily, and parking lots into existing neighborhoods. (5.01.02D) A landscape plan has been submitted with this application that appears to meet the requirements of UDC 11-3B. Building design and landscaping will be reviewed as part of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and administrative design review that would follow this proposal if it were approved. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject property is presently vacant. The 25' landscape buffer that is required along N. Ten Mile Rd. and 10' buffer that is required along W.Nelis Dr. have already been installed, as are the sidewalks. D. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2B-1): The proposed use is a drive through coffee kiosk(restaurant)that will operate between the hours of 5AM and 1 OPM. This use is allowed by right per the development agreement and within the C- G zone district, although the earlier opening time of 5AM requires conditional use permit approval as required in the recorded development agreement and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 and UDC 11-4-3-49. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): A"Drive-Through Establishment"is subject to specific use standards as outlined in UDC 11-4-3- 11 as follows: 1. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane,menu and speaker location(if applicable), and window location on the certificate of zoning compliance or the conditional use permit. The concept site plan submitted with this application identifies the location of the stacking lane, and window location. There are no outdoor speakers associated with this proposal. Page 5 Item 6. 161 2. A site plan shall be submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties.At a minimum the plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following standards: a. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles, and the public right-of-way by patrons. The concept plan shows the stacking lane is a separate lane that does not obstruct driveways, drive aisles or public right of way. The site has also been designed to allow egress from the pawn shop to the south into the subject property without interrupting the stacking lane. b. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking,except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking. There is a separate drive aisle to the north of the stacking lane for parking and access. There is also a separate divider provided to prevent cars from pulling out of the parking lot into the stacking lane. c. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten(10)feet of any residential district or existing residence. The stacking lane is more than 250'from the closest residential district or residence. d. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred 100 feet in length shall provide for an escape lane. The stacking lane provides an escape lane which allows access to and fNom the lot to the south (pawn shop) as well as merges to an exit lane to W. Nelis D. e. The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The site is designed with the drive-through window oriented to the east to be visible from N. Ten Mile Rd. 3. The applicant shall provide a six-foot sight obscuring fence where a stacking lane or window location adjoins a residential district or an existing residence. The stacking lane does not adjoin a residential district or existing residence. A"Restaurant"is subject to specific use standards as outlined in UDC 11-4-3-49 as follows: 1. Parking a. At a minimum, one(1)parking space shall be provided for every two hundred fifty(250) square feet of gross floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan shall be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies with the requirements of this title The site plan indicates 5 parking spaces whereas 2 are required. The site plan contains a detailed parking plan. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): Dimensional standards in the General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) include a 25'landscape buffer adjacent to arterial roads, 10'buffer adjacent to local roads and a Page 6 Item 6. ■ maximum building height of 65'. There are no front, side or rear setbacks in this zone district. The proposed drive through facility meets these dimensional standards. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-39 I1-3H-4): Access to this development will occur from W.Nelis Dr. (two points) and run along a one-way drive-aisle in a counter-clockwise direction. Cars will enter the site and will either park in a lot or continue along a"u-shaped" 12' drive aisle to the coffee kiosk and exit back to W.Nelis Dr. There is also a point of access through the property at the south(the pawn shop). This access will serve as an escape lane for cars that have entered the drive-though aisle, and will also allow cars from the pawn shop to merge into the drive aisle past the coffee kiosk and leave the development at the same northern exit point. A curb will be provided between the parking lot and the one-way drive aisle to separate the lot from the drive aisle and prevent cars from backing into the drive aisle when leaving the site. However,the drive aisle between the parking and the stacking lane is shown to be 24' in width whereas UDC 11-3C-5 requires 25'. Staff has added this as a recommended condition of approval. This proposal was referred to ACHD,who responded in a January 8,2021 letter that there were no concerns and no required improvements to the adjacent street(s). H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): The subject property is within the C-G Zone District. Per the specific use standards for a restaurant(UDC 11-4-3-49),parking is based on one(1)parking space per 250 square feet of gross floor area. With a square footage of approximately 500 sq. ft. for the kiosk, two parking spaces are required whereas 5 parking spaces are required. The site plan reflects at least three bicycle spaces. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17) Sidewalks along both the N. Ten Mile Rd. and W.Nelis Dr. frontages have already been constructed. As required by UDC 11-3A-19,the applicant is providing a 5' wide pathway at the northeast portion of the site connecting to the existing sidewalk along W.Nelis Dr. to allow better pedestrian access. However,there is a regional trail on the east side of N. Ten Mile Rd. which is 10' in width to accommodate bicyclists. Staff recommends the pathway from the perimeter sidewalk to the kiosk building be widened to 10'. I Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): UDC 11-2C-3 requires landscape buffers of a minimum width of 25' along arterial streets and 10' along local streets. Both these buffers as well as 6' wide attached sidewalks exist along the site. The landscape plan reflects the buffers meet the minimum landscape requirement of one tree per 35 linear feet of frontage. UDC 11-3B-8 requires a five-foot-wide minimum landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading, or other paved vehicular use areas. The landscape plan shows the 25' wide arterial buffer along the northern perimeter of the drive aisle, 10' wide landscape buffer along the southern perimeter of the drive aisle, and as much as 60' width of landscaped area between the eastern drive aisle perimeter and the sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd. There is also approximately 15' of landscaped area between the parking lot and the northern drive aisle. The proposed landscaping significantly exceeds the landscape requirements of UDC 11-3-B.No existing trees are shown to be removed with this proposal. Page 7 Item 6. F163] The site is highly visible from N. Ten Mile Rd,the existing residential to the southeast and the pathways along Ten Mile Creek and N. Ten Mile Rd. In order to ensure the design of the development will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity, and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area, staff requested the applicant screen the drive-through aisle that is visible from N. Ten Mile Rd. The applicant proposes an approximately 40' long vehicle headlight screen wall of an unspecified height directly at the NE corner of the development. Although staff supports this feature, staff believes there should be additional measures to soften the visual impacts of the vehicles in the drive aisle.As a condition of approval, staff recommends additional length of screen wall,berming, or evergreen shrubs along the entire eastern perimeter of the drive aisle to the south property line sufficient to soften visual impacts of the drive through as viewed from N. Ten Mile Rd and the nearby residences. K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): The site plan and landscape plans do not show any other fencing other than the screen wall. Any fencing would be required to comply with the fence standards in the UDC 11-3A-7. L. Utilities All utilities for the proposed development are already in place. No additional services are needed. M. Building Elevations The applicant submitted conceptual elevations with this conditional use application. The elevations show architecture similar to most of the kiosks in this franchise,with materials consisting of weathered wood plank and ribbed metal siding and three pitched standing seam metal roofs. Overall,the proposed architecture is good quality. If staff s recommendation regarding extending the landscaping,walls and/or berming along the entire eastern perimeter of the drive aisle to the south property line is followed,it would increase the visual quality of the project. The proposed elevations will be reviewed in detail at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) and Design Review(DES) submittal. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 8 Item 6. 164 VII. EXHIBITS A. Conceptual Site Plan(date December 16,2020) `F „1A I - — — -- - - — - — H1F?kl*�i� . NELIS DRIVE 58 '05•�7"E 112.1 W. LLI LP.NDSCAPE ? _ _—__ EA REFER T6 LANDSCAPE PLAN 544'95'31"E 28 — —— urunEnsEMEN7~ -_ 2i I 31CYC-E PAR{ING Herr raaxuraarr � woecrPEEASEMExr � I i rE J LU aEA C= ' I 111 ` r' LANC9CP.=E TENCL7.^,JR PREP,R F f P.;...^rl !l LAN63CA=E rz_='. r r N f W pSW _ U CTRI=E T4❑E11NL4iE 6Zl- T LAN L ir' [• —EXISTING PAWN ONE SITE I CONCEPT SITE PLAN Page 9 Item 6. ■ B. Conceptual Landscape Plan(date December 16,2020) I I I y l E -�I !L- N� /1 �, Y*�.". { •!1 .Y -a UPORMe mffm��SIT or - I 940E 11-¢T I 4= •" 4J I �I]WE Cd ]O IF h 1 4; 11M !pv-rm — � 10.nm !•a,oc .13 r :Y: Tom:■' T:: Igo Y 5 7� RV ; V. 17 6.XJ fMM • .L y rr uesm .06 rr L"L-4)F fE-AWIG wr MRR!'R CST+ li u —hn.l ar{1 heEYh (F hplDk5 Ewe 11-M--e L—r—E uo rJ 10![l�[1T {I}WK!Q:-IF e-qvw1wrl E. va 1![1U1'411 lil T�1WIM 7.90f+e1?h +J exrrrw 71M I+aLm C. Conceptual Screen Wall(date: December 16,2020) I PROPOSED PROJECT TO BE SIMILAR TO STORE ON CHERRY LANE PING MERIGUtiH RD. Page 10 Item 6. 166 D. Conceptual Elevations (dated: December 16,2020) icru�rmo i L 9�GC1!ICTA PAW& b ¢roc .NORTH ELEVATION 1 TLEVATIUN M1 i �s R.A,F OMMMMM x�m ir+iwxi SOUT I LEVATFM ` YJEST ELEVATION 1� - M DISKM T9 MATCH UZTIW3 6TCRC AT W MERN AM CHERRY L E Page 11 Item 6. F167] VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and administrative design review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit applications. The applicant will either meet all architectural requirements of the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM)or apply for a design exception as part of the CZC submittal. 2. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to commence the 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 11-5B-6F. 3. Hours of operation are limited from 5AM to 1 OPM. 4. The plans shall be revised to increase the width of the drive aisle between the parking and the stacking lane to 25' as required per UDC 11-3C-5. 5. The plans shall be revised to increase the width of the pathway from the perimeter sidewalk to the kiosk building to 10'. 6. The site plan prepared by jgt architecture, dated December 16,2020,is approved with the revisions as listed in 4& 5. 7. The landscape plan prepared by jgt architecture,dated December 16,2020, is approved with the following revisions: a. The drive aisle and pathway shall be widened as listed in condition 4&5 above. b. The landscape plan shall be revised to incorporate a combination of screen walls,berming, and/or evergreen shrubs to a height of 4 feet along the eastern perimeter of the drive aisle to the south property line. It should be sufficient to soften visual impacts of the drive through as viewed from N. Ten Mile Rd and the nearby residences while still providing visibility of the drive-through window. 8. The architectural elevations prepared by jgt architecture, dated December 16, 2020, are approved as submitted. 