The URL can be used to link to this page

2021-03-04 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, March 04, 2021 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Lisa Holland Commissioner Nick Grove Commissioner Andrew Seal Commissioner Steven Yearsley Commissioner Maria Lorcher ABSENT Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Bill Cassinelli ADOPTION OF AGENDA - Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] - Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the February 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) by Lost Rapids Development, LLC, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Rd., North of W. Lost Rapids Dr. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of a residential use and zoning district on 1.61 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. - Approved 3. Public Hearing for Kiddie Academy (H-2021-0003) by neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located at 3335 E. Victory Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 8,436 square-foot, single-story daycare facility on approximately 1 acre of land on Lot 3 of The Shops at Victory plat in the C-C zoning district. - Approved 4. Public Hearing Continued from February 18, 2021 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. - Recommended Approval to City Council, Hearing Scheduled for April 6, 2021 5. Public Hearing for Movado Mixed Use (H-2020-0123) by FlexSpace, LLC, Located on the South Side of E. Overland Rd. Between S. Eagle Road and S. Cloverdale Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units (56 units on 4225 E. Overland and 10 units on Parcel S1121121011) on 6.8 acres of land in the C-G zoning district B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements (Inst. #2017-12608 & #2018-012456) to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses on the remaining 6.8 acres of the Movado development. - Recommended Denial to City Council, Hearing Scheduled for April 6, 2021 ADJOURNMENT - 9:36 p.m. Item 1. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting March 4, 2021. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of March 4, 2021, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Andrew Seal. Members Present: Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Nick Grove, Commissioner Maria Lorcher and Commissioner Steven Yearsley. Members Absent: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel and Commissioner Bill Cassinelli. Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Lisa Holland X Maria Lorcher X Andrew Seal X Nick Grove _X Steven Yearsley Bill Cassinelli Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman Seal: Good evening and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for March 4th, 2021. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. 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 this 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 comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have process questions during the meeting please e-mail the city clerk at 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. You can access that at meridiancity.org/live. Madam Clerk, we will begin with roll call. Weatherly: Commissioner Yearsley, I believe you are on mute. I will come back. Commissioner Yearsley is present, but he is currently on mute. Absent are Commissioners Cassinelli and McCarvel. Seal: Do we want to give Commissioner Yearsley a minute to chime in? We are going to wait just a minute so we can get Commissioner Yearsley audible. Weatherly: Commissioner Yearsley, are you present? Commissioner Yearsley, can you hear us? Commissioner Yearsley, we cannot hear you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 6 Page 2 of 62 Holland: Mr. Chair, one suggestion for Commissioner Yearsley. Sometimes when I have had trouble with my audio -- if you go down to where it says mute in the bottom left corner and click the up arrow you can switch to phone audio, if that's not working for you, and, then, we will give you a call in number instead. Seal: Thank you. Weatherly: Andrea, just want to do a quick legal check. Without Commissioner Yearsley we do have four Commissioners still, which is technically half plus one. Are we okay to proceed with quorum? Pogue: Yes. That's a quorum. We don't -- he's here; right? We just can't hear him or see him? We don't know if he can hear or see us. Weatherly: Correct. Yearsley: So, who is the vice-chair? Pogue: There we go. Was that him? Weatherly: Yes. Pogue: Okay. I think we can get started, because we do have a quorum. Seal: Okay. Weatherly: And we have now established Commissioner Yearsley is present. Thank you. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Seal: Very good. Okay. First item on the agenda is adoption of the agenda. Could I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Holland: Mr. Chair, so moved. Grove: Second. Seal: It has been moved and seconded to adopt -- it has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 7 Page 3 of 62 1. Approve Minutes of the February 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Seal: Next item on the agenda -- agenda is the Consent Agenda. We have one item on the Consent Agenda, which is approval of the minutes for the February 18th, 2021, Planning and Zoning meeting. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent -- Consent Agenda as presented? Holland: Mr. Chair, so moved. Grove: Second. Seal: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Seal: Okay. 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 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 -- will be called on only once during the public testimony. The clerk will call the names individually and those who have signed up on our website in advanced testify. You will, then, be unmuted in Zoom or you can come to the microphones in chamber. Please state your name and address for the record. 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 your group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes to speak. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any others who may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on the topic you may come forward in chambers or if on Zoom press raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you are only listening on a phone please press star nine and wait for your name to be called. If you are listening on multiple devices, a computer and a phone, for example, please be sure to mute those extra devices, so we do not experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished, if the Commission does not have questions for you, you will return to your seat in chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak and please -- and please remember we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony has been heard, the applicant will be given 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 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 $ Page 4 of 62 to discuss and hopefully be able to make a final decision or recommendation to City Council as needed. ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) by Lost Rapids Development, LLC, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Rd., North of W. Lost Rapids Dr. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of a residential use and zoning district on 1.61 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Seal: At this time I would like to open the public hearing item for Lost Rapids Drive Through, H-2021-0001. We will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I seem to be having a little bit of trouble sharing my screen. Can you see my presentation? Seal: Yes, we can, Sonya. Allen: You can? Okay. All right. I will go ahead then. I am not seeing it on my end for some reason. So, I'm not sure how to advance my slides. I'm not sure what's going on. Seal: We do see the Lost Rapids -- Allen: Sorry about that. Seal: We see Item No. 2, Lost Rapids Drive Through CUP. So, it is up there. Allen: Are you looking at my hearing outline or are you looking at the PowerPoint presentation? Seal: It is the PowerPoint presentation. Allen: Okay. Dodson: Sonya, I can run it if you would like, if that's easier for you. Allen: I would like that. Thanks, Joe. I'm not real sure what's going on, but that would be great. All right. This is a conditional use permit for Lost Rapids Drive Through. This site consists of 1.61 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and is located on the west side of North Ten Mile Road north of West Lost Rapids Drive. Yes. Dodson: You have to quit sharing your screen first. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 191 Page 5 of 62 Allen: Okay. Should I go ahead, Joe? Dodson: There you go. Allen: Okay. If you would do me a favor to advance the slides I would sure appreciate it. Seal: Joe, I'm not seeing the presentation. That's interesting. Dodson: Correct. That's correct. Allen: Yeah. I'm not either for some reason. All righty. Everybody see it now? Seal: Yes. Allen: Okay. Alrighty. So, again, this site consists of 1.61 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and is located on the west side of North Ten Mile Road north of West Lost Rapids Drive. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north and south is vacant undeveloped land, zoned C-G. To the west is a drive aisle and Costco and future multi-family residential, zoned C-G and R-40. And to the east is Ten Mile Road and across Ten Mile are single family residential properties zoned R-8. This property was annexed back in 2018 as part of the Lost Rapids project. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is commercial. A conditional use permit is requested for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of a residential zoning district on 1.61 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The residential zoning district that constitutes the conditional use requirement is located to the southwest of this site where Lost Rapids Apartments are approved and in the development process. There are also residential uses and zoning to the east, as mentioned, across Ten Mile, but because the uses are separated by an arterial street, a conditional use permit is not required for that reason. There are specific use standards in the UDC that apply to drive-through establishments. Staff has reviewed these standards and finds the following: At approximately 259 feet in length the stacking lane for the drive-through has sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways and drive aisles by patrons. The stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking. The stacking -- the stacking lane isn't within ten feet of any residential district or residence. An escape lane is provided, because the stack-- stacking lane is greater than one hundred feet in length and the drive-through window is visible from Ten Mile Road and an adjacent internal driveway for surveillance purposes. Joe, can you go to the landscape plan, please. Thank you. Access is proposed via a north- south driveway along the west boundary of the site from West Lost Rapids Drive to the south and a driveway via Ten Mile Road exists along the northern boundary of this site. Direct access via Ten Mile Road is prohibited. Parking is proposed in excess of UDC -- UDC standards. A minimum of 23 spaces are required. Seventy-seven are proposed. This lot does have a shared parking agreement with the two lots to the south, which are currently undeveloped. Staff is recommending a pedestrian walkway, a minimum of five feet in width, is provided to the sidewalk in front of the building from the sidewalk proposed along the west boundary of this site, as shown on the landscape plan, and along the north boundary of the site between the sidewalk along Ten Mile Road and the sidewalk along Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 Flo] Page 6 of 62 the west boundary of the site for safe pedestrian access. Next slide, please. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that incorporate a mix of materials consisting of wood siding on the top portion and stone veneer on the lower portion of the building, with glass store fronts and a combination of flat and pitched roof lines. Final design is required to be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Written testimony has been received from Derek Gasser. BFG Development is the applicant. He is requesting to not be required to provide a sidewalk along the west and north boundaries of the site, consistent with the pedestrian circulation plan approved with the development agreement. Next slide, please. So, this -- this is a copy of the pedestrian connections that were approved as part of the pedestrian plan in the development agreement. It does not show a pedestrian sidewalk along the west or north boundaries of this site. That is an added condition of approval that staff recommends as a provision of the requested conditional use permit. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Staff -- staff will stand for any questions. Seal: Thank you. Is there any questions for the Commissioners for staff? Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Their request of waiver on the sidewalk, is there some sort of a site plan design that they are -- they are wanting to waive that for? We can certainly ask the applicant, too. I just wasn't sure if they expressed why they would like to waive the sidewalk. Allen: Yeah. I would defer to the applicant on their request -- Holland: Sounds good. Allen: -- Commissioner Holland. Thank you. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. Seal: Are there any other questions? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Gasser: Good evening. Seal: Please state your name and address for the record and you will have 15 minutes. Gasser: Good evening and thank you. Derek Gasser. 74 East 500 South, Suite 200, Bountiful, Utah. 84010. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Sonya, for your time and your help on this. As Sonya went through that, you know, we -- we have agreed to -- we feel like we have got a great product here that's been consistent with what we originally had looked at in 2018 when we came through with our initial zoning. We feel like that's going to add benefit to the community, to the established shopping center, and to the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 Fill Page 7 of 62 patrons who are in the area. With regards to staff comments, we have -- we will -- we were adding additional landscape screening to the landscape plan. Sonya had called out in her staff notes to have additional screening where the drive through goes through. So, we have made those adjustments. We have submitted those to Sonya and we will include those with the CZC. We also agree with the recommendation for a bicycle rack and have a new site plan that shows that bicycle rack on the property, which will be submitted with the CZC as well. With regard to the sidewalk on the west side of the pad and on the north side, we refer-- go back to what the approved pedestrian connectivity map showed when we did the initial zoning April of 2018. 1 don't know if -- Joe, if you can pull that up. One back. So, this is what we came through in April of 2018, which shows along all of the perimeters the pedestrian walkway and, then, there is a connection to Costco in those two areas and, then, we also have that pedestrian walkway that goes around along the east side of the drive aisle coming in off of Lost Rapids. Joe, can you go one forward. So, in addition to that what we are proposing is on Ten Mile, the only public road that this fronts, that we would have a pedestrian walkway from Ten Mile, the public road, into the site. In addition to that, we --we have no cross-parking with Costco. So, in our agreement with Costco as we went through, for reasons we don't want Costco patrons parking in our pad sites and vice-versa, Costco didn't want pad users parking in their site, so we don't have -- we are hoping to not have people park in Costco and, then, walk over to the site. The intent is that that would all be separate. We feel when we look at this on the screen on the left we feel like this provides a safe mode of pedestrian access to the site. The safest way by not having to cross any drive aisles -- excuse me -- by staying along the perimeter on Lost Rapids going up Ten Mile and, then, coming in. I'm trying to think. think that's -- maybe it would be best just to ask for any questions and, then, I can comment -- comment on any questions. Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Commissioners, are there any questions for the applicant? All right. Hearing, then, none, at this time we will take public testimony. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we do not. Seal: Okay. If anybody in the audience would like to testify you can raise your hand and come on up or anybody on Zoom please raise your hand and we will try and recognize you and bring you over so you can speak. Don't see anybody raising their hand. Nobody in chambers is raising their hand. So, if the applicant would like to come back up if you have anything further to say. Commissioners, if you have any other questions you would like to ask. Gasser: Yes, Commissioner. You know, one last item that we would comment on as we went through this we were basing this off of that approved connection -- pathway connection from 2018 and as we made our site as we went through the preliminary application process and working with staff, we did not anticipate or provide space for a sidewalk along the north side. We are fairly constrained. Currently we have a five foot landscape buffer and we don't have the ability to shift the building to the south to provide that sidewalk there. I guess that's, you know, the only other thing we would add in that. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F12 Page 8 of 62 We -- we don't feel like it's needed. When we look at who is coming into the building we really feel like people are driving to the location and we feel like if they are coming off of the public roads we have great access coming straight off of Ten Mile right into the site. Any other questions? Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland. Holland: In the landscaping buffer that you have proposed on the west and north boundary in lieu of the sidewalk, are there any breaks in the landscaping? If someone was to be walking let's say from the Costco parking lot over through to your site or would they have to access pretty much through that drive aisle walking it? Gasser: Commissioner Seal and Commissioner, I believe, you know, we have room to do breaks in there. I'm looking at the -- the plan that we have now and I would have to look and see what's been called out on the bushes that are going in there to meet the requirement, but I can't imagine there wouldn't be a way for us to create natural breaks within that landscape barrier. Holland: I'm sure we will -- we will deliberate on that. And, Mr. Chair, if I can follow up. I'm sure we will deliberate about the sidewalk, but I would say in my opinion if we didn't have a sidewalk I would at least want to see some designated crossing points across those landscape buffers, so that way pedestrians could still access the site without having to drag through, you know, crushed -- crushed rock or bark or whatever kind of landscaping material is there. I know a lot of people will just jump over it anyway, but it's better to prevent that when we can and have easy connectivity for pedestrians, because they will walk over from Costco if they get their groceries there and, then, they decide to come over for a sandwich or whatever it is after they are done shopping. Seal: Thank you, Commissioner Holland. And I do have a question. Joe, can you back up one slide. I just -- in looking at this I understand where this is a pedestrian connection path here, but I don't think in any way, shape or form this shows that there are no sidewalks anywhere else. So, hopefully, that was not the inference that was -- was going on here. I mean, otherwise, the subdivision to the left would have no sidewalks. Gasser: When you -- Commissioner Seal, when you say no sidewalks -- so, we have the sidewalk going along -- and I apologize. When we brought this in -- so, this does not show any of the interior site work for the apartment project. There are sidewalks within that community. As far as sidewalks between the uses, there is the sidewalk on the north end that comes all the way around and, then, that east side as well as of the apartments. And did I misunderstand that or is that -- Seal: No. I just -- I'm just hoping that the -- that it's understood that, you know, what's shown in red for pedestrian connections is not the only sidewalks that are supposed to be there and abound. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F13] Page 9 of 62 Gasser: And we anticipate, Commissioner Seal, as we go forward on -- on each of the pads that each of those pads will have a connection from the public roadway into the pad as well. Seal: Understood. Okay. Thank you. Okay. If there is no additional questions can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Lost Rapids Drive Through, H-2021-0001. Holland: So moved. Grove: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Lost Rapids Drive, H-2021-0001. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Okay. Who wants to start us out? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead. Grove: I guess I don't have super strong opinions on this in terms of the -- the sidewalks. I understand both sides of why the staff would want it, but also how the applicant has described the -- the noncross-access agreement with Costco, essentially, where they aren't wanting a bunch of pedestrian crossing. So, I would be inclined to agree with the applicant as long as we had something in there about what Commissioner Holland was alluding to with a natural break on that west side for the center sidewalk. Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland, go ahead. Holland: You know, when possible I like seeing sidewalks, too. I can see why staff made that recommendation. Where they are a little bit site constrained with their layout I don't have a big challenge with the way that their-- their lot is laid out with the way that building is going to interface and the drive through. I think that that's fine. I would say at a minimum they need to have some sort of break in the landscaping on the west and the north boundaries and it could just be something where they have a couple of those paver stones for people to walk on to get through whatever it is. I don't think they necessarily have to be ADA compliant or anything like that if we did that. But I would be interested to hear what the other Commissioners' thoughts are on whether or not we allow them to waive that sidewalk. Seal: Commissioner Yearsley or Commissioner Lorcher? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F14 Page 10 of 62 Yearsley: Mr. Chairman, I -- I agree with both Commissioner Grove and Commissioner Holland. I -- yeah. I agree with both of them on the removal of the sidewalk, as long as we have access. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: I don't have a problem with there not being a sidewalk. It's going to be mostly parking lot where there will be plenty of space for people to walk safely. Seal: Okay. Thank you. My only comment on this is I -- the sidewalks to me, if we allow that to happen here, then, we are going to be missing it along the entire stretch, so -- and I do go to this Costco and I know that people do walk up from Lost Rapids on there and I have seen them walking in the road, not on the sidewalk already. So, that's -- that's my only concern with this, is that the interpretation is going to be that, you know, since there is already a walking path diagram out there that nobody has to supply sidewalks in here for this. So, my question would probably be to staff on that as far as what do we have in place to ensure that when sidewalk is more appropriate that we can enforce something to put that in. Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, the UDC only requires sidewalks adjacent to public streets. The driveway along the west side and along the north side of the property are not public streets. There will be a lot of pedestrian traffic I anticipate from Lost Rapids Drive to the south. Lost Rapids Apartments is kitty-corner southwest of this site that's currently in the application process. There is a sidewalk that is required along the east boundary of the apartment complex, which is the west side of the north-south drive aisle. But there is nothing on the east side. None of those lots are developed yet. This is the first lot that's coming in. There is a pedestrian connection from Lost Rapids along the east side of the multi-family development and, then, it goes up to the Costco site. But nothing to the east. Seal: And, Sonya, there is no other pedestrian crossways on Ten Mile from Lost Rapids to -- up to Chinden; correct? Allen: I'm sorry, I'm not understanding your question. There is a -- there is a sidewalk along the west side of Ten Mile to Chinden. Seal: Right. But there is no like a -- pedestrian crosswalks or anything. I know there is one through there somewhere, but I think it's south of Lost -- of Lost Rapids. Just trying to make sure that we are not going to short side somebody that's coming across Ten Mile on a bike or, you know, walking or something like that from one of the subdivisions to the -- to the east. Allen: Yeah. The pedestrian circulation plan is as shown. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F15] Page 11 of 62 Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anymore discussion or would somebody like to take a stab at a motion here? Holland: Mr. Chair, I'm still struggling a little bit with the sidewalk, because the way that it's set up the sidewalk that's on the west boundary coming up, it will end right where this lot begins and so you will have a lot of people taking that -- walking crossing over that drive aisle to get into this on pedestrian or bikes and so I do worry a little bit about the safety of that in the long run. Sonya, will there be a sidewalk or anything that divides this specific pad site from the pad sites to the south of it? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Holland, no, there will not be. Holland: Sonya, do they have room on their site plan that they could put one on the south side? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Holland, not really. They -- they made a modification to the site plan to shift the trash enclosure. You can see it at the southeast corner of the site, basically just a little bit off the property line, enable to -- in order to enable the trash service to pull in and service the dumpster and not have conflicts with the drive through lane. So, we have scooched that as far as we could to the south. Holland: And I'm worried, too, that if we require them to do sidewalk they don't have enough room to do that right now without getting rid of completely all of the landscaping. Allen: Yeah. I -- I'm not real sure why the applicant doesn't want to do it on the west side. They originally showed that on the landscape plan. Joe, if you will scroll up a couple slides. It appeared to have enough room. You can see it there. But -- but the one along the north boundary only has five feet for landscaping. So, adding a -- you would either need to remove the landscaping and put in a pathway or a walkway. It is a code requirement next to vehicular driving surfaces that they have a perimeter buffer, that -- that could be waived through alternative compliance, but, really, the -- it would just require the site to shift or remove a parking stall or so and the -- part of the patio area if it was -- if a walkway was put in along the north. Holland: So, a follow-up question. Could we require a pathway on the western boundary and, then, just ask for breaks in landscaping on the northern boundary? Would that be a fair compromise? Allen: You can. I'm not sure you want to promote pedestrians walking through the drive aisle to access the site that way though. Holland: Sure. Allen: You know, there is a pedestrian connection near the southeast corner from the sidewalk along Ten Mile that would come in to this building, but other than that there is Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F16 Page 12 of 62 not one that's going to be put in until further to the north for the pedestrian circulation plan for the site from Ten Mile. Holland: Would it make staff feel better if we recommended at least a minimum of doing a sidewalk just on the western boundary and, then, left the northern boundary as a landscape berm or buffer? Allen: I think anything helps. You know, it's -- it's a safety issue is the basis for staff's recommendation, but it's -- it's under your purview with the conditional use permit. Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland, go ahead. Holland: I will throw out a motion and see if it sticks. Seal: Thank you. Holland: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 4th, 2021, with the following modifications: That they would be required to construct the sidewalk on the western boundary, but that they would be allowed to maintain having the landscape buffer instead of sidewalk on the northern boundary. Seal: Is there a second? Yearsley: I will second. Seal: Okay. It is moved and seconded to approve item number H-2021-0001 with the modifications. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for Kiddie Academy (H-2021-0003) by neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located at 3335 E. Victory Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 8,436 square- foot, single-story daycare facility on approximately 1 acre of land on Lot 3 of The Shops at Victory plat in the C-C zoning district. Seal: Okay. Next item. I would like to open the public hearing for item number H-2021- 0003 for Kiddie Academy. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Give me a couple of seconds here to get the presentation up. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F17 Page 13 of 62 Seal: Thank, Joe. Dodson: Thank you. Before I start I do want to note on the outline when I was writing it I forgot to change the possible motions. There is a CUP request, so if you make a motion to approve or deny, not recommend, since you are the acting body. Just to let Commission know. Seal: Understood. Thank you for the clarification. Dodson: First item by me before you tonight is the Kiddie Academy conditional use permit. The site is located at 3335 East Victory Road, which is near the southeast corner of Victory and Eagle Roads. It is approximately one acre of land and currently zoned C-C as noted in the central picture here. To the north is C-C and R-15 zoning with future multi-family that is approved there and undeveloped commercial land. To the east is R- 4 zoning and existing single family residential. To the south is a large RUT parcel that is a county residential parcel and to the west is C-C zoning and Rite-Aid existing commercial property. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a new 7,926 square foot single story daycare facility. The applicant has noted a maximum child capacity of 158 children and no more than 21 staff members on the property at peak hours. Staff has recommended a condition of approval to limit the number of children served to this number of 158. The applicant did not apply for a design review with this application, but have provided staff with conceptual elevations as seen. These elevation show adequate facade modulation, a number of field materials, and appropriate scale and finish materials for the proposed use. Prior to obtaining building permits the applicant will be required to obtain certificate of zoning compliance and administrative design review approval. Access into the site is proposed via driveway connections from Victory and Eagle as seen here, here, and two driveway accesses on Eagle, which are existing. In addition to the access points, the parking abutting Victory is also existing. Following initial review by staff the applicant revised the site plan to provide a better circulation plan and better circulation pattern. The revised site plan shows 30 total parking stalls, of which 18 are new, and additional parking on the north side of the building to the west -- and to the west. Between these western spaces the applicant is constructing a drop-off and pick-up area here. This drive aisle is shown as a one way drive aisle for parents that goes from the south to the north adjacent to the west facing center. The applicant has proposed a one way drive aisle in this direction with the anticipation of a majority of the future children coming from subdivisions to the south, because it has an easier access from those existing subdivisions and the adjacent, as noted in the other picture, the existing driveway connections along Eagle. Staff finds that the site plan provides adequate safety and circulation to meet the required specific use standards. In addition to the future building itself, the applicant is also proposing three outdoor play areas noted on the plan with the three colors. These play areas are shown to be fenced for safety and the fencing is supposed to be six foot nonscalable, which is being proposed and meets code. The subject property has an existing sidewalk connection to the subdivision directly to the east and this sidewalk connection will also be maintained with this new use. Maintaining this pedestrian connection makes this a truly walkable commercial use and offers adjacent Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F18 Page 14 of 62 parents and extremely safe access to the daycare. Staff does recommend approval of the requested CUP application and I will stand for any questions. Seal: Thank you. Are there any questions that the Commissioners have for staff? Okay. Seeing none, would the applicant like to come forward. Good evening. Please state your name and address for the record. Bidwell: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. And thank you, Joe. I'm Amanda Bidwell with neUdesign -- Seal: Get just a little bit closer to the microphone. Bidwell: Amanda Bidwell with neUdesign Architecture. 725 East 2nd Street in Meridian, Idaho. So, I'm here on behalf of Kiddie Academy today. As you can see on the screen -- yeah -- we have proposed some preliminary elevations that kind of tie in with the existing Rite-Aid that's over there, using some stucco and complimentary awnings. Go to the next slide. The buildings located next to the Rite-Aid off of Eagle and Victory on an existing pad site -- Joe has already talked about the access points from Eagle and Victory and we have adequate access to our building. If you can go to the next slide. So, as mentioned it's on about an acre parcel. The building is roughly 7,950 square feet and we are proposing three separate play areas to add variety for different ages of children on the site and, then, we are also offering 30 parking stalls on the site and there is a pedestrian connection currently shown on the site plan to the east. Staff has recommended we also provide one out to Victory Road, continuing that same sidewalk to the north, and we agree with that, so we will provide that in the CZC application. Next slide, please. One of the most important parts of the circulation on our site is that drop- off and pick-up lane. Vijay, the owner, has experienced in his other daycare facilities that he has an average of a maximum of four parents dropping off at any one time. So, with that drive aisle and the provided parking stalls we have plenty of space to prevent queuing out onto either Victory or Eagle with our site circulation. Next slide. So, the landscaping is shown all around the building. It does meet code there. And another feature that we have is a fence surrounding the building. That's for -- you will see on the next slide there are doors exiting from each classroom and that they exit out inside the fence to direct children around to the back and just promote safety that way. The floor plan has a variety of classrooms. We are requesting a maximum of 158 children. There will be an average of 15 employees on staff with 21 during peak hours in the middle of the day and we are proposing operating hours between 6:30 a.m. and 6:00 o'clock p.m. Next slide. So, just a closer look at our elevations. Like I said, stucco and awnings to tie into the Rite-Aid with some of our own materials as well to give it a unique look. So, with that I will stand for any questions. Seal: Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant? Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Was that Commissioner Holland? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 Fig] Page 15 of 62 Holland: I know that we are just reviewing the -- the site plan here and the conditional use request. I'm just curious about the staff-to-kids ratio. I believe the state has a requirement of six to one. Is the applicant planning to meet that state requirement? Bidwell: Yes, we are. Lorcher: Mr. Chairman? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: You mentioned that Kiddie Academy has other locations. Are they here in the Treasure Valley? Bidwell: No. They are in Portland and Vancouver. Lorcher: And how long have they been established? Bidwell: I don't know that information off the top my head, but I know my client has had his facilities well established for the last several years. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Dodson: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Joe. Dodson: I did forget to mention that the -- in addition to the parking provided on site, the applicant and this property does have cross-access and cross-parking agreements with the Rite-Aid and the future third commercial lot south of Rite-Aid as well. So, they will have opportunities to park beyond the 30 and beyond the site. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anymore questions from the Commissioners? Okay. At this time we will take public testimony. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up? Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we didn't have anybody signed up. There was one person online that raised their hand, but subsequently lowered their hand. There they are again. Vijay, one moment. Llavarasan: Hi. Thank you. I just wanted to answer that one question that came up. We have been operating for the past four years and during our fifth year of operation -- Seal: Sorry, sir. Can you go ahead and state your name and address for the record. Llavarasan: Sure. This is Vijay Llavarasan and my address is 2219 Northwest Sierra Way, Camas, Washington. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F20 Page 16 of 62 Seal: Okay. Thank you. Go ahead. Llavarasan: Yeah. My wife and I we have been operating a childcare center for the past four years and that's -- just wanted to make sure -- I think a question came up for how long we have been operating. So, just wanted to share that information, that it's for the past four years and, then, Kiddie Academy itself is a nationwide system and they have been for 35 years -- operating for 35 years. Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant? Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: So, to the gentleman that was on the telephone, so this is more of a franchise concept, as opposed to grassroots starting new? Llavarasan: Yes, ma'am, it is a franchise, but each location is independently owned and operated. So, it would be me and my wife that will be fully owning and operating it. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Okay. Do we have anybody else that would like to come up? Anybody online? No? Would the applicant like to come up and close? Bidwell: Thank you. We think this is a really great opportunity for the surrounding neighborhoods to have a daycare facility located very close to them, so we are excited about this project and I'm here for any additional questions. Seal: Are there any further questions from the Commission? All right. Hearing none, at this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for item number H-2021-0003, Kiddie Academy. Grove: So moved. Yearsley: Second. Seal: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on item number H-2021-0003. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: All right, Commissioners. Who wants to lead off? Grove: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F21 Page 17 of 62 Seal: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I don't see any issues that jump out at me. Definitely need additional daycare, childcare facilities in the area and this would be a good addition. Seal: All right. Thank you. Anybody else? Shy bunch this evening. Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I don't see any concerns, so since nobody else was jumping up, I will just make a motion and see if it goes somewhere. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0003 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 4th, 2021, with no modifications. Grove: Second. Seal: It has been moved and seconded to approve item number H-2021-0003 for Kiddie Academy with no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing Continued from February 18, 2021 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. Seal: All right. Are we ready for the next one? Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing for item number H-2020-0113, which has been continued from February 18th, for Foxcroft Subdivision. We will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Now we are on to the fun ones. As noted, this is for the Foxcroft Subdivision. This project consists of multiple properties totaling 35.7 acres of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F22 Page 18 of 62 land, which is -- the majority of it is currently zoned RUT, but 12.7 acres of it are already zoned R-15 from an older approval. The site is located directly west of Ten Mile Road and is on both sides of the proposed Pine Avenue extension and it is east of the Ten Mile Creek, which abuts the property entirely on its west boundary. This project is surrounds -- Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner. Grove: Joe, did you want to switch slides before -- Seal: Yeah. We are not seeing the slides on Zoom. Sorry. I could see them in chambers. Dodson: Interesting. That is odd. Seal: There it is. Thank you. Dodson: Thanks, Commissioner Grove. So, as noted, this is 37 -- 35 and a half acres, 12 of which are already zoned R-15, located west of Ten Mile and on both sides of the proposed Pine extension and all the Ten Mile Creek borders it on the west boundary entirely. In addition, it surrounds the Mile High Pines Subdivision, which is the -- I guess the white area shown here -- has not yet done their rezone, but they have garnered approval from City Council. To the north is R-4 and R-8 zoning with detached single family, as well as to civic uses, Chaparral Elementary School and Fuller Park. To the east is Ten Mile Road as noted and across that is C-C. That's not right. No. C-C and RUT zoning as I noted, which will be the future Mile High Pines, which is R-15 zoning, as well as some C-G zoning. To the south is the railroad property and south of that is C-G zoning with some self storage. To the west is the Ten Mile Creek and further west of that is R-8 zoning and existing detached single family homes. As noted, the R-15 piece already -- is obviously zoned. It received approval and annexation in 2005. However, the development agreement and use and plat were never signed and never -- I guess fully issued. Therefore, the property did receive zoning however, but no development agreement, no concept plan, and no plat are currently approved or relevant on that site. It does have two future land use designations on the site, medium density residential and mixed use community. The formal requests for this are threefold. An annexation and zoning of 23 acres of land, with a request for R-8 zoning designation. A preliminary plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lots on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning and the existing R-15 zoning and a conditional use permit for multi-family development consisting of a total of 216 units on the 12.74 acre site in the existing R-8 -- R-15 zoning district. The total unit count between both areas of the project is 291 units, 75 single family, and 216 apartment units. The proposed uses as noted are multi-family and single family residential. The single family is proposed as mostly detached single family, but there are also some attached single family duplexes and alley loaded single family. I will let the applicant speak to a little bit more about where those are located. The project is proposed with a gross density of 8.17 dwelling units per acre, which according Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F23] Page 19 of 62 to the provisions within the Comprehensive Plan is rounded down to eight dwelling units per acre, meeting the Comprehensive Plan designation of medium density residential, which allows three to eight dwelling units per acre. Again, this does fall at the maximum allowed within the medium density residential. The majority of this project contains medium density -- or the medium density residential designation, but there is an area in the southwest portion of the site that contains the mixed use community designation. Mile High Pines, as noted, already approved earlier this year just to the south and east of this project and contains -- they are entirely mixed use community and they also have the mixed use community elements within their site plan by having commercial along Ten Mile and some additional multi-family that are half single family -- or, sorry, half single story and half two story. In addition, the existing commercial to the east should be taken into account when discussing the overall area of mixed use community. I lost my place. Sorry. Future land use designations are not parcel specific and, therefore, when a project contains more than one designation applicants have the opportunity to float designations and a proposed project that may fit with both or only one of the designations. In this case the applicant has not chosen to include any commercial uses with the subject property and, instead, has proposed a project that is entirely residential corresponding with the medium density residential designation. Despite intentionally not proposing a project consistent with the MUC designation, the applicant understands that some integration of uses and incorporating adequate transition between users is still important. Thus the applicant and that of the project to the east, Mile High Pines, have worked together to allow cross-access between the projects located on the south side of Pine Avenue, so both vehicles and pedestrians can have easier access to the commercial approved on the west side of Ten Mile and that would be right here. As well as an emergency access here that more than likely I would walk through, because it's only going to be bollards, so that's another pedestrian connection. Much of -- much of staff's analysis within the staff report regarding the apartments was based on the transition between these units and the existing two story single family homes to the north. Following publication of the staff report, the applicant provided additional information and exhibit to show that the third floor of the three story buildings will only be approximately four feet higher than the second story of the adjacent single family homes. My other discussion and analysis regarding the density and the MUC designation were somewhat misplaced and should not remain in the staff report. Following review of this information staff is recommending that some of the conditions of approval and DA provisions be changed or removed in line with the provided staff memo submitted on Monday, March 1st. With the latest information provided to staff, staff finds the proposed project complies with the Comprehensive Plan. To dive into this exhibit a little bit more quickly, you can see the elevations of the existing and the proposed. There is a presumed approximate four feet of fill and/or foundation for the apartments and, then, you have the first, second, third floor, which as you can see not that much higher than the adjacent second story, which I was concerned with initially. It will also be more than 80 feet away from the abutting adjacent homes to the north. So, line of sight is going to be very difficult to see into their yards, which is preferred and I can understand that perspective, which is why I initially had them being reduced to two stories. As noted in my memo, Commission does have an -- well, with the CUP process Commission does have the authority to limit any part of the multi-family as well. The applicant submitted conceptual renderings for the proposed apartments and some photo Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F24 Page 20 of 62 examples of the proposed single family homes. The submitted multi-family elevations show traditional walk-up garden style apartment buildings. The buildings appear to have at least three field materials of stucco, lap siding, and stone and they incorporate adequate roof plain variation. The -- the buildings do appear to share an identical color palette, which is not--which does not meet the ASM, the Architectural Standards Manual. Multi-family and attached single family homes require design review prior to obtaining building permit approval. So, at that point staff will ensure compliance with the ASM. Here is some examples of the attached duplexes, the alley loaded, and, then, the standard home lots, the detached single family. Let's go back to this one. As shown on the master street map, the applicant is proposing to construct and extend Pine Avenue as a 36 foot wide collector street from Ten Mile Road to the Ten Mile Creek and construct a vehicle bridge over the creek. Mile High Pines is also required to construct their portion of the south side of the Pine extension to their western boundary. So, to be more clear, this applicant will construct half the roadway and this section on the full roadway segment of Pine here and construct the pedestrian -- or the vehicle bridge across the creek. All projects are required to construct this public road extension with the first phase of development to help with community infrastructure and overall site circulation -- or really road circulation through this area of the city. The multi-family portion of the site is proposed with two driveway access points to Pine, both being full access points. One here and one here. ACHD has approved these access points despite the eastern driveway not meeting their offset requirements for a full access and needing a 25 percent modification to their policy to be approved. Moving this access further west would significantly change how the triangle shaped R-15 piece could be developed, which aided in ACHD's determination to allow this access as proposed. In addition, it lines up with the access within Mile High Pines to the south. All of the streets within the single family portion of the site are proposed as public local streets at width of 33 feet wide, which allow on-street parking where no driveways exist. There is also a short segment of roadway in the south area of the site located here and labeled as alley on the site. It's not actually an alley, it is considered a minor local urban street. I might be mixing the words up. Minor urban local. To service five of the alley loaded homes along Pine. This road is a reduced street section of 24 feet and does not require sidewalks. There are plenty of other sidewalks adjacent to this area that serve these units, as well as the open space surrounding it. The revised preliminary plat shows 75 single family building lots and nine multi-family building lots, with 41 common lots, totaling 125. Of the 75 single family lots, three are proposed to contain homes that are to remain and be part of the new subdivision, two in the south and one in the north along Pine, which you can guess are three larger parcels here. All proposed building lots appear to meet UDC dimensional standards on the revised plat. The applicant proposes to construct the project in three phases, starting with the south -- southwest you could say and, then, move to the northwest and, then, finish with the multi-family project in phase three. The cul-de-sac in the south of the site is approximately 720 feet in length and it connects to an emergency access within the Mile High Pines project as noted. This length of cul-de-sac and/or dead- end street, according to code, is beyond the 500 feet allowed and require City Council approval to be longer than 500 feet. The single family homes are required to show compliance with the parking standards at the time of individual lot development, but as noted the local streets are wide enough to accommodate on-street parking. Based on Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F25] Page 21 of 62 the number of bedrooms the minimum parking required for the multi-family is 411 spaces. The revised site plan shows 440 exceeding code requirements by 29 spaces and amounting to slightly over two spaces per unit, which is my understanding an industry standard for multi-family development. Staff believes the revised site plan with additional parking spaces provides adequate parking without producing a waste of land area. A minimum of ten percent qualified open space is required to meet UDC standards in the 11-3G-3 section. In addition, the applicant is required to meet the multi-family development common and private open space standards for the specific use standards for multi-family development. Combine the required -- required amount of minimum qualifying open space that should be provided is 4.81 acres. The applicant's revised open space exhibit shows a total of 7.3 acres of qualifying open space. The applicant is proposing 5.7 of this area to meet the minimum ten percent and it actually amounts to approximately 16 percent. The qualified open space consists of the required street buffers, a little area along Ten Mile, but mostly the ones adjacent to Pine, the Ten Mile Creek area, which is allowed to remain natural per code, and other open space areas throughout the site as noted in the darker green on the shown exhibit. This area exceeds the minimum UDC requirement. The remaining 1.6 acres, approximately, meets the common open space standards for the multi-family development and consists of the clubhouse, pool, with some -- that doesn't make sense. Consists of a clubhouse and pool and other open space areas that meet the required dimensional standards of 20 by 20. The single family portion of the site requires one amenity per code and the proposed multi-use pathway meets this requirement. The multi-family development proposes over one hundred units, so the decision making body shall require additional amenities above the minimum four noted within code. The applicant is proposing five qualifying amenities. A clubhouse, a swimming pool, fitness facilities, pedestrian and bicycle paths and open space that is at least 5,000 square feet in size. Because of the number of units staff is not in full support of the proposed five amenities can adequately serve the apartment units. The applicant and I have discussed additional possibilities and I assume that they will be discussing that with Commission tonight as well. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required and proposed along the property's western, northern and southern boundaries per the master pathways plan. The submitted plans show compliance with this master plan. Staff originally required that all pathways be constructed with the first phase of development, but with the Pine Avenue extension and the detached sidewalks along its -- its entire length, plus the first phase segment of pathway along the south and west boundaries, staff now finds that the pathway should be constructed along with each phase. So, to say that another way, their phasing plan already shows them starting here and, then, moving in a clockwise pattern. They will already be constructing the southern multi-use pathway and the western one, which will connect to the detached sidewalks along Pine, as well as an existing multi-use pathway segment here and, then, be able to get to Fuller Park and the school. With this they can get out to Ten Mile and the existing sidewalk there. So, there is not necessarily a need with phase one to have the multi-use pathway segment here or even this segment here, because there will be adequate ability to get to the adjacent open space and school with phase one and the Pine Street extension. The submitted memo outlines this revision as well. Overall this applicant is proposing to construct approximately 4,500 linear feet, which is .85 miles of pathway with this development and does not include the detached sidewalks along Pine Avenue. This Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F26 Page 22 of 62 is an abnormally high number for one project to construct, so staff is very appreciative of the proposed pathways that are required, as well as those that are not required, but being proposed. The new pathways constructed in this development would offer multiple avenues for residents in the vicinity to safely get to Fuller Park and Chaparral Elementary. Staff is in full support of the proposed pathway plan for the subject development. This application did receive some public testimony prior to the hearing. As of this afternoon there were six pieces of testimony discussing disapproval of the project. The main issues outlined in those were regarding the extension of Pine and not wanting it to be extended. The density of the proposed project -- project and the safety of pedestrians going to and from Fuller Park and crossing the new extension of Pine or the existing area of Pine in the western subdivisions. Staff does recommend approval of the subject applications with the conditions contained in the staff report, as well as the DA provisions, but with the revisions noted in my memo dated Monday, March 1 st, and after that I will stand for any questions. Seal: Thanks, Joe. Are there any questions the Commissioners have for staff? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead. Grove: Joe, question for you, because I know it's going to be brought up and you have already mentioned it in the written testimony from the public, but can you speak to the connection for Pine and how that is aligned within the master street map? Dodson: Absolutely, Commissioner Grove, Members of the Commission. On the master street map -- I don't know if it's -- I can't see it in these. Pine is shown as a future collector roadway, meaning it's supposed to help local streets of subdivisions get to the arterials, which would be Black Cat to the west and Ten Mile to the east. This was always going to be extended, it's always been part of the plan. Collector roadways are usually constructed by applicants and not ACHD, which is why this applicant, as well as the Mile High Pines applicant are required to construct it with these applications. They will be also constructing the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek, which is, obviously, one of the more expensive pieces -- pieces of the project for this required access. It will -- Pine will be extended from the west all the way to Ten Mile between the two projects. Should line up on -- on the section line between the south and the north and should align with the existing stub to the west. Does that answer your question, Commissioner Grove? Grove: It does. And I guess a follow-up question, because it was brought up in the testimony, but could you speak to the -- I guess signalized lights on the east, but how -- I think a lot of the concerns were how it affects the nonsignalized intersection to the west, but since that's not part of this project how -- how this is addressed or not able to be addressed with this project. Dodson: Great question, Commissioner Grove. So, yes, as noted the Black Cat and Pine intersection is an off-site thing and generally speaking very rarely does the city Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F27 Page 23 of 62 require off-site improvements. This would be one of those cases where we are not going to require that. It's not just the city, but also ACHD noting that there are not yet enough vehicle trips at that intersection to trigger a signal. That doesn't mean that Black Cat is not going to be widened, which it is slated to be widened in the coming years, thankfully, from Franklin all the way to Cherry. Whether that includes a signal I am not aware of that. I am --from what I have seen I have not known of a signal to be placed at Pine and Black Cat. However, with this extension the majority of people in the subdivisions that are to the west, if they need to get to the freeway likely they are going west to Black Cat and, then, down to Franklin, back out to Ten Mile. Now those trips would be heading directly east and not utilizing the Pine and Black Cat intersection, which should help alleviate some of that traffic. I can't speak to the traffic associated with the school site south of where all of this is at, but that's also why ACHD is planning to widen Black Cat hopefully sooner than later. My understanding is within the next five year work plan that they are including the widening of that road. But this extension should alleviate some of the issue, because people would logically go east to get to Ten Mile, rather than heading west and going around the subdivisions. Grove: Thank you. Dodson: You're welcome. Seal: Any other questions for our staff? Lorcher: Commissioner? Seal: Go ahead. Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: So, the -- ACHD signed off on it, even though all these homes are going in with the extended traffic that's going to be on Ten Mile? Dodson: Commissioner Lorcher, that is correct. Yes. ACHD very much wants this extension to help alleviate some of the traffic issues further to the west off of Black Cat. Lorcher: Off of Black Cat. Okay. Thank you. Dodson: Yes, ma'am. Seal: Any other questions? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Go ahead and state your -- state your name and address for the record, please. You have 15 minutes. Suggs: My name is Jane Suggs with Gem State Planning and I'm here representing Foxcroft Subdivision. Is it okay if I do this without my mask? Seal: I think you are okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F28 Page 24 of 62 Suggs: It fogs my glasses up. And, then, Joe, do I just press down if I want to get -- or do I tell you? Okay. And I will move over here and -- Seal: Just make sure you are speaking into the microphone, so we can -- Suggs: Got it. Seal: -- get everything recorded correctly. Thank you. Suggs: Again, Jane Suggs, Gem State Planning. 9839 Cablecar Street. Representing Foxcroft Subdivision. Happy Idaho Day. Today's the day. We really appreciate working with the staff. We updated our plans. I want to very much thank Joe Dodson, who was very helpful. Bill Parsons. Bruce Freckleton. Joe B -- because I can't always pronounce his name. The fire marshal. And others. We are very happy to say that we agree with all the conditions of approval and those are the ones that are outlined in the March 1st memo. Right now Foxcroft is an in-fill community that is approvable as conditioned. So, everybody can breathe. We talked about this -- Joe talked about this a little bit. I'm going to tell you a little bit more about Foxcroft, but while I do keep in mind that with the approval of the Foxcroft as we proposed, this developer, single handedly, will construct the vehicular bridge over Ten Mile Creek and we are going to finally provide that much needed connection. That is something that ACHD has been wanting to happen. We are also going to make the connection on Pine Avenue and this is unusual that we are doing this in the first phase. Typically you would do this type of construction throughout and have it completed after you have completed your project, because there is a lot of cost involved in that. This is a little bit of a different thing to do this all during phase one, but I believe Mile High Pines also had a condition to do their work on Pine -- Pine Avenue at phase one. So, we are going to work together and make sure that when we get started you will have a connection, not only the bridge, but -- well, of course, it will take a while to build it, but curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Pine Avenue, which I think will be a wonderful connection for the folks who live in that area. I also want to put this project a little bit in -- since it's an in-fill project and put it in context. You can -- you can see -- don't know if you -- if this works. Oh, there we can. Oh. So, here we are. This is the R- 15. This is the Mile High Pines project and this is our project north and south of Pine. There has been a lot of activity south of this project at the Ten Mile interchange as you know and you will recall that the Mile High Pines development did include over 28,000 square feet of commercial property. That's how they finally got approved. The Foxcroft community can certainly support that commercial with rooftops and the pedestrian access that you will see. We have a lot of that. We believe that Foxcroft is a really great transition and it's between this commercial area that you see in this part of Meridian. Again, a little squirrely here, but -- there we go. All the commercial here and this is a nice transition with single family and multi-family housing. It also is adjacent, as Joe mentioned, to Fuller Park and Chaparral Elementary School. Schools and parks. That's where you want to put houses. That's where you want to put people. A lot of them. Foxcroft apartments are already annexed, as Joe mentioned, and zoned for high density residential. The apartments will offer a 3,000 square foot clubhouse with community room, fitness rooms, and a kitchenette, plus a swimming pool and I'm going to show you a couple of renderings Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F29 Page 25 of 62 that for-- some of these were in your package. It shows you some of the apartments and the pool and other views of the apartments. Now, we have -- we are asking for a conditional use permit for that. We did not do design review on this particular application. So, we will be coming back for design review, as Joe mentioned. We will be looking at our palette of colors. So, this plan shows the different types of lots. This is a color-coded map showing the different housing types. The blue lots --the grayish blue lots -- and they are the larger lots -- are the existing homes that are out on this Pine Avenue, which, really, is just a dirt road right now, it's not even a dedicated right of way at all. They will remain as part of the plat. The peach colored lots, the ones south of Pine, are single family detached homes. They will face Pine and they will have garages in the back and this makes for a really nice streetscape as you are going down Pine and that's one of those homes. Again, there are some yellow lots on the north side. These are the two unit townhomes that Joe had mentioned. I will show you what they look like. And these are two story townhomes. There you go. And the tan lots are the ones that are just standard single family detached homes and there is an example of one of those. Even though we are within walking distance of Fuller Park -- and Fuller Park -- if you haven't been out there it's incredible. Twenty-three acres, picnic shelters, restrooms, playgrounds, three baseball fields, volleyball court and there is even a pond to go fishing. We also want to have a couple of intimate spaces within the subdivision of Foxcroft for our residents to recreate and gather. So, here is something showing those amenities. You will see the gazebo, Pergola Park. You see a circle around the clubhouse and fitness facilities. In the apartment complex, the playground area, and, of course, we have community pathways around the entire project. Here is a picture of our -- I call it Pergola Park, because that's a cute pergola. Opportunity for people to gather in that location in the north part of the project. And, then, we have the playground that's in the south part. Again, they are --the playground equipment and larger over in Fuller Park, but sometimes you got little ones and you just want to be able to walk across the street and this provides that opportunity with some seating around the park, so the kids can play. Again, a little more intimate setting for just the residents of that neighborhood. We do have extensive connectivity within the project. We are constructing, as Joe mentioned, several regional pathways. The ones on the north boundary, the pathway along Ten Mile Creek, and along the south boundary, which is next to the railroad track. This is in addition to all those yellow marked up sidewalks that you see throughout the project and, unfortunately, we didn't show, because every one of those apartment buildings also has sidewalks in front of it, too. So, there is lots of ways for residents to move around in a pedestrian way. Now, the way I look at it with the connections that we have here, you can get your steps in. We also appreciate the fact that we do have a path -- there is a pathway that runs along the Mile High Pines, along their west border, that we can access and get into the commercial areas pretty easily to support them in a pedestrian way, which is very nice. And, of course, we also have the easy access up to the school and to the park. I can stand for questions. But first let me say how much I appreciate, again, the staff working with us on these conditions. We are in agreement with all the conditions and we very respectfully request your recommendation of approval to City Council for the annexation and rezone, the preliminary plat, and the CUP for the apartments as conditioned in the March 1 st memo and I will stand for some questions. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F30 Page 26 of 62 Seal: Thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Grove. Grove: Yes. I have a question on the southern parcels. Are -- and how the access to those lots will work. Are those indicated as driveways? I was a little -- I couldn't really tell what those were intended as. Suggs: Yeah. Thanks. Those are on the very bottom of the property. I mean against the railroad track. Those are shared common lots that are -- well, excuse me. They are single family homes that have a common driveway, so because we have such an odd shaped lot there, there wasn't any way to really get a street to wrap around, so they will access to the cul-de-sac and you will see several of those were there -- the lots on the very southern border will take their access to a common driveway and you will see that as they are shared there. So, those are single family, they are not multiple family lots, and they are pretty good size lots. They just have to share that common driveway and they are -- they are popular all over town when you have these odd shapes and that's a little bit about why we have to design this way and why we design for residential is because of the odd shape of this property. Does that help? Is that what you are talking about, Commissioner? Grove: It is. Thank you. And if I can get one other question. Is there future plans for the three existing residential lots to be developed in the future or are those intended to stay as is in perpetuity? Suggs: Well, it's hard to say. They are going to be part of the plat. They will be zoned R-8. We were asked by the staff to take a look at how the two on the south side, since they are larger, how they might redevelop and we wanted to make sure that there would be a possibility of doing that by making sure that we didn't Iandlock them and -- do you have that, Joe? Do you want me to see if I can -- I think I have it down here on -- way down. There it is. We did develop a little sketch. Now, this is not going to be property that we own after the property is finished, so it will belong to the people who actually sold the property to the developer and so this was just showing that those two homes could redevelop their property in the future, meet the zoning code. It is a condition of approval that we expect that they will build something similar to this. Again, we won't be in control of those, but we do think that really what the city wants to know is that we weren't setting up these guys to have an issue if they chose to redevelop. Again, we can't even tell these -- this drawing saves the homes and we don't know if they won't even do that. So, right now they are planning on living there. So, that -- and we have planned to provide the access that they need to get to the public streets. So, they will be larger lots -- and I think we used to do this back when we were doing other developments that had -- next to RUT, those five acre lots, sometimes we had to come up with a -- kind of a conceptual plan for doing future development. We really couldn't hold it to -- hold that -- someone to that, but we did want to know that the city wasn't letting someone approve something that Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F31 Page 27 of 62 would keep that property from developing. So, I think that's really what this is all about, just to give a concept of that. Grove: Thank you. Seal: Any other questions for the applicant? I have one myself, actually. On the -- and you can just leave this up. Where the driveway is for that kind of southwest -- the bigger property, is there a reason that -- that Lot 11 isn't slid to the left to kind of close that off, instead of having a driveway in between two houses there? Suggs: Because that's where the owner wanted to be able to access. So, that's Mr. Johnson, who has that southern larger lot, and he needed to have that access at a certain location, so that he could access his garage and get through his property and so we ended up having a driveway there and we added a lot there, because you can add a lot there and somebody can live there. It would force 12 -- we would love to develop that as well, but it wasn't large enough and didn't have the right configuration to put a house on it. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Let's go ahead and open it up for public testimony. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up? I'm guessing we do. Weatherly: We had two people sign up, none of which indicated a wish to testify however. Seal: Okay. If anybody in chambers would like to speak on this you can raise your hand, have you come up. Oh, we have got somebody online. Weatherly: Jane, one moment, please. Jane, you should have the ability to unmute yourself and speak when you are ready to provide your name and address. Byam: Okay. Are you looking for Jane Byam? Weatherly: Yes. That's correct. Byam: I got disconnected there for a minute, so -- I am -- my name is Jane Byam and I live at 6050 El Gato Lane, Meridian, Idaho. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Go ahead. Byam: Should I use my camera or not? I'm -- I have got that capability or you just want to hear me. Seal: That's up to you. We don't have to -- we don't have to see you, we can just hear you if that's okay. Byam: So, I would like to start my remarks with asking a question about the future land use map and current zoning on that northeast parcel where the apartments are going. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F32 Page 28 of 62 Several residents in -- in our neighborhood were involved in paying attention to participating in surveys and things when it came to the future land use map and protection of our neighborhood and the rural atmosphere that we have here and on the future land use map that parcel is designated as medium density, just like the other two parcels that are currently RUT within the county designation. I recognize that in 2005 that north -- northeast parcel was annexed into the city and zoned at the time R-15, but could you, please, explain to me why on the future land use map the city designated the use as being medium density, not high density? Seal: Joe -- Joe, do you want to take a stab at that? Dodson: I can, but usually we let the public testimony go first. Seal: Okay. I was going to say if you -- Dodson: If she has another comment we can hear that and, then, if nobody else wants to answer, then, I will gladly answer that. Byam: Okay. So, should I continue with my -- with my other remarks -- Seal: Yes. Byam: -- and, then, we will come back to that? Okay. Thank you. So, being on El Gato, which is, essentially, directly across from Pine, we -- we have seen increased traffic on our quiet agricultural street over the past few years. When the school was being proposed, the Aviator Charter School was being proposed to the city, originally that property there was going to be high density, but when the school was approved that was changed to mixed -- mixed employment, I believe, and I know that a parcel of that property is now going back to high density. At the time a traffic study was done by Charter -- or by Compass Charter and said that at peak times there were only 200 cars coming down Black Cat. Well, anybody who lives on our street can tell you that there is certainly more than 200 cars going down Black Cat and so traffic is a concern at the time that school lets out and starts in the morning. People can't get out onto Black Cat because of traffic stopping to turn into the school. Having Pine extended, which we -- you know, everyone knew that it was eventual. Having Pine extended is going to cause even more problems there. I recognize the gentleman earlier said that most people will head west to Ten Mile if they are wanting to go to the freeway, but if anybody that's going to live in these homes or in the apartments have children that are going to be going to the charter school, they are going to be heading west and it's going to make that intersection there at Pine and Black Cat or El Gato and Black Cat that much more difficult and so that is a major concern for me and -- and I believe other people have expressed that in writing to the city. Another concern for me is that in the Comprehensive Plan it does make allowance for keeping areas of rural homes and agricultural properties and as time goes on and just really in just the last few years we are seeing more and more farmland becoming high density or medium density subdivisions. So, I am concerned about the fact that the applicant is requesting -- or going with the maximum density for the medium density area, rather than Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F33] Page 29 of 62 giving -- giving those homes a little bit larger lots and leading to, you know, less congestion when it comes to people. We are seeing that rural atmosphere that used to exist here in Meridian disappearing very quickly. The Comprehensive Plan states housing introduction -- introduction communities for housing should be available for all income groups, with a diverse mix, including rural, modular, townhomes, apartments workforce housing, large lot subdivisions and single family homes. We are -- we are seeing a lot of cookie cutter homes crammed into small spaces with, you know, like ten feet or less in between homes and so the rural atmosphere is disappearing very quickly. Residential land uses, the purpose of this designation is to provide for a variety of housing. There is several things in the Comprehensive Plan that emphasize the need for maintaining some of that rural atmosphere and -- Seal: Ma'am, you will need to wrap up -- Byam: Okay. Seal: -- your three minutes is up. Byam: Okay. So, I -- I just wanted to -- wanted to express my concern for increased traffic coming to the intersection of Pine and Black Cat, which when it's -- when traffic is backed up on Black Cat there is the potential of people come -- going down El Gato, instead of waiting to get to the traffic light at Franklin and that causes a hazard on our street and so that -- that's a major concern for us is that increased traffic with Pine going through, especially if it's not going to be a controlled intersection. So, those --that--those are all the comments I have. Thank you. Seal: Thank you, ma'am. Okay. Do we have anybody else that wishes to testify? Joe, do you want to go ahead and explain the zoning slash -- because it does get a little bit confusing in there. Dodson: Yes, sir. Like I said last time, we are going to have to start an education series for Meridian on zoning versus comp plan. I will let the applicant speak to some of the other comments that she made, but as long -- for the Comprehensive Plan conversation, the -- as I noted in my presentation, the future land use designations are not parcel specific, unless -- unless the parcel only has one designation on it. However, when we work with projects we take in -- you know, and you are subdividing, now all these parcel lines are moving and you got to take into account all of the different designations on there to some degree, as I did in my analysis. But, then, again, you don't have to adhere to both or all three or four they are having. For example, there is properties off Overland that have half of the property is -- shows commercial and half of the property is residential. You are not going to develop the site as both more than likely, you will choose one. In this case there was mixed use community and also medium density residential and they are opting to go with the medium density residential designation and that can fit with the Comprehensive Plan. With the density that's the bigger conversation. They are meeting the density for the overall project, which is how we look at gross density. The medium density residential