9. Parking requirements associated with the drive through coffee kiosk shall comply with the commercial parking standards; 1 per 250 square feet of gross floor area. 10. The Applicant shall comply with all bulk,use, and development standards of the applicable district listed in UDC Chapter 2 District regulations. 11. The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. 12. The Applicant shall comply with the structure and site design standards as set forth in UDC 11- 3A-19 and the Architectural Standards Manual. 13. The applicant shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-313-13. 14. The applicant shall comply with the specific use standards for a drive through establishment and a restaurant as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-11 and 11-4-3-49. Page 12 Item 6. 168 15. The project is subject to all current City of Meridian ordinances and previous conditions of approval associated with this site(AZ,PP 04-004,FP 05-047,DA Instr. #104093293, CPAM 10- 002,RZ-11-001, and DA Modification Instr.#112054621). B Public Works 1. No proposed changes to the public sewer and/or water infrastructure are shown within this record. Any changes or modifications shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. 2. There is an existing water service stub near the northwest corner of the property off of Nelis that either needs to be used or abandoned. 3. A fully functioning streetlight is required on W.Nelis Dr. at the west property boundary. Streetlight shall be installed and functioning prior to occupancy. C. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACED) https://weblink.meridiancity.orgJ ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219444&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The site meets all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district. The site already contains landscape buffers,parking is adequate, and the parking area will be landscaped as required by UDC 11-3B-8. Stafffinds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed drive through coffee kiosk will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan per the analysis in Section V of this staff report. 3. That the design,construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The subject site is within a commercially zoned area. Directly south of the site is a pawn shop and other commercial retail.Across W. Nelis Dr. to the north is an Idaho Power Sub-Station and industrial uses. East of the parking(across N. Ten Mile Rd.) is a parking facility, regional pathway and Reta Huskey Park. Single family residential is approximately 250 feet to the southeast. The site will be landscaped beyond the minimum requirements, and architecture will be required to meet the Architectural Design Manual(ASM) at time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). If staffs recommendation regarding additional screening of the drive aisle is followed, staff would find the proposed use should not change the character nature of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Page 13 Item 6. ■ If staff's recommendation regarding additional screening of the drive aisle is followed, staff would find the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff ,finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes,glare or odors. This proposal is for a drive through establishment that will operate between 5AM and IOPM in an area zoned for commercial uses, at a minimum of 250 feet from the nearest residential zone district, and on the other side of a major arterial street. Also, there are no outdoor speakers proposed with this establishment. The proposed facility is appropriate in this location. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site; thus, Staff finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 14 Item 7. Ll 70 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) by Cole Architects, Generally Located East of N. Webb Ave. Between E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 30,000+/- square foot residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district. Item 7. 171 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) by Cole Architects, Generally Located East of N.Webb Ave. Between E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 30,000+/- square foot residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in 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 PUBLIC HEARINGSIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 7 PROJECT NAME: Northpoint Recovery Center (H-2020-0126) 3 PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 7. ■ C�, EI IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT .►a H o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 2/4/2021 � Legend DATE: ff Projeci Lccfl-fiar TO: Planning&Zoning Commission - FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner f 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0126 Ep Northpoint Recovery Center-CUP .40 LOCATION: East of N. Webb Ave.between E. State Ave. &E. Pine Ave.,in the NW 1/4 of Section 8,Township 3N.,Range lE. rTrTr� I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a 30,000+/-square foot residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 3.86 acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Residential care facility Current Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Proposed Zoning NA Lots(#and type;bldg/common) NA Amenities NA Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 12/8/20;2 people from the public attended the meeting attendees: Page 1 Item 7. F173] History(previous approvals) ROS#6734(2004);portion of Lot 3 and Lots 4-5,Block 3, Gemtone Center No.2(1997);Pinebridge(AZ-07-006; RZ-07-010;PP-07-008—DA#108022893);H-2017-0058 (Pine 43—AZ,RZ,PP,MDA—DA#2018-000751);ROS #11291 (Parcel 4)(2018);A-2020-0182(PBA,"parcel B" tentative) approved) A. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend diu Legend S. 0 Project LacafK:m Id IQ � Project Limo-or- I�I a —ram - a az " Reitial MU R - r �f e _ I U r- Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend I- ., . Legend Project LacaTian U L-O C. 0.. letProjeat Lacafian City Lim& 1 - — Planned Parcels O -L 1=L $ .8 - o RUT _ r F L-O JJJ L R1 1 Page 2 Item 7. ■ III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Jennifer Mohr, Cole Architects— 1008 W. Main St.,Boise,ID 83702 B. Owner: Robert Quinn,TQ Flagstone, LLC—811 N.W. 13'St.,Fruitland, ID 83619 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. STAFF ANALYSIS A Conditional Use Permit(CUP)is proposed for a new 30,000+/-square foot single-story residential care facility on 3.86 acres of land in a C-G zoning district, as required by UDC Table 11-2B-2. The facility will be an in-patient/out-patient addiction treatment provider with 48 beds with administrative and treatment uses. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation of Mixed Use—Community(MU-C)in that it will contribute to the mix of uses in this area and the variety of healthcare options available in the City. It will provide for the physical and mental health care needs of the community in relation to addiction recovery and is in close proximity to housing, arterial streets and businesses. The use should be compatible with residential uses to the north as well as the industrial use to the east and future commercial uses to the west and south. A segment of the City's multi-use pathway system is proposed along the eastern boundary of the site between State and Pine Avenue as a public amenity,which will connect different land use types. Only the eastern 315'+/-portion of the property is proposed to develop with this application; the western 70'+/-wide strip of land is proposed to develop at a later time. Two(2)building pads and associated parking are depicted on the site plan for future development. That portion of the site is not approved with this application and will require future submittal of an application for review and approval by the Planning Division. Measures shall be taken so that the undeveloped portion of the site isn't unsightly or a fire hazard. Existing Development Agreement(Inst. 2018-000751): The existing Development Agreement (DA) approved for Pine 43 in 2018 contains conditions that govern future development of this site. The conceptual development plan approved for this site included in the DA depicts 4 buildings and associated parking on this site. Staff has reviewed the DA and finds the proposed site plan and use in substantial compliance as required. Staff has included recommended conditions of approval in Section VII in accord with the DA as noted below. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC II- 4-3-29: Nursing or Residential Care Facilities, as follows: A. General standards: 1. If the use results in more than ten(10)persons occupying a dwelling at any one time,the applicant or owner shall concurrently apply for a change of occupancy as required by the building code in accord with title 10 of this Code. 2. The owner and/or operator of the facility shall secure and maintain a license from the State of Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, facility standards division. B. Additional standards for uses providing care to children and juveniles under the age of eighteen (18)years: Page 3 Item 7. 175 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by a minimum six-foot non-scalable fence to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this Code. 2. Outdoor play equipment over six(6)feet high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts or uses adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk. C. Additional standards for uses providing care to patients who suffer from Alzheimer's disease, dementia or other similar disability that may cause disorientation. A barrier with a minimum height of six(6) feet, along the perimeter of any portion of the site that is accessible to these patients shall be provided. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this Code. Site Plan: A site plan was submitted, included in Section VI.A,that depicts the footprint of the proposed structure with parking on the north side of the building adjacent to E. State Ave. The western 70'+/-of the subject property is not proposed to develop with this project. A property boundary adjustment application has been tentatively approved for the boundary of this site depicted on the site plan(A-2020-0182,Parcel`B"). Additional items associated with the tentative approval must be submitted in order to finalize the PBA prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application for this site. Access: Access is proposed via E. State Ave. with an emergency only access via E. Pine Ave. A temporary turnaround is proposed on the west side of the site that has been approved by the Fire Dept. Because a driveway is ultimately proposed between the subject property and the property to the west as depicted on the plans,Staff recommends a recorded cross-access easement is submitted granting cross-access/ingress-egress to the property to the west(Parcel#51108244538)with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.If the Applicant is unsure where the cross-access will ultimately be provided, the access may alternatively be granted in the future with the subsequent development application for the western portion of the site. Parking: Off-street vehicle parking is required at 0.5 space per bed for residential care facilities as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and should comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-5. Bicycle parking is required at one space for every 25 proposed vehicle parking spaces or portion thereof as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G and should comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Based on 48 beds, a minimum of 24 vehicle spaces are required;43 spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards resulting in 19 extra spaces. Based on 43 vehicle parking spaces,a minimum of one (1)bicycle parking space is required; four(4) spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards, resulting in three (3)extra spaces. Landscaping: A 10-foot wide street buffer is required along E. State Ave., a local street, and a 25- foot wide street buffer is required along E. Pine Ave., an arterial street, landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Parking lot landscaping is required as set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C. A landscape plan was submitted, included in Section VII.B,that depicts a 30'+/-street buffer along E. State Ave. and a 40'+/- street buffer along E. Pine Ave. Landscaping exists within the street buffer along E. Pine Ave.;tree locations are depicted on the plan but no vegetative groundcover is depicted. Vegetative groundcover should be depicted on the plan in the street buffers and parkways that complies with UDC 11-3B-5N and the width of street buffers,lineal feet of buffers and the required vs.provided number of trees should be included in the Project Calculations table for Page 4 Item 7. F176] the street buffers along E.Pine Ave. and E. State Ave.that demonstrate compliance with UDC standards. The western 70'+/-portion of this property is not proposed to develop with this project; because it's part of this property,Staff recommends the street buffers along Pine and State along the full width of the property are constructed with this project. Perimeter landscaping is required along the east boundary of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. Landscaping is required in planter islands at the ends of rows of parking in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.2.Mitigation is required for all existing trees 4" caliper or greater that are removed from the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- IOC.5. An existing 16"caliper black locust tree is depicted on the landscape plan; the Applicant should contact Matt Perkins, City Arborist,to determine if mitigation is required. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should comply with these standards. Sidewalk: An existing detached sidewalk(and curb and gutter) exists along the frontage of this site adjacent to E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Pathway: The Pathways Master Plan depicts a segment of the City's regional pathway system along the eastern boundary of this site between E. State Ave. and E. Pine Ave. The Applicant proposes a 10' wide pathway from the north end of the emergency access driveway to the perimeter sidewalk along Pine Ave.;the emergency access driveway is proposed to serve a dual purpose as a pedestrian pathway. Landscaping is required along the pathway in accord with the standards listed in UDC H- 3B-12C. As a public amenity in the MU-C designated area, Staff recommends a bench is provided adjacent to the pathway along the east boundary of the site in close proximity to a shade tree for a rest area. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway along the eastern boundary of the site should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that meets the requirements of the Park's Department(coordinate with Kim Warren). The DA requires pedestrian connections to be provided between buildings in the form of pathways distinguished from vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks. The site/landscape plan should be revised to comply with this requirement(i.e.provide pedestrian connections to the future structures to the west). The pathway connection from the perimeter sidewalk along E. State Ave.to the main building entrance should also be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface as noted and required by UDC 11-3A-19B.4. The sidewalk in front of the building should be extended to the east to the emergency access driveway/pedestrian pathway. Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VI.0 that incorporate materials consisting of horizontal fiber cement siding and stone with vertical wood siding and exposed wood beam accents and standing seam metal roofing. The design of the proposed structure is proportional to and should blend in with the architectural style of the residential development to the north as desired in MU-C designated areas. The square footage of the structure at 30,000 s.£ complies with the provision in the DA that limits the building size to a 30,000 s.f.building footprint(provision#5.1.7). The DA requires windows, awnings or arcades totaling at least 30% of the length of the favade to be provided for facades that are viewable from other structures (provision#5.1.4f); final design shall comply with this requirement and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application to ensure consistency Page 5 Item 7. F177] with UDC standards and design standards and conditions noted in Section VII. V. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions included in Section VII per the Findings in Section VIII. Page 6 Item 7. F178] VI. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 12/22/2020) 1 Holed ElYormeNon: COLE m Ma ARCHITECTS M, _J` 'N�� i �rdect Cd�culelbQ l i I RfN7E ••••••••,•••- , :. ei�y ` ,.r..._ 'dna�.at�- err NOT FOR E YELCPV.NT- rc�h=.:y1•.�„^-%�^ C. ~' y' DONATRIICTIOR }= :.: THE L. ':C": LF{TO •` � �_..�..(�_d r. GROUP 11 1J LIiJ 111I "�1,- .a'F� pr�tw'is.'�'�-"Ty 4• .�_.s. _ ....4 PROPOM eAnns RITE DBIRAMS N : IQTA PART ' 4H NOPTHPofNr .,�o.l.. wr :I. 1 �yd� � i M�F.MMyI.•NN�_,�`i'i � 4 M}r�l+�k Y o✓r}w Y.vf CuawEhupl Permrt-SFte Plan ! 4 r a }� CONEWMK-USE PERW-IFTE PLM C I.00 Page 7 Item 7. F179] B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 12/22/2020) I RANT aa-EXlE F WAS IMa'.ulK�[ _ OLE � ARCHITECTS 6�9ks: •at.c+s: M—_— }� :k s• rg tca NMFM1ii7 .* 17o : }, x,:5:}::: xY V-3 ;'; 1iNEn _ LAMB 6RDIP .._ FRS RILING Lwutm _. r � w •_ ' OEM NORTH POINT' S::S:k::}' I k:f,�S'S'.:f::S!�;•.: � —.�r o y e..— SES:ki:k..'..i.:... S�YASSf�kk' ks55< - _ NOR71MOM — y RECOYEEHO M31 P"fl_56ti n anal Use Permit-Isndscape Plan FERMrr]NhL�14E FERNR- LWO9C PE PLAN L1.00 Page 8 Item 7. F180] C. Proposed Building Elevations (dated: 1/4/202 1) Ito I t 1,4 MATERIAL LEG ENU T'01------ -------- COLE ARcHITEc-rs lu EU iNO FOA --T------T-:-- —-—-—-—-— -——-—-—-—-— Li ------- ----- -------------- A 00 ou LU [I] moym I"Na RELY CBII81 ---- ------ ------ -------- t[E 11FJj 01 A4.00 Page 9 Item 7. 881 VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-000751,H-2017-0058). 2. The tentatively approved property boundary adjustment application(A-2020-0182) shall receive final approval prior to submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications for this development. 3. Continued compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-29: Nursing or Residential Care Facilities is required. 4. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Depict pedestrian connections to the future structures to the west as required by the Development Agreement(provision#5.1.4b). Pathways shall be distinguished from vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. b. The pedestrian walkway connecting between the perimeter sidewalk along E. State Ave. and the main building entrance shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 19B.4. c. Extend the sidewalk in front of the building to the east to the emergency access driveway/pedestrian pathway. d. Depict landscaping in the street buffers and parkways along E. State Ave.and E.Pine Ave. along the full width of the property,including the portion not proposed to develop with this proj ect, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and 11-3B-5N respectively. e. Include the width of the street buffers, lineal feet of buffers and the required vs. provided number of trees in the buffers in the Project Calculations that demonstrate compliance with the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. f. Depict perimeter landscaping along the east boundary of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.1. g. Coordinate with Matt Perkins,City Arborist,to determine mitigation requirements for this site. Depict mitigation information on the plan if required by the City Arborist in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC.5. h. Depict a tree in the planter island at the west end of the row of parking on the east side of the entry driveway in accord with UDC 11-3B-8C.2d. i. Depict landscaping along the emergency access road/pathway along the east boundary of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. j. Depict a bench adjacent to the pathway along the east boundary of the site in close proximity to a shade tree. 5. All of the site work required above and depicted on the landscape and site plans shall be completed with development of the residential care facility. 6. Submit a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway along the eastern boundary of the site with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that meets the Page 10 Item 7. F182] requirements of the Park's Department(coordinate with Kim Warren). 7. The maximum building size is limited to a 30,000 square foot building footprint as set forth in the Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-000751,H-2017-0058). 8. Windows,awnings or arcades totaling at least 30%of the length of the fagade shall be provided for facades that are viewable from other structures as set forth in the Development Agreement (Inst. #2018-000751,H-2017-0058). 9. A recorded cross-access/ingress-egress easement should be submitted granting cross- access/ingress-egress to the property to the west(Parcel#S 110824453 8)with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. If the Applicant is unsure where the cross-access will ultimately be provided, the access may alternatively be granted in the future with the subsequent development application for the western portion of the site. 10. Maintenance of the undeveloped portion of the site shall regularly occur so that the area isn't unsightly or a fire hazard until such time as it's developed. 11. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structure shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 12. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time,the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6.A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F. B. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=219869&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty C. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=222011&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=220033&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty VIII. FINDINGS Conditional Use(UDC 11-5B-6) 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 the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district. Page 11 Item 7. F183] 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed residential care facility will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions noted in Section VII of this report. 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 proposed use will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff ,finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VII of this report. 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 proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff ,finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Stafffinds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. 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) Stafffinds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. b. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. Page 12 Applicant Presentation NORTHPOINT RECOVERY MERIDIAN , ID CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISION I FEBRUARY 4, 2021 NORTHPOINT" COLE/ARCHITECTS 41*0 R I C a V E R Y - ARCHITECTURE / PLANNING / INTERIOR DESIGN CONTEXT PLAN/ SCALE: NTS �� - Good Samaritan Mwi Society - Boise Village 1 WEST VALLEY Northpoint Recovery Idaho 9 I-HEAR WINSTEAD PARK Idaho Vocational NORTHPOINT Rehabilitation RECOVERY �99 , CENTER 9Riverview Rehabilitation Recovery4 Life V -- �!+ St. Luke's Rehabilitation Sonny EAST END St. Luke's 1301S S A+TE Rehabilitation Meridian UNIVERSITY'S IL FFM — Avamere 0 DISTRICT Transitional Care and... T Balance Recovery LLC 9 Zelus Recovery I �, mL VISTASEb � SOUTHEAST L & SOUTHWEST BOISE 'Mir ADA COUNTY -- �O •a ALLIANCE Boise Airport F BPI NORTHPOINTCOLE/ARCH ITECTS NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 102 SITE PLAN/ SCALE: NTS TOTAL SITE: 3.68 ACRES DEVELOPED SITE: 2.57 ACRES STATE AVENUE BUILDING AREA: 27,659 SF MAX BUILDING HEIGHT: 28'-4" F-- -------------------------------- ------- ----------___ REQUIRED PARKING: 24 STALLS BIKE PARKING: 2 1 FUTURE , ' DEVELOPEMENT OUT OF SCOPE I � I TRASH NEW 1-STORY ' BUILDING Q I TEMPORARY FIRE L Z ' ACCESS I - U) z Q --- w I ' FUTURE DEVELOPEMENT OUT OF SCOPE - I I ---------------------------------------------------- ----- PINE STREET NORTHPOINT® COLE/\RCH ITECTS ® - R E c 0 V E R Y — NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 103 DESIGN CONCEPT/ PERSPECTIVES ENTRY PERSPECTIVE NORTHPOINTA COLE/�RCH ITECTS NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 104 DESIGN CONCEPT/ PERSPECTIVES I STATE ST. PERSPECTIVE NORTHPOINT® COLE/�RCHITECTS ® — R E c 0 v E R v - NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 105 DESIGN CONCEPT/ PERSPECTIVES W77- 7777 2-L= -- - --------------- - -- ---- ---- ------------------- ---_------ -- - - memo COURTYARD PERSPECTIVE NORTHPOINT® COLE/�RCH ITECTS ® - R E c 0 v E R v — NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 106 MATERIALS/ STONE LAP SIDING VERTICAL SIDING GRAY STOREFRONT EXPOSED GLULAM BEAM NORTHPOINT® COLE/�RCH ITECTS ® — R E c 0 v E R v — NORTHPOINT RECOVERY I PAGE 107 THANK YOU/ Item 8. Ll 84 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) by Breckon Land Design, Located on the east side of S. Meridian Rd./SH 69, midway between E. Amity Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) and R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. PUBLIC IN SIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 8 PROJECT NAME: Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 A) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 8. 185 (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: February 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Shafer View Terrace (H-2020-0117) by Breckon Land Design, Located on the east side of S. Meridian Rd./SH 69, midway between E.Amity Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) and R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing Item 8. ■ STAFF REPORTC�,WEIIDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING February 4,2021 Legend L_J__ DATE: Project Lacfltar F-1 #0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission 4:: //z FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner , 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0117 -t Shafer View Terrace—AZ,PP LOCATION: East side of S. Meridian Rd./SH 69 midway between E. Amity Rd. and E. Lake Hazel Rd., in the SW 1/4 of Section , 31,T.3N.,R.IE. (Parcels#R7824220044 Tr 4 &#R7824220042) 1- -� {{ do I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres) and R-4(29.82 acres)zoning districts; and Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 39.01 acres Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential(LDR)(3 or fewer units/acre) Existing Land Use(s) Agricultural land Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential(SFR) Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 50 buildable lots/10 common lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) 2 phases Number of Residential Units(type 50 SFR detached dwellings of units) Density(gross&net) 1.76 units/acre(gross); 3.30 units/acre(net) Open Space(acres,total 5.26 acres(or 18.55%)overall common open space—4.05 [%]/buffer/qualified) acres(or 14.27%)of which is qualified open space Amenities Multi-sport court,tot lot,gazebo shade structure,multi-use pathway Physical Features(waterways, The McBirney Lateral runs along the southern boundary hazards,flood plain,hillside) and through the western portion of the site. Another Page 1 Item 8. F187 Description Details Page waterway exists on the eastern portion of the site between the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoned properties. Neighborhood meeting date;#of 10/13/20; 14 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) This property was previously platted as Lot 4,Block 1, Shafer View Estates,developed in Ada County and recorded in 2002(Bk. 84,Pg.9403). It was deed restricted and was only allowed to be used for open space as defined in the non-farm development section of the Ada County code and the planned development section of the Ada County code for a period of not less than 15 years from the recording date of the subdivision plat. This property was originally proposed to be annexed with the adjacent Apex development but was later withdrawn. B. Community Metrics Description Details P Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes(draft) • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Access Access is proposed via E. Shafer View Dr.,local street,and E. (Arterial/Collectors/State Quartz Creek St.,collector street Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Traffic Level of Service ACHD does not set LOS thresholds for state highways. Stub No stub streets exist to this property and no stub streets are Street/Interconnectivity/Cros proposed to adjacent properties. s Access Existing Road Network S.Meridian Rd./SH-69 exists along the west boundary and E. Shafer View Dr. exists along the south boundary. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ No sidewalks or buffers exist along S.Meridian Rd./SH-69,a Buffers state highway,or E. Shafer View Dr.,a local street Proposed Road 111ICapital Improvements Plan(CIP}f Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): • The intersection of Amity Road and Meridian RoadISH-69 is listed in the CIP to be widened Improvements r to 6-lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,7-lanes on the east,and 7-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2031-2035. • The intersection of Lake Hazel Road and Meridian Road/SH-69 is listed in the CIP to be widened to 6-lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,7-lanes on the east,and 7-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2036-2040. • Amity Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Meridian RoadISH-6910 Locust Grove Road between 2036-2040. • Lake Hazel Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from Linder Road to Meridian Road/SH-69 between 2036-2040. • Lake Hazel Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Meridian RoadlSH-6910 Locust Grove Road between 2036-2040. • Amity Road is scheduled in the IFYWP for pavement rehabilitation and pedestrian ramp construction from Meridian Road7SH-69 to Locust Grove Road in 2022. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 3.5 miles • Fire Response Time Falls within 5:00 minute response time area-nearest station is Fire Station#6—can meet response time goals • Resource Reliability 87%-does meet the target goal of 80%or greater Page 2 Item 8. F188] Description Details P • Risk Identification 2—current resources would not be adequate to supply service (open waterways) • 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. • Water Supply Requires 1,000 gallons per minute for one hour,may be less if buildings are fully sprinklered. • Other Resources Police Service • Distance to 4 miles . Police Station • Police Response The average emergency response time in the City is just under 4 minutes(meets Time target goal of 3-5 minutes) Meridian Police Department-Shafer View Narth Location of new development- Las.-of N Merldlan Rd Between E Amity Rd&E Lake Hazel FLd ime Frame- Dl/01/2019-12/31f2024 Level of Service ILosl-Delivered By Reporting District IRD-M777) Calls for Service[CFS]: Response Times; Dispatch to Arrival(all units) Average Response Times by Priority- 'City of Meridian' PriorkV 3 3A3 Prrority2 fMPosvwawffhbstolom"esl 7:11 Priority 1 l+str Goof is w![14l015#0 20 mJrwfesl 10:37 Average RespbnSB TirdeS by Priorlty:'Iv1777' Priority 3 5A2 Priority 2 11:43 Priority 1 8:36 Calls for Service(CFS):Calls occurring In RD'M777' CFS count Total 55 %of Calls for Serwice split by Priority in'M777' *of P3 CFS 1.8% *of P2 LXS 74.5% Ag of P4 LT5 21.64L %of PO 0:5 0.0% Crimes Crime Courrt Total 22 Cr'aaltei 'Crash Count.Total 46 Analyst Note(si: Response Time and Calla For Service(CF51 by morlty-Most frequent priority tall types; •Pribei ty 3 balks involved Subject at the Door. •Priority 2 calls most frequently inmkved TrafFC Stapsr Stalked Vehides,and Welfare Checks 1911 Hang Ups)_ •Priority 1 calls m45t frequently involved N4 Contact Order RePgFtr VIN Inspections,and Citizen A55ift5- Crime loccurred date!-Most frequent crimes involved: Driving Under the Influence,and Liquor Law Violations(Open Container IDrlverl,Aloohollc Beverage Possesslon Under Age 21,etc.),and •druglNarcotic Ulalatlons(Possesslon of MarlJuana), 'Crashes-Most frequent crashes were; •41.1,%injury type crashes, •26.1-%property damage reports,and •324-M non-reportable crashes. arioelty Response rsmes ye8ned: Priority 0 type ca Its are no priority type of ca IIa Prliarlty 1 type calls are For non-emergency type of calls where the officer will arrive at the ea rilest oonwenlerKe,and shall obey all tMfit laws_ Priority 2 type calls require an urgent response where the officer will arrive as soon as practical,and should obey all traffic laws. Prlorh,y 3 type calls are an emergency response In which the Irghts and siren and driving as authorlmd far an emergency vehicle by Idaho Cade to facilitate the quick and safe arrival of an officer to the scene. West Ada School District • Distance(elem, ins,hs) Page 3 Item 8. 189 • Capacity of Enrollment Ca aci Miles [nn..m kh-1) Schools Mary McPherson Elementary' 481' 675 1.3 • #of Students Victory Middle School 868 IODO 2.8 Enrolled Mountain View High School 2218 2175 3.9 *Enrollment number is estimated for the 2021-2022 school year based on current enrollment and future growth in the respective attendance area.It reflects changes made to the Mary McPherson Elementary attendance area. • #of Students Predicted from 35 school aged children predicted from this development by WASD. this development Wastewater • Distance to Directly adjacent Sewer Services • Sewer Shed South Black Cat Trunk Shed • Estimated Project See application Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining 14.02 Balance • Project Yes Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/concerns • Flow is committed • See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water ) IL • Distance to Water Directly adjacent Services • Pressure Zone 5 • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's • Water Quality None r • Project Yes Consistent with Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Page 4 Item 8. ■ C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend . Legend i ONdyeci Lcca-fior I(fdProjeot Lucafon - Medium Density Residenfial idnfi ed-Hig :�• - ensify - Residenfi Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend R1 Legend ff — ff ; IfRUT Preyeci Laca-nor IetProject Lacaian -- R1 ;_1 City Limit R-$ — Planned Parse R _ RUT R-4 w RUToil RUIT A. Applicant: Mary Wall,Breckon Land Design—PO Box 44465,Boise, ID 83711 B. Owners: James Chambers, 39, LLC—5356 N. Troon Pl.,Boise,ID 83713 DWT Investments,LLC—2929 W.Navigator Dr., Ste. 400,Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant Page 5 Item 8. 991 1 III. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 1/15/2021 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/12/2021 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 1/21/2021 Nextdoor posting 1/12/2021 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan) The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Low Density Residential(LDR). The LDR designation allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of three 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. The proposed development consists of a total of 50 single-family detached dwellings on large lots [i.e. 12,000 square foot(s.f.)minimum] on 39.01 acres of land at an overall gross density of 1.76 units/acre,which falls within the density range desired in LDR designated areas. This property abuts a County subdivision, Shafer View Estates,to the south and will provide a transition to future urban properties to the north, zoned R-4 and R-8. 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, is proposed which Staff believes is appropriate due to the large lot sizes and density desired in LDR designated areas. The variety of lot sizes (i.e. 12,000-18,652 sf.) proposed will provide for diversity in styles of homes, which Staff believes will contribute to the variety of housing in the City to meet the preferences and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed density and lot sizes should be compatible with the rural residential homes/properties to the south on 1+ acre lots in the County and future urban residential development to the north and east in the City. Page 6 Item 8. F192 • "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 in accord with current City plans. • "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 to this site and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The emergency response times for Police Dept. and Fire Dept. meets the established goals. • "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) A 10 foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed within the street buffer along S. Meridian Rd.ISH--69 as required by the Pathways Master Plan and UDC 11-3H-4C.4. A total of 4.05 acres of qualified open space is proposed along with quality amenities (i.e. sports court, gazebo, tot lot, multi-use pathway). • "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) The Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was not required by ACHD for this development. WASD submitted comments stating that approximately 35 school aged children are estimated to be generated by this development; enrollment at Mary McPherson Elementary School and Victory Middle School is currently under capacity and Mountain View High School is over capacity(see Section VIII.I).According to the Community Development's school impact analysis, enrollment at Victory Middle School will be slightly over capacity at build-out of building permits already issued in this area at 104%(Mary McPherson will be 95%and Mountain View will be 109%) (see Section VIII.J). The closest City Park to this site is Discovery Park, consisting of 77-acres, to the southeast on E. Lake Hazel Rd., Y4 mile east of S. Locust Grove Rd. A future City Park is designated on the FL UM within a half mile of this site to the west. • "Require all development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The proposed site design features a 1:1, 2:1 and 3:1 transition in proposed lots to existing lots in Shafer View Estates to the south. These lots are separated by an existing 41 foot wide easement for the McBirney Lateral which provides an added buffer between rural lots and proposed urban lots. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are proposed as required with this development. Page 7 Item 8. F193 In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan per the analysis above. V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS( L0 A. Annexation: The proposed annexation is for 40.48 acres of land with R-2 (10.66 acres)and R-4(29.82 acres) zoning districts,which includes adjacent right-of-way to the section line of S. Meridian Rd./SH- 69 and to the centerline of E. Quartz Creek St. A total of 50 residential dwelling units are proposed to develop on the site at an overall gross density of 1.76 units per acre consistent with the associated LDR FLUM designation for the site. Although the proposed density is more consistent with an R-2 (Low Density Residential)zoning district,the Applicant requests R-4 in order to provide a transition in lot sizes between the existing rural residential subdivision to the south(Shafer View Estates)and the future urban residential subdivision approved to the north(Prevail Subdivision),zoned R-8. Larger lots are proposed adjacent to the southern boundary that gradually transition to smaller lots to the north. The property is contiguous to City annexed land and is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. A legal description and exhibit map of the overall annexation area along with individual legal descriptions and exhibit maps for the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts are included in Section VIII.A. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure future development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the development plan proposed with this application, Staff recommends a new DA is required with this application, containing the provisions noted in Section VIII.A, as discussed below. B. Preliminary Plat: The proposed plat is a re-subdivision of Lot 4,Block 1, Shafer View Estates, developed in Ada County and recorded in 2002 (Bk. 84,Pg. 9403). This lot was deed restricted and was only allowed to be used for open space as defined in the non-farm development section of the Ada County code and the planned development section of the Ada County code for a period of not less than 15 years from the recording date of the subdivision plat. The required time period has elapsed and the lot is now eligible for redevelopment. The proposed preliminary plat consists of 50 buildable lots and 10 common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts. The subdivision is proposed to develop in two (2) phases. The first phase consists of 28.35 acres and is proposed to develop with 50 single-family detached homes at a gross density of 1.76 units per acre and a net density of 3.30 units per acre with an average lot size of 13,444 s.f. The second phase is proposed to be platted as one large 10.66-acre lot that will be developed at a later date under a separate application by the property owner. This portion of the site is under separate ownership from the rest of the site and was previously illegally split off, therefore,it's ineligible for development until included in a subdivision to create a legal lot for development purposes. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures or site improvements on this property other than a private drainage facility on Lot 6,Block 6. Page 8 Item 8. F194 Proposed Use Analysis: Single-family detached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted uses in both the R-2 and R-4 zoning districts per UDC Table 11-2A-2: Allowed Uses in the Residential Districts. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2A): Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the R- 2 district in UDC Table I1-2A-4 and the R-4 district in(UDC Table 11-2A-5), as applicable. Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3): Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to streets and block face. Block faces are limited to 750' in length without an intersecting street or alley but may extend up to 1,000' where a pedestrian connection is provided as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3F.3. City Council may approve a block face up to 1,200' in length where block design is constrained by certain site conditions that include a large waterway or irrigation facility;block faces over 1,200 feet require a waiver from Council. A 90 degree turn in a roadway may constitute a break in the block face; however, overall pedestrian and vehicular connectivity will be considered when evaluating the appropriateness of block lengths greater than 750' in length—additional pedestrian and/or roadway connections may be required. The face of Block 3 exceeds 1,200' and does not provide a pedestrian connection other than the emergency access driveway which may serve as a pedestrian connection between the proposed subdivision and Shafer View Estates to the south. The Applicant requests City Council approval of the proposed block length due to existing site constraints that include the following: 1)the narrow configuration of the subject property; 2)the location of the McBirney Lateral, a large waterway/irrigation facility,that runs along the southern boundary and through the western portion of the proposed subdivision; and 3)the existing Shafer View subdivision that abuts the site to the south,south of the lateral,which does not include any pedestrian pathways or stub streets to this property.If not approved,the plat should be reconfigured to comply with this standard.An emergency access road for Fire Dept. is proposed between the end of the cul-de-sac and E. Shafer View Rd. but it's not a public access. The cul-de-sac length complies with UDC standards. Access(UDC 11-3A-3) Direct lot access is proposed via E. Shafer View Dr.,an existing local street along the southern boundary of the site, for the lots south of the McBirney Lateral;the lots north of the lateral will be accessed via two(2)accesses from E. Quartz Creek St., a planned collector street along the northern boundary of the site. The UDC(11-3A-3)restricts and limits access points to collector streets where access to a local street is available. Local street access is not available to the northern portion of the proposed development. Due to the configuration of the property,without the easterly second access,the cul-de-sac would exceed the maximum length standard of 500' allowed by the UDC(11-6C-3B.4). Therefore, Staff is supportive of the proposed accesses. An emergency access for the Fire Dept. is proposed between the cul-de-sac and E. Shafer View Drive. A public street connection is not proposed to E. Shafer View Dr. for several reasons, including the following: 1)residents in Shafer View Estates were strongly opposed to the connection; 2)modification to the McBirney Lateral would be necessary to design a public road in that location and the lateral is under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and the process for modifications to their canal and an encroachment on their easement is very time consuming(i.e. 12+/-months)with no guarantees of approval; 3) approval from Nampa-Kuna Page 9 Item 8. Fl-951 Irrigation District would also be needed has they have irrigation piping located in this area as well;4)a public road through that area would require a new pump system for the Shafer View Estates irrigation system as the road would go through the existing pump system—moving the pump system would also require moving/modifying a large BOR irrigation pipe that feeds the irrigation pump station; and 5)the cost of design and irrigation infrastructure work required to put in a public road is estimated to be $100,000.00 to$150,000.00(see Applicant's explanation for more detail). For these reasons, Staff does not recommend a connection is provided. Access to the R-2 zoned portion of the site is anticipated to be provided from the east as that portion of the site is planned to develop with the Apex development to the east. Direct lot access via S.Meridian Rd./SH-69 and E. Quartz Creek St. is prohibited. 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. The proposed street sections accommodate on-street parking on both sides of the streets for guests in addition to driveway parking spaces on each lot. Staff is of the opinion sufficient parking can be provided for this development. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): A 10' wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed as required within the street buffer along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 per UDC 11-3H-4C.4 and the Pathways Master Plan. The pathway is required to be placed in a 14-foot wide public use easement,which shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to submittal for City Engineer signature on the final plat(s)for Phase 1.If the pathway will be located entirely within the right-of-way, a public pedestrian easement is not needed. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 Sidewalks are required to be provided adjacent to all streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17. Where the multi-use pathway is required along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69,the pathway may take the place of the sidewalk. A combination of attached and detached sidewalks are proposed within the development as depicted on the landscape plan. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-1 : Eight-foot wide parkways are proposed along all internal public streets where detached sidewalks are proposed. All parkways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-17E. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 35-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to S. Meridian Rd./SH-69, an entryway corridor; and a 20-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to E. Quartz Creek St., a collector street, as proposed. Landscaping is required to be installed within the buffer per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C,which require buffers to be planted with a mix of trees and shrubs, lawn,or other vegetative groundcover. Street buffer landscaping is proposed in excess of UDC standards as shown on the landscape plan in Section VII.C. Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E. At a minimum, one tree per 8,000 square feet of common area is required to be provided along with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. Landscaping is proposed in excess of UDC standards as shown on the landscape plan in Section VII.C. Landscaping is required adjacent to the pathway along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. A 5' wide landscape strip is required on both sides of the pathway planted with a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover. The Landscape Page 10 Item 8. ■ Requirements table should include the linear feet of pathway with the required vs.proposed number of trees to demonstrate compliance with UDC standards. Landscaping is required within parkways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3B- 7C. The Landscape Requirements table should include the linear feet of parkways within the development with the required vs.proposed number of trees to demonstrate compliance with UDC standards. There are existing trees on this site at the fronts of Lots 1-5,Block 6 along E. Shafer View Dr. If any of these trees are proposed to be removed, mitigation may be required per the standards listed in UDC 11-313-1OC.5. Contact the City Arborist,Matt Perkins,prior to removing any trees from the site to determine mitigation requirements. Noise Mitigation (UDC 11-3H-4D): Noise abatement is required for residential uses adjoining state highways as set forth in the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-41). A 4-foot tall berm with a 6-foot tall solid wall by Simtek is proposed along S. Meridian Rd. as noise abatement as depicted on the detail on Sheet L1.0 of the Landscape Plan. Architectural elements are proposed to break up monotonous wall planes as required. A detail of the proposed wall that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D should be submitted with the final plat for the first phase of development. Qualified Open Space(UDC 11-3 : A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-313 is required for developments over 5 acres in size. Based on the area of the plat, 39.01 acres, a minimum of 3.90 acres of qualified open space is required. A total of 5.26 acres(or 18.55%) of common open space is provided within the overall development,4.05 acres(or 14.27%) of which is qualified per the standards in UDC 11-3G-3B, which exceeds UDC standards(see open space exhibit in Section VII.D). Qualified open space consists of half the street buffer along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69, all of the street buffer along E. Quartz Creek St., 8-foot wide parkways, linear open space, and open grassy areas of at least 50' x 100' in area. Lot 9,Block 3 does contain a pond but it does not encompass more than 25% of the required open space area as required. The pond is required to have recirculated water and should be maintained such that it doesn't become a mosquito breeding ground as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3B.7. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G�• A minimum of one(1) qualified site amenity is required for developments over 5 acres in size and up to 20 acres,with one(1)additional amenity required for each additional 20 acres of development area. Based on a total of 39.01 acres of development area, a minimum of one(1)qualified site amenity is required. A multi-sport court,tot lot, gazebo shade structure and segment of the City's multi- use pathway system is proposed in excess of UDC standards. Storm Drainage: An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. The Applicant submitted a Limited Geotechnical Engineeringeport for the subdivision. The preliminary plat depicts an existing private drainage facility and existing&proposed ACHD drainage facilities and easements. Page 11 Item 8. F197 Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-1�: Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21. Waterways(UDC It It The McBirney Lateral is a large open waterway that lies within a 41-foot wide easement along the southern boundary of the site and through the western portion of the site. Another waterway exists on the eastern portion of the site between the proposed R-2 and R-4 zoned property within a 23-foot wide NMID and BKID easement. This project is not within the flood plain. The UDC allows waterways such as this to remain open when used as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UC 11-1A-1; otherwise,they are required to be piped or otherwise covered per UDC 11-3A-6B. The decision-making body may waive this requirement if it finds the public purpose requiring such will not be served and public safety can be preserved. The Applicant is not proposing to improve the McBirney Lateral as a water amenity or linear open space but is proposing to install a 6-foot tall wrought iron fence along the waterway to deter access to the waterway and ensure public safety.The Applicant requests approval of a waiver from Council to allow the waterway to remain open and not be piped. The Applicant states the Boise Project Board of Control opposes any improvements within their right-of-way.The other waterway should be piped as required. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)• All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C for fencing along waterways and the general fencing standards in 11-3A-7. A mix of 6-foot tall wrought iron and 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is proposed adjacent to common areas; 6-foot tall wrought iron fencing is proposed along the McBirney Lateral. There appears to be gaps in the fencing along the lateral on common lots that abut the waterway; fencing should be included in these areas to prevent access to the waterway and to ensure public safety. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations have not yet been prepared for this development. However,the Applicant did submit several sample photos of 2-story homes that will be similar to those constructed in this development, included in Section VII.E. Single-family detached dwellings are exempt from the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Because homes on lots that abut S.Meridian Rd. and E. Quartz Creek St.will be highly visible,the rear and/or side of structures on lots that face those streets should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections, recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and preliminary plat with the conditions noted in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 12 Item 8. F198 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description& Exhibit Map ��1 Ifs .,ACCURATE F SURPE TIN 6 6 NAP�INS -#titPl0- Annexation Land Destriptiorr A parcel of land being a(portion of the north Half of the Southwest Ouarter of Section 311 Taurnsh ip 3 North,Range 1 East of the Boise MQridian,Ada County,Idaho and all of Lot 4,81ock 1 of Shjifer View Fst s Subdivision as rewrde4l In lBook 64 Qf Plats at Pages 9403 and 9404, Et-eonrds of Ada-curdy,said parcel is localed in the North Haif of the 5butNwest Qwi§rter of Section 31,Tuwrisfiip 3 North,Range 1 East of the Bocce Merldiinan,uda County,Idaho,being more particularity de bed as folbws, l3E:GINN ING at the found aluminum cap man ument at the QUartar-amer common to Section 31.TNN,RIE and Section 36.T3N,R1W as iperpetuated bV document 103052690.Records of Ada--aunty,from which the fnu nd brass cap at the township corner common to Township 3 North.Ranges 1 East and I West and TownsJhip 2 North,Ranges S East and 1 west as perpetuated by document 20194)15470,Records of Ada County hears 5 07 E15'17"E a distance of 2669.99 feet; Th ence H 89'57'19"E a long the m id-seEbon line for a distance of 2507-75 feet to the northeast{Omer of said Lot 4; Thence S OW 17'00"W along the easterly line Qf swiW Lot A for a distance OF 1342-40 feeC Thence along the wulhi!riy boundary of said Lot 4 th a following fi courses and d istances= 1-) N 99'52'35"W for a d4stanoe of 130A0 fee, 2-) N 23'55'33"W far a distance of 17453 feet; 3-) N 16'35'10'W fora distance of 254.88 feet; 4.) H 14'42'14"W for a distaNxe of 194.57 feet; 5-) N 31'79'55"Vd for a distance of 113.67 feet; 6-) N gy°3X 47'°W fora distance of 147.74 feet; Th ence S 34'28'44"W for a dicta nce of ln43 feet to the mnterline of E.Shafer mew Drive; Theme N S5'19 49"W along said cent-erline for a distance of IGD.09 feet; Thence leaving said canteellne N 34'41'11"E for a distance of 10753 fett; Thence alorig the&Gutherly boundaryofsaid Lot 4 the following 15 courses and distances; 1-) N 04'09'19"E for a distance of 90-91 feet; 2,1 N 26'42'26"W fora distanoe of 85.32 feet; 3_) N 515°39'37"W for a distance of 97.95 Beet; 4_) N 75'35'35''W for a distance of 90-f!B feet; r 1 B02 W.Hays St..:Suite 306-Erni9e,ID 83702•Phckw:2054504-227. www.accurattee unrn are.amn Page 13 Item 8. 199 1 ACCURATE � r � e a � SURMEfl�l6 3 Ii�PPl�16 5_) N 86"33' 28" VV for a distance of 135.49 feet; 6_) 5 71'44'26"W for a distance of 111,98 feet; 7_) S 60°59' 28"W far a distance of 112.30 feet; &. N 76'52' 47" W for a distance of 210.54 feet; 9j 5 78'31'59"W for a distance of 45.73 feet; 10_) S 51`53' 13" VV for a distance of 147,64 feet; 11.) 5 65'24'ST W for a distance of 258.22 feet; 12.) 517'39'49"W for a distance of 98.75 feet; n_) S 03'59'SY E for a distance of 50,00 feet; $a-3$fetm 3 longzhc arc of a 275.00fout radIuscurve rlght h"nga central angle of 18'24' 12"and a long chord bearing N 84'38' 15'W a distance of M_00 feet; 1S.) 5 28'48'47"HIV for a distance of 206-91 feet to th-e centerline of E.Shafer View Drive; Thence along said centerline the following 4 tourers and distances., 1.1 103.63 feet along the are of a 500.00 foot radius curve right having a central angle of 91'52'2V and a long chord bearing N 47'59'54" VV For a distance of 103,44 f eet; 2.� N 42"01'36'' W for a distance of 107.12 feet; 1.) 83.86 feet along the arc of a 100,00 foot radius curve left having a central angle of 48"02'45"and a long chard beating N 86'02'56"W a distance of 91.42 feet; 44 5 89'55'39'W for a distance of 219_88 feet to the section line; Thence N 00'45' 17" W along the section line for a distance of 802_03 feet to the REAL P01NT Of BEGINNING, Parcel conta Ins 40.463 acres,more or ie5s- 1602 W. Hays St.,Suite 305 Boise_ ID 887W Phone;20"86422~7 www.arcuratesurweyars corn Page 14 Item 8. F 00 AIVIVEXA TIOIV MAP PARCEL LYING 1N FHE N 112 OF ME SIN 114, .SEC 77O1V 31, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M. 36 3i 7 f4 COR. CP&- rNST Na.r05052680 N 89'57'1 8" E 2507.75' LOT 4 BLOCK 1 Cy N SHAFER VIEW ESTATES ZQ 40.4a3t ACRES co rLl$ 05 L14 y C?7 �1$ o ti� j2 SCALE: 1"=300' �s O A ~~ ° L6 f ea k L22 �+ g L25 C 1 o NOTE: SEE SHEET 2 FdR mUNE AND CURVE TABLES L E. SHAFER VIEW DRIVE 11463 �,!•yzl � r L 1 LEGEND ANNEX A�4Y ACCURATE � ---------- SE LINE C77QN LINE � � T3N R1 W 38 3T T31V R2W �i a r_T2NRIW__T ti 1 SURVEYING & MAPPING FOUND 3 1 f2" BRASS CAP IWQNi1MENT 1602 W.Hays street#306 R2W im FOUND 2" ALUMINIUM CAPlt Boise,Idaho 83702 CP&F INST. No. 11A (248)488-4227 2019-01,5470 ❑ CALCULATED POINT qtf w www,accuratesurveyflra.mm RYI� SHEET I OF 2 JOB 20-227 Page 15 Item 8. F 01 LINE TABLE UKE BEARif4G a15TANCEt L1 N 89'S235 W 150A0' L2 Td 23755'33" W 170.53` L-� N 16'35'10" W 254.68' L4 N 14'41'14" W 194-52' L-5 'N 31'29'55" W 113-67' L6 N 89'34'47" W 147-74' L7 S 34 8'44" W 190,43' L8 N SF 15'49" 1N 100.09' L9 N 34741'F1" E 107,53' L10 N 04'00 T 9 E 90. 11 L11 N 26'4-2'26 W 55.32' L12 N 5630'37" W 57.95' L1 3 N 75 33'35" W 90.56' L1 4 N E19 33'28" W 135,49' L15 S 71'44'26" W 113.BB' L16 S 60'69'28" W 112-W I.17 N 76'5 '47" W 2 10.54' LlI3 8 78'31'59' W 45-73' L 1 9 S 51'-53'13" W 147-64' L20 S 66'24'50" W 258-22' L21 S 17`40'26" W 98.75' L22 S 03'59'33" E 50_00' L23 S 28'48 47 W 206.91' L24 N 42'01 36 W 101.W L2 5 S 89'5 39" W 19,Ra' CARVE TABLE CURVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH C 1 88.35' 275.00' 18' 4 50 5 84735'15" E 68.08' G2 103.63' 500-00' 11"52'2.5- IN 47 n,3'54 W 105A4 C3 83.86' 1!R0.00' 48'0�'45" N 6�'02'S8 W $1.4� 4. 14`* r 4�, ACCURATE 1114632 S � RuErl$6 wrtrlu 9oi9e.Idaho 83702 4} 420a�489-4227 �,` w ww.acc u rate W r V elarsco rn hki J.�� F��ti� SHEET 2 OF 2 JOB 20-227 Page 16 Item 8. F202] R-2 Legal Description: krn ® 9233 WEST STATE STREET I RUSE,0 83714 1 208.639.6939 1 FAX 20S.639.5930 January 6,2020 "ect NO.18-0V Legal Description Portion of Lot 4,Block 1 of Rafer View Estates Exhlhit A A parcel of la nd being a portion of Lot 4, Block 1 of Shafer View�vtates(Book 84 of plats,Pages 9403-9404, records of Ada Cou rty,I daho)which is sit uated in the N orth 112 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31j wnsh ig 3 North,Range 1 East,Boise Mericlliarr,City of Meri{i8n,Ada cou nty,Idaho,and being more particu larly described as follows: BEGINNING at a WR.Inch rebar marking the Center of said Section 31(alsa being the northeast corner of said Lot 4,Block 1),which bears N89°57'15"E a distan€e of 2,507.62 feet from an alurninom tap marking the West 1/4 Corner al said Section 31,t henee following the easterly line of said North 112 of the Southwest 114, S00°16'52"W a distance of 1,342.44 feet(formerly 500°15'38"W a dlzstan€e of 1/342.81 feet to the southeast Corner of said North 112 of the Southwest 114{also being the southeast corner of said Lot 4,Block 11; Thence leaving said easterly flee and fallow Mg the southerly I ine of Said Nort h 1/2 of the Sout hwest 114, N$9"52'31"W a d Ittanee of 130-43 feet to the lout beast corner of Lot 13,Black 1 of said Shafer View Estates; Thence leaving said southerly II ne and following the boundary of Lot 4,la lock 1 the#allowing courses: 1. N 23"55'33"w(formerly P1235V32"Wj a distance of 170.57 feet; 2. N15'35'10"W(formerly NW36'09ffVY1 a dlstanee of25.4.38feet; N14"41'01"W(f arm erly N14'42'W Wj a distance of 193.75feet; 4. N31a15'14"W(formerly N31°A6'i -W° a distance of 114.54 feet to a found 1/2-inch rebar, 5- N8g'52'31"W(formerly W?53'30" )a d ista nce of 23.81 feet to a polnt on t h a nprthe rly line of t he 41-foot wide McBlrney Letexal easement; Tfi ence Ieavin,g the houndary of sa Id Lot 4,Block 1,and fallowing said northerly line the following courses: 1. N77'19'36"E a distance of 75.47 feet; 2_ 1475'37'04"t:a distance of 27-30 Net to a point on t he centerline of the 38-foot wide drain ditch easement shown on said Shafer Vlew Estates su6dlvkslpn plot; Thence leaving said northerly Ilne and following Bald centerline the fallowin8 courses; 1. N06°2W52"W a distance of'151.79 feet; 2_ N17°292rW a dEstance Of 170.33 feet; 3. 