is, again, three to eight dwelling units per acre. The density is not tied Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F34 Page 30 of 62 to the zoning. R-15 zoning does not equal 15 dwelling units per acre as it used to. It did prior to the new comp plan 2018, formally approved late last year. It used to mean so many dwelling units per acre maximum. That is not true anymore. It is only -- density is always tied to the future land use now, which is in this case three to eight dwelling units per acre. The R-15 zoning -- or any zoning that they request, it has more to do with the dimensional standards and the allowed uses within that zone. They could have requested R-40, which does not mean 40 units per acre, it just means that there is no minimum lot size. That's a higher height limit. That's pretty much the only differences. R-15 has a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet and a maximum height I believe of 45 or 50 feet, roughly. So, there is -- that's the biggest difference between the comp plan and the zoning. But they are meeting their density per the Comprehensive Plan and if you have more questions regarding that you can review my staff report and I did more in-depth analysis than that. I hope that answered your question, ma'am. Seal Thank you, Joe. Appreciate that. Would the applicant -- excuse me. Would the applicant like to come forward and close. Suggs: Thank you again -- thank you, again, Commissioners and Mr. Seal. I do want to respond to a couple of the questions from Ms. Byam on El Gato Lane. If you know where that is, that's on the other side of Black Cat. So, that's about a half mile away. So, just kind of to show where it is. But I understand her concern, because that seemed to be the concern of many of the people who live -- who live on Pine Avenue on the west side of Ten Mile Creek and how they have kind of enjoyed living in -- on a dead end and so their traffic really is just the people that live there and the construction guys, who are building all those nice houses that are right there now, so -- so, yes, there -- I think there is some concern about the Black Cat and Pine, but we are imagining what it could be and I do think that one of the things that the neighbors likely will do when the projects are all completed and the traffic is all done -- and that could be several years from now -- is keep in touch with ACHD, because as a person who is in my neighborhood association in the east end of Boise, we spent a lot of time with ACHD asking them to do studies on some of our streets, especially our cut-through streets. So, we want to make sure that, you know, everyone has a safe access. That is not something this particular project can do. We are pretty far removed from that, but I do recommend that Ms. Byam -- Byam and her neighbors kind of keep in touch with ACHD, because there may be a need for additional studies when the project is completed. I mean we are just imagining it's going to be a lot worse, so -- and I do agree with Joe, there are some people now that are going to want to go east and this is the way to do that, instead of going out to Black Cat down Franklin and coming back -- to Black Cat and down to Franklin. I do -- I think I need to address the fact that I do think the Comprehensive Plan -- and this is one of the things that makes the Comprehensive Plan interesting for some of us. It does say things about maintaining rural lots, but we are in a very highly urbanized area right here. We are very -- we are on Ten Mile Road, which has access to the freeway, which is being improved -- of course it's already been improved with five lanes, curb, gutter, sidewalk, which is nice and bike lanes and we are close to the school and we are close to a park and, again, these are the places where you want to put in the lots that serve the most people. So, we want to get people closer to these recreation opportunities and to the schools, so that kids can walk and I -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F35] Page 31 of 62 1 have spent some time talking to a property manager that manages apartments of this size and even larger and she talked a little bit about the fact that in this location where you are near a school, she said I will almost guarantee you you are going to have a lot of young children with single parents, because they have to go to work and they want to be a place where the kids can get to school without having to be bused or -- so, you will see a lot of that. She was really very specific about it, so -- but, again, just to -- just to share that I believe we are in a very -- more urban area of Meridian and we think that reserving -- setting aside land for rural, we do have the natural Ten Mile Creek, we have the pathways, we are leaving that as natural as possible and, again, we are close to a park that's open space. And I think we have a really good mix of homes. I think Jane mentioned that she thought that there should be a mix of homes and I think we do, we have the attached single family, we have the alley loaded or rear loaded single family and we have the standard single family and we have multi-family apartments and that's all within like our 35 acres. So, we think that that's a really nice mix of opportunities for people who want to live near Fuller Park, near Ten Mile, you have got lots of choices. So, I will stand for other questions if there is some more questions from the Commissioners. Again, I very respectfully request -- because we have done such good work with the staff, we are -- we are ready to get approved, move on to City Council as conditioned and -- and there are quite a few conditions and there are things we have to do, so -- but we appreciate the staff understanding how this will flow and we are doing all the extra things we can to make sure that we provide a really good opportunity for the city. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other -- Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland, go ahead. Holland: Hi, Jane. I have a one follow-up question. So, I'm sorry I missed -- if I missed this, but Lots 29 through 31 that are up on that northern section of it there where Aleppo comes in, there is Lot No. 28 to the north of it, is that the drive aisle access for those three lots? Suggs: You are talking about along the north -- Holland: I was having a hard time understanding just from looking -- Suggs: You are here; right? You are talking these? Can you see my screen? Holland: Sorry. Let me flip back -- Suggs: Oh, to the south. Holland: So, down farther--farther to the south. Right above where Pine comes through. Suggs: Where Pine -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F36 Page 32 of 62 Holland: So, in that northern quadrant right above where Pine is. Suggs: Okay. Holland: As you are coming into that loop there is kind of that yellow -- Suggs: Oh, yeah. Holland: -- triangular -- Suggs: Oh. Yeah. Yeah. Holland: Those three lots there. Suggs: Yes. That's a driveway to service the -- yeah. That's a driveway. They will actually be front-loaded, those three larger lot -- those three -- and that's a funny shaped lot for a driveway. But yes. I'm going to see if I can point to that. So, yes, there will be a fence along Pine at this location. These will not the -- face the street. This will be a fence and they will be front loaded and this is the driveway right here. That makes -- is that -- I think that's what you're talking about. Right? Holland: Yeah. It was just trying to figure out how those lots had access, if it was off of -- I was hoping it wasn't off of Pine, I was hoping it was off that drive aisle there. Suggs: Yes. It is off the drive aisle. And similarly on the north side of that same little loop you see a couple of houses with a -- with a driveway that they are accessed off of, too, and just below that is a pathway that carries you through. So, there is an opportunity. And, then, not shown very well, but along the boundary between the apartments and the single family in that north part, there is a pathway that runs all the way from the regional pathway on the north all the way down to Pine Street. So, there is a nice connectivity there, too. But you -- you have -- you have caught onto the fact that, yes, we have a couple -- so we have these lots that have common driveways and they are not accessing Pine, because that's a collector and we have the front-on housing, but they are not going to have their accesses, so that's the -- south of Pine. Those vehicles will be accessed from the south and they will not be connect -- driveway connections to Pine. We are trying to eliminate that -- that -- those turning movements. Holland: So, one more follow-up question just to confirm. So, that drive aisle -- that lot that connects over to the east there, is that a drive aisle that -- it's going to be open between the apartments and that residential for people to go between? Suggs: The --the lot will be and that particular-- the one on the south that you mentioned -- oh. Okay. Keep on going. Are you doing that, Joe? Okay. I'm trying to get to a plat. Seal: Yeah. I was going to say, you had it there. That -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F37 Page 33 of 62 Suggs: Okay. Well, that -- you can see -- yes. On the three that -- that kind of backup to Pine, there will be a fence. So, people will not be walking there, because it's a driveway. On the north where there are two lots that -- that -- there are two lots that service -- you see there is one that's landscaped, that will be an opening in the fence, so people can cross over. Right there. And the -- and the gray area is going to be the drive aisle. So, we are trying to make sure that people aren't walking down somebody's driveway. So, there will be a fence along the pathway that runs between the multi-family and the single family. Is that -- I think that's what you are asking; right, Lisa? Holland: Yeah. That makes sense. And thanks, Jane. I appreciate you clarifying. Seal: Okay. Are there any other questions? I have one question that I would like to pose. So, the attached single family that's there, I think they are the ally-loaded ones, they do have a driveway or is that not correct? Do all of them have a driveway? Suggs: They each have a driveway and they are not attached, they are actually detached single families. Seal: Okay. Oh. Okay. Suggs: So, yeah. And they each have a driveway, two car garage in the back, and they will have a little bit of a -- about a 20 foot apron that you have to -- have to park there, too. So, yeah, those are detached. Because you are getting the driveway in the back, those houses are all 36 foot wide lots, I think, and they are 26 foot wide houses. So, they are just wide enough to put a garage in the back, but since you don't have the garage up front they are really cute, because -- I mean I would prefer one if I could find one that I could afford. Seal: Okay. Suggs: I like the alley load look. I mean I guess it's -- it just makes for a really nice streetscape. You can't tell on this -- and we didn't blow it up enough for you to see, but we went in and had to change this -- we had to actually drop a lot. We had 13 and now we have 12, 1 think, and we -- because a couple of lots we had made less than 4,000 square feet, which is your requirement for that R-8 zone, and so we dropped a lot there, which was -- you know, we don't like to do that, but we did, and so now when you come out your front door towards Pine you will go a little -- kind of -- you will have connecting sidewalks -- two at a time and they will come out. So, you won't have a sidewalk every 20 feet, you will have one sidewalk every like 40 feet, so -- and it's really cute. I think we have done that in a couple of other projects, too, and we really like the look of the fact that, you know, you can get to the homes, but you don't have all those little sidewalks coming along Pine. Our landscape architect is really good at doing the connections. Seal: All right. Thank you. Suggs: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F38 Page 34 of 62 Seal: Do we have any other questions? Commissioner Grove. Grove: Mr. Chair, I have a question real quick. Seal: Go ahead. Grove: Jane, for the amenities for the apartment section, is there a play structure of any kind or is it primarily the clubhouse, fitness center, pool, for the amenities there? Suggs: That is what we are planning right now is the clubhouse with amenities in the clubhouse and the pool and, of course, all the walking areas. We do have some green spaces. A couple of those are being used as drainage facilities, but we do have some just open areas. So, if you want to throw a frisbee you can. So, I guess in some of the areas like -- oh, gosh, I can't seem to find this very well. There we go. There is some just open areas here and here. This is a drainage area, but you could still probably have -- have some recreation in it if you just wanted to run around a little bit. Again, we were -- we were not putting in a lot of recreation, because we are so close to Fuller Park. I mean you can actually just -- I mean it's a stone's throw. You can walk down the pathway and get to Fuller Park and you are right there with all of those amenities. So, we had not been -- we have done what we were asked to do for the number of units, as Joe mentioned, that -- we had talked about a few others, but at this point we have not proposed any additional amenities over and above what were required by the code. Grove: Would a tot lot fit in any of those open green spaces in that R-15 section? Suggs: We could probably make something fit. We did talk -- I did talk to Joe a little bit about maybe some of these areas -- what we find are people with dogs and we might need to turn one of these little areas here -- which we think this would be a -- probably a good space for it -- into a dog park. I think that's something Joe said that he's finding that in apartment complexes people have dogs and, of course, we have a pathway -- again, taking -- you can walk your dogs on the path. But we could do that. I have found from talking to the other property management person that I have been dealing with, it -- either that or maybe at one of these locations near this -- a regional pathway along the north side we could put in a bicycle air pump and you can hang tools with it. You have to be kind of careful so they don't walk away, but there is a way that you can do that. I think I have seen those at some places along pathways in Boise. I haven't seen them along the regional pathways. So, we might choose to do that. We think that because we are close enough and with bike lanes to the Ten Mile interchange and all of that, maybe if you are willing and we are willing to put in maybe a bicycle station along the regional pathway along the north that would be adjacent to the -- the apartments we think it would be well used. Does that sound good, Commissioner? Add a bike station? Grove: I'm just kind of going off of the comment that you made earlier in your initial presentation about the tot lot for the alley-loaded project and seeing the difference between the alley-loaded project on the south and, then, the R-15 in terms of how that's described. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F39 Page 35 of 62 Suggs: Okay. I'm not -- I didn't quite follow that. Tell me -- say that again another way. Grove: You said how nice it is for that little playground area for people to walk across and be able to have that without having to go somewhere else and so just curious if that applied to the -- how that applied or did not apply to the R-15 section. Suggs: Possibly. We just think that we have enough amenities there with the swimming pool, the plaza that's around the pool, and the areas that are inside the clubhouse and with all the other open spaces we feel like that's sufficient amenities. Grove: Thank you. Suggs: I'm not -- I'm not offering that up right away. I'm just thinking there are other things that -- instead of another tot lot there that might be more usable, like the bicycle station than a tot lot, since things are closer. And, then, it's -- again, one is on the other side of Pine, which is a collector and one is directly accessible to the -- to the playground at Fuller Park without crossing a street. Seal: Okay. Do we have any other questions? Nobody come off mute. All right. Can get a motion to close the public hearing for item number H-2020-0113, Foxcroft Subdivision. Lorcher: I will motion that. Holland: Second. Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on item number H-2020-0113. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: All right. Who wants to start out? Lorcher: Chairman, I will start out. Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: My primary residence is at Black Cat and Cherry, so I'm very familiar with this and I did have a house on Parkside Creek, which I was on for a park back in the way back days when it was a dirt path and farmland all over the place and the pond was little and it's gotten a lot bigger and it's beautiful. It's wonderful that the City of Meridian has taken over Fuller Park. They have done great things with their amenities and it was only a matter of time before developers come in to be able to take advantage of some of these green spaces that we already have in our community and build houses around them. I empathize with the homeowners on El Gato. I also have a small farm off of McDermott and Ustick and I do use El Gato to get through to Pine and if Pine kept going through I Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F40] Page 36 of 62 would probably do that to avoid Cherry Lane or Franklin. So, those traffic concerns are real and it's going to happen, but it's not necessarily the developer's fault, it's -- as our community grows we all look for different ways to get to where we need to go. It sounds like this particular developer is doing everything that the city is asking them to do. They are following the rules, they are following the code, even though some of our old timers really kind of lament about losing some of our farm space, it is part of -- of what's happening. So, you know, they have addressed the concerns of the city. They are following the rules and it would be a great place to live to be able to access that park. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Holland, you are off mute I see. Holland: I don't know that I was ready to talk either, but -- I mean is it exactly what I would draw on a map if I had this site plan, maybe not. But I don't know that I have any huge opposition to it. I think that-- I appreciate the pathways. I appreciate that they did provide a little bit more green space than required and they have worked closely with staff. I think that the roadway issue with Pine, even though it might seem like you are going to get more traffic on Pine going through, it could actually alleviate some of the issues that we are having at Black Cat and Pine, because people will be able to head towards the east to get Ten Mile to get towards the freeway. I -- I'm very familiar with this area, too, and I know that -- I know that that can be a really busy road, but I think this could potentially help offload some of those traffic challenges. So, I don't know that it will be necessarily used as a speedway to go through, but I think it could potentially help with some of those challenges in the future. That's all I got for now. Seal: Okay. Thanks. Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead. Grove: I would echo what's been said so far, especially with Commissioner Holland, and this might not be the exact layout that I would have gone with if I were, you know, thinking about it, but I don't have any strong objections other than I would like to see some additional amenity, you know, tot lot or something for the R-15 section. I do really like the amount of pathways that are in this project. It is very similar to the -- the project to the southeast of the pathway that it had and I think having all of those pathways between the two developments is going to be a big benefit for this -- this new development that's coming in and I think that -- that Pine needs to open up. It's going to create better access for everybody and it should help alleviate some of the pressure that is, you know, over on Pine and Black Cat and it's also one of those things where we don't get some of the improvements on Black Cat, you know, until 2031, until there is more rooftops that necessitate it to be bumped up sooner and so that's, you know, chicken and egg situation with some of the development for improvements on roads. So, I'm -- I'm mostly in favor of this project. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F41 Page 37 of 62 Seal: Okay. Thank you. And I will just chime in here. I don't have any major reservations about it either. I do -- having the driveway through to two properties there, that -- I see that becoming an issue when things try to redevelop on those lots or even an issue as having that a drive -- drive aisle between the two lots. So, I think it's going to limit that -- what they can there and how they can do things there or pose problems in the future. I do agree that, you know, some kind of tot lot or play structure up in that multi-family is to me going to be a little bit more relevant than -- than where it's at down south. Not that I would like to see that one go way, but an additional one, you know, play structure something like that just to let kids run around. Even, you know, kind of rock structures or something like that. Something for kids to play on and -- would be great to see there. But, yeah, I do like the pathways and all that, the way that they have constructed that, incorporated the creek into it and everything is very nice. So, I think it's going to be nice if it gets approved. Commissioner Yearsley? Yearsley: Yeah. I wanted to -- I -- I think for most parts it's a fairly good layout. I do echo the idea of having an additional amenity for the R-15. You know, I -- in all my years I have been on the Commission I have never heard anyone come in and say I have got too many amenities in my subdivision. Typically everything is underbuilt, overutilized. In our subdivision that we have, the same thing, it's just -- you never have enough and so I think it is warranted for another amenity within the tot lot -- or in the R-15 area. The rest of it looks reasonable and makes more sense and so I would be in favor of that with that -- with that addition. Seal: Okay. Do we have any other commentary or would somebody like to make a go at a motion here? Anybody? Holland: I could probably take a stab. I was trying to let somebody else do it this time though. Grove: I was getting my notes. I can -- I can do it if you would like. Holland: Go for it, Commissioner Grove. I will let you do it. Grove: Okay. Seal: Commissioner Grove. Grove: All right. Let's see. Make sure I got the right number. All right. Oh, no, I don't. Dodson: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Joe. Dodson: Just real quick, Commissioner Grove. On this one, because there was a staff memo following the staff report, just be sure to include any recommendation that it also Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F42 Page 38 of 62 includes those revisions within the memo, dated March 1st. In addition to those in the staff report. Just so we cover all of our bases. Grove: I can't find the right piece of paper, so I'm just going to take a wild stab at this. Yearsley: I can take a stab at it. Grove: You want to do it? Thanks. Yearsley: Yes. Grove: Thanks. Yearsley: So, Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend -- Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, I can't -- we are having trouble hearing you. Yearsley: Sorry. I'm looking on -- talking into one computer and looking at the screen on the other. Seal: Understood. Yearsley: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2020-0113 as presented for the hearing date of March 4th, 2021, with the following modifications: That we add the -- to include the revisions in the staff memo dated March 1 st, 2021, and that in the R-15 area an additional amenity, such as a tot lot, shall be included into that phase. Grove: Second. Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of item number H- 2020-0113, Foxcroft Subdivision, with the aforementioned modifications. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. 5. Public Hearing for Movado Mixed Use (H-2020-0123) by FlexSpace, LLC, Located on the South Side of E. Overland Rd. Between S. Eagle Road and S. Cloverdale Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units (56 units on 4225 E. Overland and 10 units on Parcel S1121121011) on 6.8 acres of land in the C-G zoning district Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F43 Page 39 of 62 B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements (Inst. #2017- 12608 & #2018-012456) to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses on the remaining 6.8 acres of the Movado development. Seal: All right. Commissioners, then, does anybody need a quick break before we move on to our last item or -- speak now. No? Power through? Okay. I will take the silence as power through. Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing for item number H-2020-0123 for Movado Mixed Use and we will begin with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Before I get started I did want to note that the applicant did respond to my staff report yesterday, I believe. Today's Thursday. So, I think it was yesterday. I do agree with their recommended revisions to my staff report. I just want to note that some of the recommendations I made -- how do I put this? I don't have an economics commercial background, so some of them might have been ill informed. So, after meeting with the applicant and, then, getting their specific outline and response, I do agree with what they are requesting within that memo. With that I do think that any motion tonight should include a recommendation to revise some of the staff report analysis in order to accommodate some of that conversation, too. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Dodson: So, as noted next and last project for the night is Movado Mixed Use. The site consists of 6.8 acres of land, currently zoned C-G and is located on two parcels. One -- the western parcel is 4225 East Overland and, then, it has the adjacent parcel to the east as noted here. Parcel on the west. Parcel to the east. It is along the eastern edge of the city limits on the south side of Overland Road east of Eagle and roughly half a mile or so west of Cloverdale. To the north is RUT zoning and county single family residential. To the east is city of Boise, which -- with some undeveloped land, but it is approved for mini storage from my understanding. To the south as R-15 zoning and detached single family and to the west is C-G zoning with approved and currently under construction multi-family. There is an extensive history on the site all the way back to 2016 with the Movado Estates and it was, then, modified and rezoned with the Movado Greens and Silverstone Apartments, which are the apartments to the west and, then, in 2019 a different MDA and modification to the approved conditional use permit for those apartments were applied for, but, then, later withdrawn following the Commission meeting and those comments at that point. There are two existing development agreements from 2017 and 2018 that are relevant. The MDA request before you tonight--or with City Council doesn't include many changes to those provisions as they are still applicable. The Comprehensive Plan designation on the site is mixed use regional as noted in the picture to the left. The applications before you are for a conditional use permit for multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units, 56 on the west parcel and ten on the east near the southeast corner of the site within this C-G zoning district and it is -- includes a development agreement modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses. The DA mod Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F44 Page 40 of 62 is requested for the purpose of including a new development plan for this area of the Movado Greens development, to consist of both commercial and residential, instead of just commercial. The existing DA includes a concept plan for this area from 2017 when the property received DA modification approval to change the number and layout of the apartment units along Overland, now known as the Silverstone Apartments, and is currently under construction. The existing concept plan depicts a number of office, retail and commercial buildings. The applicant believes the existing concept plan for this area of this agreement is not feasible. The applicant states that the separation from Eagle and Overland intersection by the residential is too far and is too far to accommodate the approximate 56,000 square feet of commercial space shown on the existing concept plan. Therefore, the applicant is proposing a new concept plan depicting three commercial pad sites and 66 multi-family dwellings in the form of townhome style dwellings. Those being eight-plexes. Staff supports this change to this area of the Movado Greens development. The commercial area is now proposed at approximately 27,500 square feet across three buildings and is shown along Overland to increase its visibility and viability being a commercial use along a busy arterial. In the western half of the site it is separated from 56 of the multi-family units by a shared drive aisle that is the access to the public street network for both of these proposed uses and it connects to the drive aisle in the Silverstone Apartments to the west. In the eastern half of the site the applicant also shows a commercial building, a larger one, along Overland with the remaining area of the parking lot -- or remaining area of the lot as parking until you get down to the very southeast corner where you have ten more of the multi-family townhome style units. The applicant presented a thorough case for this area of the mixed use regional designation to lack true viability as a premier location for 56,000 square feet of commercial uses due to its location being more than a half mile from the Eagle-Overland intersection and the central hub of the mixed use regional designation. Some commercial should remain on these parcels. Absolutely. But staff agrees with the applicant that the proposed amount with the incorporation of multi-family is adequate to meet the mixed use regional mixed use policies. Access is proposed via driveways that connect to South Movado Way, the existing collector street that bisects the project. The driveway within the northwest section of the project will connect to the driveway stub from Silverstone as noted. This driveway acts as the border, as well as the integration between the commercial and the multi-family development. South of this driveway are the drive aisles for the 60 -- 56 of the multi- family townhomes with their required parking. The southeast portion of this area right here specifically -- sorry, I lost my place. Sorry. It contains a segment of the drive aisle that is over 150 feet in length, which would require a fire turnaround. Because of this staff recommends that segment -- this segment just be reduced by a few parking spaces in order to reduce this area to being less than 150 feet. Overall residential portion of the site proposes 139 parking stalls, which exceed the 132, which would be required, which is two per unit, approximately. The east side of the development proposes an additional commercial building, as well as ten more family multi-family units with driveway access to Movado Way in alignment with the rest of the site, as well as the existing local street here. The submitted site plan shows more than the minimum parking required and drive aisles that meet UDC and fire department requirements for the commercial portion of the site. The proposed dwellings at the very southeast corner of the project are placed with minimal room to spare surrounding the buildings, but do appear to show compliance with Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F45] Page 41 of 62 the dimensional standards. According to ACHD the proposed driveway connections closest to Overland meet their offset policies because they are 220 feet from the intersection. However, they -- the two northern most driveways will not meet offset requirements for full accesses should the Overland or Movado intersection ever be signalized, which it is planned to be eventually. I do not have a date on that, but usually, as noted with the previous application, usually takes rooftops in order to warrant a signal. In this case these accesses would be limited to right-in and right-out and the applicant is aware of this potential for the reduced level of access for the northern most driveways. The proposed site plan appears to show compliance with all UDC requirements in both the commercial and residential, except for the area of the drive aisle as noted. The multi- family development is required to provide common and private open space based on the specific use standards, which is the size of the bedrooms. The applicant's -- or size of the units I should say. The applicant's open space shows only -- incorporates only 56 units on the western parcel and they show approximately 135 square feet of private open space per unit, exceeding the 80 square foot minimum. Prior to the Council meeting the applicant should show the other ten units on the eastern parcel on the -- and with the revised open space exhibit. The common on open space is to be shared between all 66 units and the submitted site plan shows 19,561 square feet of common open space being provided, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 16 and a half thousand. The open space exhibit does not show an area of land on the east parcel, which is approximately 2,000 square feet, and can be seen here, which would also be qualifying. The noted revised exhibit should also show this area. The proposed open space consists of a buffer between the multi-family residential and the existing residential to the south which is here. A MEW between two of the eight-plex units, a plaza along Movado Way that contains the proposed amenities and other small areas of open space that meet the minimum dimensional standards. Despite the proposed open space exceeding the minimum required by code, the only area large enough for a more active open space is the green space south of the plaza, which is approximately 3,000 square feet in area. The additional seating area proposed by the applicant and shown on their revised site plan should provide an additional area for the commercial users to sit and relax. Furthermore, the developer -- the developer of the subject parcels is the same as those for the rest of Movado Estates and Movado Greens directly south of the development. It can be assumed that these residents will have the opportunity to utilize the existing pedestrian network to access the larger open spaces within those developments based on -- well, with that the applicant should -- I hope they can -- clarify whether or not that will be occurring with this development when they present tonight. Based on the 66 proposed units, a minimum of three amenities are required. The applicant has proposed three meeting the minimum code requirements. The applicant has proposed an enclosed bike storage, a plaza, and a coffee kiosk. The applicant submitted conceptual elevations of the eight-plex units and since the staff report publication has submitted conceptual elevations for the units on the east parcel. All the elevations show two story structures of varying roof profiles along the roof lines and mostly lap siding exteriors. Staff will analyze the elevations for further compliance with the architectural standards manual at the time of design review submittal, which is required for multi-family development, as well as certificate of zoning compliance. Furthermore, staff has recommended a condition of approval that the same design elements are incorporated in the -- well, between the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F46 Page 42 of 62 commercial and multi-family development to ensure integration and congruency and design. Future commercial buildings also require design review, which is, again, when staff will be able to analyze those further. The elevation in the bottom right here is the proposed coffee kiosk that's in the shared plaza for the multi-family and, then, the one on the left is more of the four-plex or six-plex style that would be on the east parcel. As of 4:00 p.m. six pieces -- well, 4:30 there was seven pieces of testimony were submitted in disapproval of the project. The main concerns were dealing with the increase of traffic at the Overland and Movado intersection with the approval of additional units and, then, there being no signal proposed and overall issues with the addition of more residential units, instead of commercial, which is tied to the MDA request and the CUP. After that will stand for any questions. Seal: All right. Thanks, Joe. Do we have any questions for staff? Hearing none, would the applicant like to come forward, please. Or is the applicant online? Clark: Hi, everyone. Can you hear me? Hethe Clark. Seal: Yeah. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record and you have got your 15 minutes. Clark: You bet. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise, representing the applicant, and I'm going to get my screen share up here. The applicant being the Conger Group. This is an application that helps get a very successful mixed use project over the finish line. I think that's the way that I would -- I would characterize this and in addition to that I think something else that's very important about this one is that it helps add another kind of housing type in the City of Meridian. So, as you might know, Movado has been a very successful project. It's on about a hundred acres off Overland Road and what we are talking about is this commercial area, this kind of the last piece to develop. It's 6.8 acres and it's in -- like I say, it's been slow to develop so far. This group as a result decided -- decided to revisit those plans and come up with a proposal that honors the larger project and provides an additional housing type and we believe allow this commercial to get underway. So, let's talk a little bit about the proposal. Joe's shown it to you on your screen before. Under this proposal a portion of the area that was previously designated as commercial would be converted to multi-family, but I want to be clear when we say multi-family what it is exactly that's being proposed. So, this is not your typical stack apartments, three plus stories of multi-family. We are -- what we are talking about here is for rent townhomes and we are also talking about a developer that made a commitment early on that they would only be limited to two stories in order to allow it to be very consistent with the properties to the south. So, what I -- what I personally really liked about this is that -- is this townhouse rentals piece of it. It's unique in the market and it's the -- you know, a little personal bit. That's exactly what I lived in during my three years of law school was -- was a townhome rental. This still preserves 27,500 square feet of commercial on Overland Road. So, the commercial will still be there, but we think it's in an amount and in a configuration and with a footprint that this kind of second tier market will actually find attractive. Again, these are not normal apartments. They are townhome -- townhouse rentals with a commitment to two stories. As Joe mentioned they are fully Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F47 Page 43 of 62 parked with carports and guest parking that's accessible. The project -- so, if we kind of think of it as the commercial area and the multi-family area, there are amenities for both that are proposed. We have the small plaza that Joe showed you that's in the commercial area and I will show you another picture of that here in a minute and in the multi-family area there is going to be a barbecue and a picnic area and, then, a coffee bistro cafe and sitting area that I have shown here on the screen and, then, as well as a bicycle barn for residents. Now, that coffee bistro cafe area -- so, this is going to be single ownership. So, this isn't going to be a matter of an HOA being dependent on volunteers to operate the thing or trying to find the third party, this is going to be an amenity that the owner is going to be providing for the residents. So, it will have -- what we expect is that it will have a keycard system and, then, facilities on the inside that will allow people to come get a cup of coffee or come get some quick service and, then, move on with their day. In terms of agency review, focus on ACHD I think in