1425°50'09"W a distance of 63.g6 feet; 4_ N3174 rap"W a dkstar+oe of".39 feel; 5. N 50°03'15"W a distance of 94.54 feet; 6_ N55"05'5rW a distance of 124.96 feet; 7. N 51°4e38"W a distance of 99.63 feet; 9. N61 W51-W a distance of 33.41 fleet; 9. N 67"05'46"W a dlstan€e of 68.04 feet to the northerly line of said North 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 (also being the northerly line cf said Lot 4,Black 1): ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS I PLANNERS Page 17 Item 8. F 03 Tlrarnce lea wing said oenterline and following so id.northerly line,N89'57'15"E a distance of 799.30 feet to the POINT OF BEG INNING. Sold parcel contains 10.66 acres,more or less, kL r,Lt {s 1245 A 0F � L_ ValA�' PAGE 2 Page 18 Item 8. F 04 ik T89.30 Y P P -1 i S a ' $ t � F Y � 3 a th a T M �3 JPSPJ]L I]F/p Title; bate; 01-06-2020 Scale: 1 inch= 00 feet File: Trw l: 10.661 Acres; 464381 Sq F ;Gomm n63.4107w 0.01 Feel: FYecision=U331449= P'eximew=39458 Feet 001-s00.1652w 1342.44 M-n77.1936e 75.47 015-n55.0559w 124.96 002-n69.5231w 130.43 009-n75.37046 2730 016wn53.4638w 99.63 003--n23.5533w 170.57 410--nO62852w 151.79 01 G i.U51 w 33.43 04 16.351 Ow 254_$,9 01 1= 172622w 120.33 013zo67A54(5w 0.04 005�=n 14.4 101 w 193.75 012=n25.5009w63-86 q)I 9=nVJ, 715e789.30 04(rt731.1514w 1144.54 013=06.4130w 99.39 CV-nS9.523I w 23.81 014=It5O.O3 I5w"54 Page 19 Item 8. F 05 ACCURATE S9AVEI'IHG I MAPP190 y � '�fRY1GE R4 Rezone Land Description A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 4,Block 1 of Shafer View Estates Subdivision as recorded in Book 64 of Plats at Pages 9403 and 9404, Records of Ada County,said parcel is located in the hearth Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 31,Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,being more particularly described as follows. BEGINNING at the found aluminum cap monument at the sorter Corner common to Section 31,T3N, R1E and Sectien 36,TM, R1W as{perpetuated by document 103C52684,Records of Ada County,from which the found brass cap at the township corner common to Township 3 North,ranges 1 East and 1 West, and Township 2 North,Ranges 1 East and 1 West as perpetuated by document 201"15470, Records of Ada County bears S 00'05'17" E a distance of 2669.99 feet; Thence N 89'57' 18" E along the mid-section line for a distance of 1718.45 feet to a set inch iron pin with a Gap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 67'05' 19"E for a distance of 68.04 feet to a set 5/81h inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 61'36'51"E for a distance of 33.43 feet to a set 5/81h+nch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 51'46' 38"Efora distance of 99.63 feet to a set 5/Su'inch iron pin with a tap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 55'05'59"E for a distance of 124.96 feet to a set 5/8th inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 50'03' 15"E for a distance of 84.54 feet to a set 5/8th inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 36'41'30"E for a distance of 99.39 feet to a set S/Mh inch iruri lain witlk a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 25`56' 09"E for a distance of 63.86 feet to a set 5/Vb inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 17" 26' 22"E fora distance of 120.33 feet to a set 5/8th inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463', (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) I IW2 W.Haya 5t..Suite 305•Boise, ID 83702 • Phone:208-488-4227 www.ace u ra to su rveyo rs.c am Page 20 Item 8. F 06 ACCURATE SURVEYING II: MA9fING Thence 506'28' 52" E for a distance of 151.79 feet to a set 5/81° inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 75'37'04"W for a distance of 2730 feet to a set 5J81h inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 114,53; Thence 5 77*19' 36"W for a distance of 75,47 feet to a set 5/811 inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 99'38'35"W for a distance of 124,09 feet to a found 7:inch iron pin, replaced with a Set 518tn inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 34'28'44"W for a distance of 190,43 feet to the centerline of E-Shafer View Drive; stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 55' 18'49"W along said centerline fora distance of 100.09 feet,- Thence N 34'41' 11" IF for a distance of 107.53 feet to a set 5/81" inch Iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 04'09' 19" E for a di9anre of 90-81 feet to a found M inch iron pin, replaced with a set 5/Slh inch iron pin with a rap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 26'42'26"W for a distance of 85.32 feet to a found'A inch Iran pin, replaced with a set 5/8th inch iron pin with a rap stamped PI-S 11463; Thence N 56'39'37�W for a distance of$7.95 feet to a found' inch iron pin,replaced with a set 5/8tn inch iron pin with a tap stamped PLS 1141523; Theme N 75'35'35"W far a distance of 90.88 feet to a found )S Inch iron pin, replaced with a set 5f g,h inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence N 86"33' 28"W for a distance of 185-49 feet to a founcl inch iron gin, repiacEd with a set SlVh inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence S 71'4-' 26"W for a distance of 113.88 feet to a fou nd'A inch iron pin, replaced with a set 5f81" inch iron pitt with a cap stamped RLS 11463; Thence 5 6D'59' 28' W for a distance of 112.30 feet to a set 5/8" inch iron pick with a cap stamped PLS 11463; (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) 1002 VV. Hays St.-Suite 305• Boise. ID 53702 • Phone: 206-488-4227 www.occk1 ratesu rveyors.cum Page 21 Item 8. F 07 SURVEYIN0 S MAPPINe � s 'lfRWIS"� T# ence N 76'52'47" bit for a distance of 210.54 feet to a found A inch iron pin, replaced with a set 5/8kh inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 79'31'59'VV for a distance of 45-73 feet to a found li inrh iron pin,replaced with a set 5/8"n inch iron pin with a cap starnped PLS 11463; Thence S 51'53'13"W for a distance of 147.64 feet to a found YS inch iron pin, replaced with a set 5/8'h inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 65° 24'50'W for a distan:e of 258-22 feet to a found%inch iron pin, replaced with a set S/8"'inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463: Thence 517'39'49"W fora distance of 99.75 feet to a found Y2 Inch Iron pin,replaced with a set 5/81h inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11403; Thence 503'59'33' E for a distance of 50-00feet to a found inch iron pin, replaced with a set 51V inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 88,39feet along the arcof a 275.00 foot radlus curve right having a central angle of 18' 24' 12"and a long chord bearing N 94'38' 15" W a distance of 88.00 feet to a set 5/8th inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence 5 78°48'47"W fur a distance of 206991 feet tothe centerline of E.Shafer View Drive; Thence along said centerline 103.63 feet along the arc of a 500.00 foot radius curve right having a central angle of 11"52' 2V and a long chord bearing N 47'59' 54" W for a distance of 103.44 feet; Thence continuing N 42"01'36"W for a distance of 107-12 feet to a set 5/9"inch iron pin with a cap stamped PLS 11463; Thence continu I ng 83.36 feet along the arc of a 10D,00foot radius curve left having a central angle of 48'02'45'and a Iong chord bearing N 66'02'Se W a distance of 3 1.42 feet; Thence 5 89`55'39"W for j�distdnC2 of 2 19.98 feet to the centerline of S.Meridian (toad (State Highway 69); Thence N 00'0S' 17'W along said centerline for a distance of 802.03 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Parcel con#ain5 29-822 acres, more on less- fT 11463 I-AJF-74 ' 3 � 1$o2 W. Hays St.,Suits 306 - Boise, Id 83702 •Phone:208-486-4227 - www.accuratesurveyors.com Page 22 Item 8. F208] R4 REZ02VE MAP PARCEL LYING IN THE N 112 OF THE SW 'A SECTION 31, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M. cPa F INST. No. I 114 COR. CP&F LS 4 D773sa jig31 Wsr No.I03052660 N 89'57'18" E 1778.45' S_89'57'18" W Pts M LOT 4 BLOCK i 2 CA SHAFER VIEW ESTATES Cp Cp oar z9.&22f ACRES � s L24 �21 L20 19 r h L2J ��� 7& o SCALE: 1"=300' �� r Q 0) o 01 o U t N NOTE: SEE SHEET 2 FOR �� r L12 L10 N N LINE ANO CURVE TA64ES ~ ^] w L28 1 v A o^ L31 C3 C 7� ai Wma E. SHAFER VIEW DRIVE 11463 s 1•s21 f9 R LEGEND BOUNDARY ---------- SECTION LINE FOUND 3 1/2" BRASS CAP MONUMENT `t' 1fAb T3N RI 36 31 T3N R2W JR FOUND 2" ALUMINUM CAP m ���l f + � FOUND 1/2" IRON PIN, REMOVED r S I R V E Y I N B $ MAPPING T2N R1 W 1 6 T2N R2W AND REPLACED NTH 5/8" IRON PIN, � " � 1602 Hays Street*306 ti Boismee,Idaho 83702 CP&F INST No_ 2"ALUA4INUM CAA, PLS 1I463 (7081 488 4227 2019-0f5470 O SET 518"IRON PIN, 2" ALUM. CAP, PLS rf463 ,P E wwv.accuratewrveyors.com ❑ CALCULATED POINT ER Y 1 C SHEET 1 OF 2 JOB 20-227 Page 23 Item 8. F 09 LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE L i S 67`05'19" E 68.04' L-2 S 61'36'51" E 33.43' L3 S 51'46'38" E 99-63' L 4 S 55'05'59" E 124.96' L5 5 5G-03'15" E 84.54' L6 S 36'41'30" E 99-39' L7 S 25'50 09" E 63.86' L8 S 17'26'22" E 120.33' L9 5 06'28'52" E 151.79' L10 S 7535'46" L 1 i S 77'19'36" W 75.47 L 12 N 89'38'36" W 124.09' L 13 5 34'28'44" W 190.43' L_1 Ni 55'18'49" W 100-09 L 15 N 34.41 11 E 107.53' L16 N 04'09'19" E 90.51' L17 N 26'42'26" W 85.32' L 1 S N 5639'37" W 87-95' L19 N 75'35'35" W 90.88' L,20 N BV33'28" W 1 MAT L21 S 71'44 26 W 7 13-88' L22 S W59'28" W 112-30' L23 N 76 52'47" W 210.54' L24 S 78'31'59" W 45.73' L25 S 51'53'13" W 147-64' L26 S 65'24'5{D" 1W 258.22' L27 S 1739'49" W 98.75' L28 S 03'S8'33" E 55.00 L29 5 DY48'47 W 206.91 L30 N 42'01'36" W 107.12' L31 S 89'55'39" W 219-88' CURVE TA8LE G,URVE ARC LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE CHORD BEARING CHORD LENGTH C 1 8&36' 275.00' 1 T24'50" S 84'38'15" £ MOO' C2 103.63' SOD.00 11'52 2B N 47'59'54" W 103-44` C3 83.86' 100,00' 48'02`45" 8 56'02'58" E 81-4Z' L Ar, ACCURATE MAPP 1146353 2- 16W W.Nays Street 4306 , ,1*T-%P Boise.Idaho 93702 4 P t4$)488,422? le It xrnw a€rura"urweyors€om 5HEET 2 OF.2 109 2W mmmml Page 24 Item 8. F210] B. Preliminary Plat&Phasing Plan (date: 11/18/2020) PLAT LEGEND ------ OONTA= 'Nor TYPKAL 4V RM RMAD GEcncN tPH P NOTES +�SVICINfTY MAP CAL N PLGLW.RUAD SECTION z > DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION f < jL V rr JIj CL E.�Ee�T�ES FL—Es— PPIEUMINARY PLAT Page 25 Item 8. F211] C. Landscape Plan (date: 5/17/2020) VIEW TE R RACE MERIDIAN,IpAHO ----w- IL Page 26 Item 8. F212] rrT ram` a i PROJECT INFORMATION _ Cf!Y OF MERIDIAN LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS 1 -aw ffiSYE � Z�p4 1 mad ILIQN�a L - -- ------------------ _ =W LUIr r�OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN 7 3 i_eti_ror_.aac urnc •��:"•� O 4 11411 ill 1.11 N 18 17h'.' d :'.Vlav �7'� M'I.11;L1iJ'41i: VI':14.•.d1V'I;�.�. .���� ����.. Y11, 11 I •"""• rt rt BERM ADJACENT TO MERIDIAN ROAD ........ 'em. L10 w.. .r.,L.. 'd�f ls�l� 6�) 4 3 7 1 �i a W . v, + I 8lOClC5 i :V T BaACK.3 OCC p�p��5 I Z�QQ -"— ------- ; T — '— ---- —7r-r �LL •IL 13� LLE�II Q LLI LAND APE RAN.AWA NE IRRIGATION NOTES =W ..... .�W Iili4l l!� i}�hV.N��I.V' LU ................;!'•?,.:::: ..:..:...., .:...�� y �❑ LANDSCAPE LEGEND CALLOUT LEGEND d � �� GJ�$�1��air':�I�n�w=�An'.r-r�sn! '• �` :;;;;,.;:,•,.. — 711ii;i� .1+i Vi 1 L11 Page 27 Item 8. F 13 .-�! IM,r�[�f.T[•'r •� ---- � Sa�ie.•iu�i..� —+ LOLU r i hil r '9 .4lOCKd 18 _ y 41 oar 0 . g41 W'¢ ' may . \� —C---- - — r (*'VLANDSC TWO a W O TURF AREA PREPARATION NOTES, 2 ffy coW LU L❑ a LANDSCAPE LEffND GALLOUT LEGFNl1 ?�r :�:'.;I:'���I,4•�«�I IfI��� 4V..a! �,.�.,�.,....�....�.. z _____ m rin':'i'i';Jz;iar, f.i?,ilairr: iw'iti''h'Nr.ip i,hYi r:.'If•'r 0 S .' �.�� g ---- ��fllxuir',��as��=ti�rn.rnxo; �. ," :::.:;",..,�• P� ' m---,�.'���.„,. '�1'��': e�n�wPesrwacuw�rwe � �� .•. a�..w --- - — —� a;'.��JYVV. .m snuwuL nwr' nrve srr u�nwrc # ® ?I�4. ��rl'•�41.r�ip�,V'Sff.".I�h•°'�"•' J nix ® KEY MAP 713 �J 1 _ i r I \'J I LU �Ec $ tea 0 >= = I it: CC r + LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA THREE i �i=CD LU • WEED ABATEMENT NOTER Q N in S - NW LuC) LANDSCAPE LElfND CALLDl7r LEGEND z mnw.........� . •..��.� ����.. g 'gy � :','ii'Nua�u.;: rii's"NJr .. • ---���.;'"...�..�. ©i1V11?4;�irv�,Vr��r.V�n.nm,rn! �" �::;,',,''„•,� •.... '�,-..N..,.'.. t� :�a�X� = a:FF!•� y- " exnaevea�uis,rnuua+rK eroa� �?, �ill!VVx ^•'��• .rre soruxui wu� wue ■� wnRm e e ® '•'h�' "••'. SCi :Y IL1'a'R lHrll L61�'`L.I J �A�1 KEY MAP L78 Page 28 Item 8. F 14 Iir!!'•i 11 EM — —r�,�• — -- Y..Y_-- _--� -- ---�. _ice._ .. .. , ' � ':...�--.•. Ty. � � .. ..... _ -__, CALLO''.LEGE, ��na�.,,5, [Y UT ND ,z m . ,.,„7•,,,,•,, I�Y 8°11.L' F��p 7 16 15 :J i.i i•:. CCaW Ld CAPE PLAN-ABEA FOUR �!i! _ �11Ijpj p€ � Y. � wine , a ;.1:�'�„1'.•. `•l L i aE! a$) II r�arrizl;n erxuae�liw.e�dwuElrtu wuaecs� .� ,�,,.� r�.r„r "�r;:�au:�.rar5a�':t{v�::,:•r ui�,5�5ri. +�. I I „V "[ ( PI_ANl ER BEO CIIT EDGE E x� Z WROUGHL,IRON FENCE —m a LIA +;: 1.. °i•::_:>,•- {. LANDSCAPE LEGEND "'a'•'� "4 ROCK a —I SIT BLOOM 1 / � CALLOUT LEGEND LU Gllu 12 .......... i... O i W� Lu _'t �:':., L 1 ®:;.1C.4C'L4.Sl:1.L''"•'�' U) �❑ px �••—••—••—••——�•• +�.: T- �Y-----L} upouwe urocc.ruwma ixcs t �L �I II u+rrn wr.E LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA FNE $ ZZ TOPSOIL NOTES F yi!?Is fy!'!Is}',+i+:ii'i} trtiii;;i1N"j;: 'fti ir'}i!;;; a� :itiipiirlininitiii'r"vvJiirLffi�w:lrJirn,rlVxvi�^ E wE ''1�'�f fl'I✓,�1.'d 1•'15.'„'1�.' .' ,I7 •dSS, !'S1'i•'h''l'. ...1.^51....... M171!''�SII'•S�,�RY11 KEY MAP T. - � " Page 29 Item 8. F 15 ® �'IidJh'l,r' rr ail s'v'e 5914 = w CL mu) wwo r�A1LAN08CAPE PLAN AREA SIX Z caoue awnrcc«rawnw.e.rx m� < j riue wl w:e .''. r v, 6[SL xruesreivwue.anunexrK orveee�� w 'tidpl'Ln � I MAP (�NCE PANELTV~ "JJi LtBe ..�....�...,�.�D REVEGETATION REQUIREMENTS illy .�N}�!',V.�'M1„'fil`34.n lid:�i � . '' " 'rl'.a!+af'?!}�h:;l�' ,Vh;.�'l'.t,lti a•i',y� liiu+:4ti�iu�'trra,i i�.l'�.'7...V1�1fi'Si'i1i 514i'I'.V'i'.�i.!!'i ��. .!I'I.itl l..l ifi''19i11L�ii:in�i�i.�!}"�'�:'������ it li�S'I•'i�n ..'.' �.m, lV.. .9.. �,, �,�„!-.,.. ..I"I' i.'1I"tiF'1V�:�%W-�i�N „,,,.' lL!,h,.ill","U d4�,�4!:�hS'...,�... V.SlA �. •' :4r1'ai,.l':'?I,�'�„1''.a'ti'�f'nl�r.r;l'i�uh��ih„ S'�V41fl�l'A', ' ' H. . " ��'�V:.�.. '71'�C:��Vd ��.���� .���_III'II�_.. riii+.'111L I i�a;V YIII ""c KyKsi^4dYl{Y'4'al.Ilrhr 1. 75"dl�I���N��1)81"AI. �S1M1 'iiii�'niniiiii.i'.iiii'iiinni'«i' .... ........... . ¢a� n ... ,..�. .. (1BOULDER INSTALLATION 1 ..� 3 DECIDUOUG TREE PLANTINGp� 0 �� �.��Ir �p,i � � IN RETAINING WALL "°' Z r� ��Ai+'iN'14;'4iA!4�41'I'11'id 4'.�'l %— �LL 'U 44i1'14'.i14'A11.l51'+Yi,M.... ........... h 3 E V..I-1h ill ..... •'�W rc1'S �. �' n ii jl Ii 3 �9 tiu111 .'i ie'I'ii4. N. a ..n.... .. a� ^'•'^' �G71�{51 M1LI7SY.'4+M Ji�7W+�!.i:..a" 1 „, 4 z TREE PROTECTION DETAIL CONIFEROUS TREE PLANiIµG n�^° Page 30 Item 8. F216] D. Open Space Exhibit(dated: 12/16/20) CITY OF MERIDIAN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS COMMON OPEN SPACE I 1��clam MmAo-wwa n=m1wmm zl" rCJ 'Alm OpAem 1"w QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE As G4!r mm&f TM�IMDL44 Esmumm PF.-M.Oft tW oaver*cup±�-� cameQ."Mi IlLw ffj*Aw I hm 14.7m LANDSCAPE LEGEND WkRTZ GFLEK W. F ma-otvw rr LL I I IJ 4 I Ll Lo APOLJ�14-W 53 1 S 121 E.'2D20 HAFER VIEW NORTH PROJECT#2D121 MERIDIAN, IDAHO OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT X1.0 Page 31 E. Conceptual Building i .. ..... .... Page 32 ate•." � - # . f Item 8. F218] VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance,a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian and the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption. 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. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat,phasing plan, landscape plan and conceptual building elevations. b. A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is required to be constructed along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 in a public use easement in accord with UDC 11-3H-4C.4. c. Noise abatement is required to be provided within the street buffer along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. d. A final plat shall be recorded that includes Lot 1,Block 7 prior to any development occurring on the property. 2. Development of the subject preliminary plat shall be consistent with the phasing plan included in Section VII.B. 3. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Include a note prohibiting direct lot access via S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 and E. Quartz Creek St. b. Block 3 exceeds the maximum block face standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3F; the plat shall be revised to comply with these standards unless otherwise approved by City Council.A waiver is requested from Council to exceed the maximum block face allowed of 1,200 feet to allow the block face as proposed. 4. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised as follows: a. Include calculations in the Landscape Requirements table that demonstrate compliance with the standards for pathway(11-3B-12C)and parkway(11-3B-7C) landscaping; include required vs. provided number of trees. b. Include 6-foot tall wrought iron fencing on common lots that abut the McBirney Lateral to prevent access to the waterway to ensure public safety. c. Include a detail of the berm and wall required for noise abatement along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. d. Include mitigation information for any existing trees that are removed from the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5. Contact the City Arborist, Matt Perkins,prior to removing any trees from the site to determine mitigation requirements. 5. A 14-foot wide public use easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division for the multi- use pathway along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 prior to submittal of the Phase 1 final plat for City Engineer signature. If the pathway is located within the right-of-way, a public use easement is not required. Page 33 Item 8. F219] 6. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-4 for the R-2 zoning district and 11-2A-5 for the R-4 zoning district.. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided for all residential units in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 8. The rear and/or sides of structures on lots that abut S.Meridian Rd. and E. Quartz Creek St. shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. 9. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B unless otherwise waived by City Council. The Applicant requests a waiver from City Council to allow the McBirney Lateral to remain open and not be piped. 10. The pond is required to have recirculated water and shall be maintained such that it doesn't become a mosquito breeding ground as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3B.7. IX. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 The angle of sanitary sewer pipe going into and out of manholes needs to be minimum of 90-degrees. 1.2 All sanitary sewer manholes require a 14-foot wide access path that meets City requirements. 1.3 Sanitary sewer manholes should not be located in curb and gutter. 1.4 Add an 8-inch water mainline in Crystal Creek Way, and stub to the north for future connection. 1.5 The water mainline needs to be 12-inch diameter in Prevail Way,portion of Terrace Ridge Dr,portion of Terrace Ridge Circle and south out to E Shafer View Rd. 1.6 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6 of the City's Design Standards. A future installation agreement and funds are required for the required streetlights on S. Meridian Road pursuant to Section 6-4 B. of the Meridian Design Standards. 1.7 The geotechnical investigative report for this development,prepared by Materials Testing &Inspection, dated 02/10/2020, does not indicate a specific concern with regard to groundwater. Applicant shall be responsible for the adherence to the recommendation presented in this report. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 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. Page 34 Item 8. F220] 2.2 Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 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. 2.4 Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff, the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B- 14A. 2.5 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all incomplete fencing,landscaping, amenities,pressurized irrigation,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.6 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post with the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water 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 applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Surety Agreement with the City of Meridian.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. 2.7 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, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years.This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing 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. 2.8 In the event that an applicant and/or owner cannot complete non-life, non-safety and non- health improvements, prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat and/or prior to occupancy, a surety agreement may be approved as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3C. 2.9 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. 2.10 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. 2.11 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.12 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.13 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-I 4B. 2.14 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. 2.15 The 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. Page 35 Item 8. F221] 2.16 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.17 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.18 Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer's expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor's work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 2.19 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 signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.20 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.21 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 Water Department at(208)888-5242 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. 2.22 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment procedures and inspections. 2.23 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year- round source of water (MCC 9-1-28.C.1). 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 development plan approval. 2.24 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall Page 36 Item 8. F222] 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. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.ory/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219456&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.orb/WebLink/DocView.asp x?id=220250&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancio!.or-/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=222017&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.orgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=220261&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iu G. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.orgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=220014&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.orgj ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=220034&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky I. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridianci(y.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=220564&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT ANALYSIS https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=221041&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty K. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219526&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty L. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219424&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC M. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.org WWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=221719&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty Page 37 Item 8. F223] 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; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-2 and subsequent development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment will allow for the development of single family detached homes which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available within the City consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts. 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. 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 zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Stafffinds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density and transportation. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Stafffinds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. Page 38 Item 8. ■ 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 VIII for more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 39 Applicant Presentation SHAFER VIEW TERRACE Meridian, Idaho SUBDIVISION Site along Meridian Road84 -2.8 miles south of I◦Hazel RoadAmity Road and Lake Midway between ◦E. Quartz Creek Drive◦Location Proposed light grayCity property shown ◦Annexation Zoning Map zoning4 -2 and R-Proposed R◦ Proposed open space (18.55%).5.26 acres of common ◦s.f.23,600 to s.f.◦family -50 single◦Site Plan Neighborhood north. neighborhoods to the -the 1The lot layout provides ◦Transition Schools mies3.9 –School Mountain View High ◦2.8 miles–Victory Middle School ◦1.2 miles-Elementary School Mary McPherson ◦ Emergency serve the subdivisionsewer) are available to Public utilities (water and ◦for both Departmentsminute response time -5–3◦4 miles to Police Station◦3.5 miles to Fire Station #6 ◦Services Planned structure & seating area A park with a shade ◦sport Court-A Multi◦A Children’s Play Area◦along Meridian Roaduse pathway -A multi◦AmenitiesLandscaping and MERIDIAN ROAD BERM & FENCE Housing to 23,600 s.f.Lot sizes from 8,600 s.f. ◦Single family homes◦Style Waivers and additional cross streets property prevents -◦Control per Boise Project Board of No access or landscaping -of canall.f.Over 2100 -for safetyInstall open vision fence -◦Creek Streettwo accesses to Quartz -Street access waiver◦Exceptions