light of some of the comments that we have seen this week from the neighbors. I want to be really clear that with the change that we have proposed from the 56,000 square feet of commercial to 27,566 multi-family units, this reduces the anticipated daily trips by 330 from the original approval. So, with the original approval no light was required at Overland and Movado. ACHD since, in connection with this application, has indicated that no TI -- or traffic impact study is required, again, because the impacts are lower than what was originally approved and studied. And, then, I would just state that we are in agreement with all of the other agency conditions that have been submitted. So, as Joe mentioned, the staff report was issued late last week. We had an opportunity to review it and, then, immediately wanted to chat with staff about it and the reason for that was because we believe that some of the conditions were just not justified by code. We were able to have a very good discussion about the staff report with -- with Joe and with Bill Parsons and, again, as always we appreciated the time that they spent with us. As a result of those discussions, the common ground that we have landed on was that we would, per staff's suggestion, one thing that we would do is to add a raised paved connection between the multi-family area and the commercial area here. That's going to be part of the overall traffic calming. We are going to -- we will have speed bumps on the west side here as well to try to just make sure that people aren't going through that at too high a speed. We also think that the parking on the south side of the commercial will also aid in -- in that traffic calming. And, then, in addition to that what we decided -- and this has been proposed and -- and staff is in agreement with --would be that there would be a plaza area in --that would be added here. We have room to do it. We have about 35 feet of a landscape buffer and so what we would have is a seating area that's surrounded by a buffer of trees, you know, there would be benches there and that would be a nice way of connecting these commercial areas. With that I will start to wrap up. I just want to emphasize a few things. You know, one, you know, the -- the commercial hasn't gotten -- gotten traction today and we think that this reconfiguration is going to help get it underway. We also -- you know, I think something that's really important about this is that Movado has four housing types in it already and this adds a fifth housing type. So, that's important from the perspective of the Comprehensive Plan that looks for a wide variety of housing types and it's pretty unusual that you would get actually five different housing types within one larger development with estate lots, single tenant -- single family detached, single family attached, apartments and now townhomes and, then, also I just want to emphasize that Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F48 Page 44 of 62 with the modifications that we have proposed here traffic production is actually less than the original entitlement. So, less than what is actually approved already for this site and I wanted to put this up last. So, this reflects the letter that Joe mentioned from earlier this week and these are the modifications to the conditions of approval in the staff report that we suggest and that staff is in agreement with. So, the first would be deletion of condition 1-A, Roman I, and that was a condition that required elimination of one of the commercial lots and replacement with a two story commercial structure and, then, we would also request deletion of condition 1-A, Roman II, which required removal of parking on the northern drive aisle and, then, this last one goes to one of the points that was just made kind of in passing by Joe, but I think it helps explain some context. So, just to the east of this site there is self storage that's been approved and so one of the thoughts that we had was -- the staff had indicated a -- kind of a menu of proposed -- or allowed uses for the east commercial building and our suggestion is that we add flex space to that. The flex space use has been a -- I would say a highly successful thing in the -- in the City of Meridian and we think that that -- given that there is -- there is self storage just on the other side, it would make for a good transition if there was a flex space user that was interested. So, with that I would be happy to answer any questions and, otherwise, we would ask for your recommendation of approval on the DA modification and approval on the conditional use permit. Seal: Great. Thank you, Hethe. Commissioners, do we have any questions for the applicant? Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland, go ahead. Holland: Hi, Hethe, how are you? Clark: I'm great, Lisa. Thanks. Holland: Hey, I -- I always have challenges whenever commercial gets reduced in size and I know we --we have had conversations -- yeah. I'm just curious, how-- how did you try to market that commercial originally and -- I was just curious if, you know, if you had conversations with economic development staff at Meridian and if they tried to assist you with any of those things. Clark: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Holland, thanks for the question and, yeah, that was -- that was one that I had on my notes that we will be answering a question about reduction in commercial from Commissioner Holland and so we -- we -- I appreciate the question. This has been on the market for the better part of five years. Mark Bottles has been trying to get the thing sold. We have worked with -- with private consultants on this to try to come up with some different alternatives and, you know, one of the issues there with -- that we have with the existing layout is that a lot of that 56,000 is set back from -- from Overland and it's -- and, then, the other point that I'm just being reminded of is that it's second tier -- it's a second tier office location. So, what we need to be looking for is a Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F49 Page 45 of 62 user that's looking for something like a 7,000 square foot single story building that's the kind of thing that they can afford in a -- in a second tier location such as this. We think that that is what's going to be more likely to be successful. But, again, we have been marketing it for five years with -- with -- you know, obviously, Mark Bottles is the best -- if not the best, he is one of the best. Holland: Just a follow-up question. Did you guys consider doing maybe more flex space instead of doing the office style product? Clark: I don't know that we have decided -- thought about doing more. The -- the -- as we look at the -- at this space -- let me speak to this a little bit more philosophically and, then, I will dive into the flex space piece of it. You know, the -- the applicant here, Conger Group, we have -- there is a lot of investment that's been made in the overall project in everything that's gone on in the -- I think nine phases behind it and hundreds of lots and we want to make sure that this front area is developed in a way that it protects all the investment that's been made and so, you know, we think that a carefully selected user, you know, with these two 7,000 foot pads on the west makes the most sense there. I don't think you would be looking for a flex space user in -- in either of those, but the building on the other side, that's got -- I think it's 13,000 square feet in it, that's a -- that's a more likely candidate for the flex space. So, that's why we suggested that that condition of approval be modified just for the -- the parcel on the east. Holland: Okay. I'm always a fan of mixed use developments, I think they can work really well, so I'm not necessarily going to challenge you too hard, but I -- it's always tough to me when we have a master planned community that comes in and there is a promise of a certain amount of commercial and I know that in the valley in general we only have so much land designated for commercial, especially on the comp plan, so when we look at any sort of reduction it's always challenging to me, because we -- we don't get the ability to make it up later. We won't be able to remove houses later to add more commercial pads. And so even though it may not be a prime corner for, you know, a Walgreens or a large retail kind of user, it's always tough for me when I see commercial disappear when it's something that was part of a master plan. So, that's just a comment. I figured I would make that now and I appreciate the dialogue and the conversation. Thanks, Hethe. Clark: And thanks, Commissioner Holland, and maybe just one thing that I would say is just that it was not for lack of trying, you know, that there has -- there has been work to try to make that work. The configuration just doesn't make sense for this location and the kind of second tier user that we would be looking for and I also -- just keep in mind that what kind of competition you have got just, you know, a half mile to the west. You know, we are talking about the Silverstone development and, then, we are also going to be having the -- what, the Eagle View Commons there that will be coming in the future, the VBA project. So, you know, we -- we think that what we are proposing here is -- is an appropriate niche that would actually, you know, after five years allow that commercial to get going. Holland: Thanks, Hethe. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F50 Page 46 of 62 Clark: Yeah. Seal: Okay. Do we have any other questions? I will throw one out therefor myself here. Can you dive into the coffee kiosk a little bit more and exactly what that's going to be. Is that going to be like a branch of an existing coffee vendor out there or is it going to be more like a break room style coffee situation? Clark: Thanks, Mr. Chair. That's a good question and I may not have done a good job of explaining it. So, the -- the idea here -- and it's unique. You know, I have not seen this proposed before. But what we are talking about here is a self service type of a system where the -- the owner would be replenishing, but folks would be coming in with their keycard and keypad and, then, be taking advantage of the -- of those facilities. You know, and a couple other things it will -- it will have -- and what I like about it, too, is -- here is this picture of it up again. It will have Wi-Fi in the seating area and, you know, one thing that we are finding is -- in kind of the post-COVID era is what do you do with club houses and like these enclosed facilities and we are finding that the market is really liking these kind of open space type uses and so with the --we think with the Wi-Fi in the seating area and, then, this security that allows people to come in and do the self serve, that we think it will be a cool amenity. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the other Commissioners? All right. Seeing none, at this time we will open it up to take public testimony. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we have several people signed in, the first of which is online, that's Christy Decker. Christy, give me just a moment, please. Christy, go ahead and unmute yourself and state your name and address for the record when you are ready. Decker: Hi. My name is Christy Decker. My address is 4235 East Silverking Lane. Seal: Okay. Thank you. You have three minutes. Go ahead. Decker: I have a few questions. I'm a little concerned about the requirements for the -- I guess the coffee bistro, etcetera. I saw it as a last ditch effort to just meet the requirements. I don't see that serving the neighborhood at all if you are relying on an outside entity to maintain it. I don't know if it would be utilized enough to make it worthwhile for -- from a business perspective, if you are asking a business to come in. The other thing regarding the traffic study, I am very disappointed, because the last traffic study they did supposedly was in 2020 and they did it on a weekend, if I recall correctly, or Friday -- either that or a Friday early morning. I passed a guy and I said, oh, what are you doing. Oh, we are doing a traffic study. And I looked at my watch, you know, at 8.00 o'clock in the morning and the development is not even completed. So, I don't know how it can be okay for it not to be done, because the kind of development -- I'm part of Movado -- that that development is still not completely built out and, then, they are going to start across the way from us, too, and that's not even built out either. So, I don't know if somebody can explain to me the justification of not having a traffic study when they want more development to come in, when the existing is not even done. And, then, finally, my Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F51 Page 47 of 62 concern and most of my neighbors about the only one egress out of South Movado Way. It sounds like everything is going to filter out onto that main drive and everybody and the developer is saying, oh, well, it was designed for all that and my concern is that -- I don't think so and without a valid traffic study how could they say that's okay. That's it. Thank you. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Any questions? No. Okay. Who is up next? Weatherly: It's Kevin Johnson, Mr. Chair. Kevin, one moment, please. Johnson: Hi. Can you hear me? Seal: Yeah. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes. Johnson: Kevin Johnson. 4171 East Divide Pass Street, Movado Subdivision. So, this is the second time that we have done this. I have been -- I have lived here for two years. The last time the application was withdrawn. I think we had about 30 -- 30 plus people in that room. Most of them commented against the -- the additional apartments, because, again, it wasn't zoned for that and so just -- these are my observations, the stuff and the research that I have done. The application is a little -- a little suspicious to me. Okay. Flex Space, LLC, was possibly started in 2018 and it's either out of Washington or Oregon. Not sure. Maybe both. The other thing is if you look at their address it's basically a flex space -- I mean it's a rented desk and phone number off Fairview and that's a company called Red Barrel Real Estate out of Woodstock, Georgia. And, then, what professional company puts on an application a gmail address? They are going to spend millions of dollars and they are using gmail. Okay. So, here is -- here is my question for everybody. And, obviously, it's rhetorical. How many rental properties are enough? Right? We are talking about rental properties. And as noted there are 112 rental properties directly to the west of this particular proposal. Directly to the west. Now, if you go south 700 meters, right, and in line of sight, you can see both sides. Depending on where you are standing you can see the apartments. There are 144 apartments in the Harper Ridge apartment complex. Okay. So, right now -- I'm doing the math. That's 256 apartments, rentals, in -- in -- at least apartments, right, on top of like was stated, there are multiple types of homes. Those different types of homes are -- there are duplex -- duplexes in Movado. There is all kinds of other rental property. So, what we have done is we have built out a -- a highly -- just a large area that has just a ton of rentals. Now I want to highlight something. I did a little research on that and if you go to realtor.com and there is an article and it's those things that drive down the value of your home. Now, I might sound like David Letterman, but, thankfully, there only nine and I'm -- I'm going to do eight. So, no top ten. Hospitals drag down the value of a home 3.2 percent. Shooting ranges 3.7. Powerplants 5.3. Funeral Homes 6.5. Cemeteries 12.3. Homeless shelters 12.7. High renter concentration 13.8. So -- so, think about that. Taking 13.8 percent of my home value away because we need to figure out how to accommodate commercial and -- and some more rentals and only worse than high rental concentration are strip clubs. This is realtor.com. It's not a fly-by-night site. It is a well known site and you can Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F52 Page 48 of 62 look it up. But on top of that just so you guys know, I have been in Meridian -- on the southside of Meridian for 18 years. I am five miles away. And the reason why I did it was because I love this area. You have great quality of life. I, myself, for -- with my wife probably the first 15 years of my life we were in rentals, so I'm very thankful for them. I have nothing against them. What I do have a problem with is -- is the -- the ability to reduce the value of my home and -- and -- okay. There is going to be a lot of folks that complain about traffic. Traffic is the least of our problems. It's already nuts. It's already -- Seal: Sir? Sir? You will need to wrap up here pretty quick. Your three minutes is -- is up. Johnson: Thank you. Traffic has already been horrible. In fact, Chief Lavey last -- the last time said it's horrible and that was his comment and now that -- that proposal was withdrawn after all of our neighbors got together and we got together in like -- I just -- I'm against it and I want to thank you guys and thank you so much for listening to me and I'm not ranting at you, I'm ranting with you. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, next we will have Clarence Orton. Clarence, one moment, please. Clarence, feel free to unmute and state your name and address for the record when you are ready. Orton: Thank you. Can you hear me now? Seal: Yes, we can. Go ahead, Clarence. State your name and address for the record. Orton: My name is Clarence Orton. 4090 East Le Coultre Street, Meridian, Idaho. I live in the estates in Movado. I do agree with everything Kevin Johnson stated there concerning the last applicant. I did submit a statement earlier today with regards to the traffic that in our last public hearings was on another proposal that -- as he stated the Police Department at that time said it was already miserable and, like I said, the Movado development of the estates and the greens haven't been completed and -- and, in fact, the -- the greens over there is going to be a lot higher density to be dumping onto the Movado Drive. So, the traffic light is a definite -- definitely a big concern. There is already people that are traveling through the estates to get over into Silverstone to get to a traffic light over there, because they don't want to go out Movado -- Movado Drive. The other question I had is one quickly for staff. They were talking about a right-in and a right-out and I was wondering where exactly the right-in and the right-out was. I may have missed that. And while he's thinking about that, in the last project you considered for Meridian with -- with the development over there, there were a lot of amenities, but there wasn't any amenities for a children's play deal and this project doesn't have one either and so I wonder if they don't plan on children living there or whether they just don't want to put up a children's playground or they want them all to be funneled into the greens or over into the Movado Estates, their playgrounds over there. So, I guess I have a question with Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F53 Page 49 of 62 regards to that, why there is no children playground with these -- with these town -- or rentals. And I would go back to the question about what we were talking about, a right-in and a right-out. The exit from this project onto Movado is fairly close to the intersection with Overland and where -- where a light should be. So, where is the right-in and right- out that he was talking about? Seal: Okay. Is that everything, sir? We will try and address that question. Orton: Thank you very much. Seal: Thank you. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we are moving to our folks that are joining us here in chambers. have a couple of questionable desires to wish to testify, so I'm going to go to the yeses and, then, if you do choose to testify we will just have you raise your hand. So, first would be James Preuss. James Preuss. That's okay. Seal: Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. Please speak right into the microphone there. Preuss: My name is Jim Preuss and I live at 4297 East Vacheron Street in Movado Greens. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Preuss: I -- we have already gone over some of my concerns. Of course, my major concern is the effect that all these rental units are going to have on our property values and I would like to point out that we have playgrounds throughout the Movado development, the residential part, and there are not secured, they are maintained by the HOAs of the areas that they are in and I didn't see any playgrounds for children in the apartment complexes in their development plan. They have been very vague about allowing us any insight into what they want to do. They have had meetings in which they made promises unkept. I think the closest they came to element one of their comment -- promises was withdrawing their last application and all they have done is basically reduced the number of rental units. They are calling them different type of rental units, but, nonetheless, they are rental units, which would put in front of -- on the north side of our development 178 rental units if they get this. Now, nobody had said how many adults that's going to equate to and I'm not in that research or how many children those adults are going to bring with them. All of that is going to have an impact on the rest of the development and our development is doing very well. I have seen since I moved in -- I'm one of the first in Movado Greens, the estates in the back are going from somewhere around 400,000 up over almost to 700,000 in value. Who knows what all these rental units are going to have on that value. Therefore, I'm against it for that purpose and, of course, as everybody's pointed out, the traffic is already bad enough coming in and out of Movado, because there is only the one major large access coming out to Overland. The only other way out of the development is through two story houses and narrow streets Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F54 Page 50 of 62 into the Silverstone development -- commercial development. I will take a hint from the time and hope that some of our comments can be listened to. Thank you. Seal: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, next we have Joann Gormley. Seal: Good evening, Joann. Go ahead and step up and speak -- speak right into the microphone and -- yeah. Just give us your name and address. Gormley: Joann Gormley. I live at 4372 East Vacheron and I back right up to what's happening. I was one of the first houses there and when we bought we knew it was commercial. We were fine with that. And now all these changes want to happen. We lived in our other house for over 50 years. So, it's quite a change for us. And the problem I have -- two of them. One, if you put a two story building anywhere close to the fence our yard is ten feet, so you are basically living in our yard and the other thing is the traffic. If you have commercial you have people kind of coming and going all day. When you have that many families they are all leaving at once or coming home at one. So, I am very much against this. Thank you. Seal: Thank you. Appreciate it. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, next is Dee Dee Toschi. Toschi. Seal: Good evening, ma'am. Go ahead and step up and give us your name and address and speak right into the microphone, please. Toschi: My name is Dee Dee Toschi. I live at 1970 South Gedalio Lane in Meridian and when I first purchased my house I did a very qualified search and I very much liked it that it was going to be commercial and not apartments of any kind and I was very disappointed when I found out that it's been changed. As I understood, when Dave Evans came in, which I appreciated them, they were very honest, and I thought it was settled and now I found out, no, you can have townhouses, which is like apartments and my property is now going to be devalued. Also I'm concerned with the kids coming to the play areas that we have and it is maintained by our HOAs and you are going to have kids running up and down, up and down that busy thoroughfare. There was no Cloverdale exit made, which I think was ridiculous, because there is all that other Movado -- hundreds of homes going in and they are going to all funnel out into Movado and I'm against it. I really did a qualified study to find out a house that I would live in forever and now this. Very disappointed. Thank you. Seal: Thank you. Weatherly: Mr. Chair, that's all I have with definitive desires to speak. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F55] Page 51 of 62 Seal: Okay. If there is anybody else that would like to come up and testify. Sir, go ahead and come on up. Please state your name and address for the record and speak right into the microphone. Nye: My name is Walter Nye. I live at -- my wife and I live at 4300 East Vacheron in the Greens of Movado and mine's kind of short and sweet. I'm not here to complain about the devaluation of property, although that's always a consideration, but when we decided to purchase our home we looked all over and decided on this location and the first question that I have asked when we bought was what's going to be built behind us, as was a lot of the other residents when they purchased their home and we were told light commercial, which I wasn't against, and it just seems like there has been a switcheroo here on development plans and I'm very much against the project, because we were not told upfront what was going to go in there at a later time. So, I'm against the project. Thank you. Seal: Thank you, sir. Anybody else like to come up? Ma'am, go ahead and come on up. Name and address and speak right into the mic, please. Gottesman: Sandi Gottesman. 4061 East Esperanto Street, which is right off Vacheron where a lot of those guys are living. I wasn't planning on speaking, but as I was really looking at all the inlets and stuff, the Google map here, coming out -- this is a traffic thing. Coming out on Vacheron we, of course, turn left to get to Overland. Lots more traffic just -- and they haven't even developed on the east side of Movado Way. I mean it's being prepared for building on. So, there is that issue. I went to the meeting -- I want to say it was last fall where the developer-purchaser guy was talking about the light commercial and I said, yeah, that would be good. I don't want anymore of these apartments encroaching our nice elegant little Movado Way with our neighborhood sign in. But as I look here -- I don't know where they break in the fence to even get to that east parcel, the skinny one. Would they come around the Movado Subdivision sign? Because that's even more traffic if they come in and cross Vacheron and I believe Vacheron is going to go all the way across, which is just a nightmare. So -- but, again, the property value -- I just bought a year ago and I'm loving watching the property values climb every 30 days up nine percent, and I guarantee you if you have these other townhomes or more rentals like that it does decrease the value, which is very upsetting and I was so pleased last fall when the guy had said -- the developer said it was going to be light commercial. Thanks for your time. Seal: Thank you. Appreciate it. Ma'am, if you would like to come up. Good evening. Go ahead and state your name and address and, please, speak right into the microphone. Quick: My name is Jane Quick. I live at 4312 East Vacheron and if you build these new apartments or townhomes right smack behind me will be the parking garage, which I don't want noise at night coming and going parking and working on cars and people yelling and all that sort of thing and the traffic will be unreal if you put in more apartments. It's already pretty difficult even in the middle of the day and there is no -- you know, there is no plan for a traffic -- traffic light any longer. They did do a study I guess early on when they Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F56 Page 52 of 62 wanted to put all apartments in there and I would be very dissatisfied with the concept. Thank you very much. Seal: Thank you very much. Do we have anybody else that would like to come up? Good evening, sir. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. Bromley: Dave Bromley. 4291 East Blueberry Lane. I'm right across the fence to the south of Vacheron and these people. You can see by the color of our hair there is a lot of us who are a little older than some that would probably be in those apartments. I learned a term when I moved into that subdivision. I'm in the Village. Gated community. I heard a term forever home and a couple of neighbors said, yep, we moved here because this is going to be our forever home. We don't never want to have to move. We don't want to have to pack it all up, we will just give it onto our kids or whatever, and it doesn't sound like it's going to be a forever home if we got that much traffic and -- which is mainly what you are going to have from the apartments, townhomes, whatever they are. So, it was mentioned earlier that the chief of police was at the last -- the final meeting of the -- of the one last year and if I remember him correctly he said he drives through that area every day and it was -- it was leaning, yeah, well, maybe we ought to approve it, maybe we ought to not. After he gave his little talk it was almost instantly -- and I think it may have been unanimous that they disapproved it, because he said people tend to drive where ever is the easiest way they can go. Well, all we have is Movado Drive -- Movado Boulevard, whatever it's called. We can get out the backside of the Village through the gate and we end up having to go around to Silverstone light out there on Overland or we can go on down Movado and we can go through the estates and, then, we can go on into the Southerland Farm and go through their streets and get out to Eagle on -- I can't remember what the cross-street is there. About halfway down, though, just passed the fire station and, otherwise, we don't have any way to get in and out, except Overland really, going out Movado onto Overland and I lived in Kuna for, I don't know, 20 years and I know all the -- the way the highway was -- stoplights were put in and, basically, everybody out in Kuna had the same story, how many people do you have to kill at this intersection before you put in a stoplight and over the years more people got killed, more people, more -- they ended up putting this up. But down the road a mile they ended up finally putting in a stoplight, because it's dangerous and when you are trying to get in and out of Overland -- onto Overland -- if you are going right, well, right turn is -- you know, works, unless you have people coming out of those other two subdivisions and they are trying to get out and you end up with a line of traffic in there. Of course that happens first thing in the morning when people go to work. It happens late in the day when people are coming home. But you -- unless you are coming from Eagle direction and turning right into Movado or if you are leaving out Movado and turning right and going down Overland, that's the only reasonably safe ways to get in and out of our subdivision. If you are turning -- trying to turn and go across two lanes of traffic, going in or out, plus the center lane where, you know, oftentimes there is people waiting there to turn in and out. Seal: Okay. So, you need to wrap up real quick. Your three minutes is up. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F57 Page 53 of 62 Bromley: Which you're getting yourself killed. We don't want to get ourselves killed. We moved there because it's our forever homes and we want to live a reasonably peaceful rest of our life. Thank you. Seal: Thanks, sir. Ma'am, go ahead and come on up. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record, please. J.Nye: Hi. My name Jan Nye and I live at 4300 East Vacheron and we have lived there a year and I was excited to move in there and was told it was going to be commercial -- light commercial and I'm in favor of a little coffee shop, but self serve -- I mean not self serve, but go in there where you could bring in a couple of neighbors go in and have a sit down cup of coffee or whatever would be perfect and as the -- as the apartments go for around this way and they come up Vacheron, well, since they are almost all done on one side and over there, the traffic coming up Vacheron is like a freeway at 5:00 o'clock, 4:30, 8:00 o'clock, plus you have got the workers and they just fly by and, fortunately, I don't have any small children, but I have a little dog that once in a while runs out and they are just going way too fast and there is no other way for these people to get up, other than go down Vacheron and, then, go out to hit the streets. So, the traffic is -- in a year it's like tripled just going up our street and I live -- right now the -- there is an apartment complex and the light there shines right into my bedroom and it's down further, so if they are building directly behind me it will absolutely light up the back of my house so -- with their lights. So, I just wanted to say I'm not in favor of it. I'm in favor of some commercial in the front that we -- the subdivision could enjoy. We could go down there maybe for a pizza or something like that, but for more apartments I'm not in favor of it. Thank you. Seal: Thank you. Okay. Do we have anybody else who would like to come up? Good evening. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. McConaughey: My name is Glenda McConaughey and I Live at 4309 East Vacheron Street and that is in The Greens there as well. So, first of all, I will speak as a grandma. I love to take my kids to the playgrounds in our development. Not hardly used at all. We are usually the only ones in the playground or if there is other kids, great, but, you know, what are all the children going to do -- the families -- they need playgrounds. Very important. So, they are going to come over to ours. I mean it just seems that way to me. Yeah. No big playgrounds in the area, other than in another development over on the other side of Cloverdale down a ways, so -- the Peppermint area, so that -- that's a -- the big concern. And, then, of course, all the other things have been mentioned. But, then, there is also -- a lot of people in the community love to walk and they have got wonderful walking paths in there. So, we can just have really pleasant walks. You pass a few people along the way, you know, say hi, it's really pleasant. You can ride your bike. You don't have any problems the better bikers being in the way -- nothing. Just really nice walking paths. We love that. So, just the concern is people in the apartments are going to need to get out. They are going to need to -- you know, there is walking paths nearby in our neighborhoods, so, hey, you know, if I was in an apartment I would take advantage of that and so that's a concern and that's all that I have. Just -- and agree with all the other people that have shared. So, thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F58 Page 54 of 62 Seal: Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. Do we have anybody else that would like to come up? Sir, you -- I was going to say, you have already had your three minutes. We can't have you come back up. If she would like to come up and comment she is more than welcome. Ma'am, go ahead and state your name and address for the record and -- P.Preuss: Patricia Preuss. 4297 East Vacheron, Movado -- Movado Road and we had the same question when we bought. It was supposed to be light commercial behind us and that's why we bought. We wanted to stay there. We are older. We don't want to keep having to move and it has been getting a lot more cars coming through and it's not right that our yards are low and they are going to be building two stories, which are going to be looking in and they are not that far away and we were told it was supposed to be commercial -- light commercial over there and the people that have had meetings, they say one thing and, then, next time it's another thing and we are not -- they don't give us a straight answer. It was supposed to be light commercial and there is already apartment buildings there down the street. They are building all the way down on the west and there is plenty -- plenty throughout Meridian and down to the apartments and there is property across Overland from us that's for sale. So, then, who knows if it's going to be more apartments over there. We don't want the apartments in there. That's our opinion. Thank you. Seal: Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it. Would anybody else like to come up? Come on up. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. McClay: Martha McClay. I live at 4286 East Silverking Lane in Meridian. And I think an up-to-date traffic study seems in order in this situation. I think it actually indicates what's really going on with the traffic in that particular area with Movado Way and Overland and we haven't lived in our residence for very long, just a couple of months, but it does seem really unfair that people who thought that it was going to be light commercial behind their homes are now looking at a two story rental unit that's going to really change their daily lives in a very dramatic way. So, those are my comments. I do not support the plan as it exists now. Seal: Thank you very much. Anybody else like to come up? I think we have just about covered everyone, I believe. Do we have anybody else online? I don't see any hands up. Okay. All right. Seeing none, would the applicant like to come back and address some of the concerns. Dodson: Mr. Chair? Seal: Oh, go ahead, Joe. Dodson: Can I address the -- one of the questions that was directed towards staff and then -- regarding the right-in, right-out? Seal: Absolutely. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F59 Page 55 of 62 Dodson: Sure. Sorry. The right-in, right-out is not the Movado and Overland intersection, just to be clear. I was referring to the driveway connections here for the multi-family and the commercial, because they are so close to the intersection. If this is signalized these will be limited to right-in, right-out and, then, that's just that and I -- in the public testimony and, then, tonight I have heard a lot of comments about light commercial. I don't really know what that's from. C-G is the least restrictive commercial zoning we have and so there is quite a few things that are allowed in that use and it doesn't always necessarily mean a light commercial use. So, I do want to be clear on that, that what could go here as currently proposed is not a light commercial use. It could be a more intensive commercial use. But I -- I understand your concerns. Seal: Thanks, Joe. Hethe, do you want to go ahead? Clark: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hethe Clark. Again for the record 251 East Front Street in Boise. I think that I want to -- I wasn't going to address this, but I think there has been a little bit of -- call it confusion about who is this applicant and how they are related to the apartment application from late 2019. So, to answer Mr. Johnson's question about who is Flex Space, LLC, if you Google search Idaho Secretary and search businesses you can find the -- a lookup tool there. Flex Space, LLC, is an entity that I formed for the Conger Group in 2017 and has an address on Fairview Avenue. It's done -- you guys on the Planning and Zoning Commission know we are here all the time, we do projects throughout the valley. It's a quality developer, not a fly-by-night operation, and certainly not hiding and so the difference between Flex Space, LLC, Conger Group, is that this is our application and this -- and we did not bring the application in 2019 and 2020. That was Zach Evans, the construction -- excuse me -- construction group and there are very significant differences between what was proposed then and what's being proposed now. So, as we follow the timeline, you know, this was approved back in 2016, there was a full traffic impact study that was done at that time. A traffic impact study is done based on methodology that analyzes the entirety of the build out of the project with all of the uses that are proposed and approved. It also has a growth factor built into it, so it identifies what the impacts are going to be at the end of build out. So, that was done in 2016 and 2017 there was a slight modification to the project. It reduced the trips, so ACHD did not require an updated traffic impact study at that time, because that outside impact had been reduced. They identified the -- the required improvements at that time in 2016. This pulled back those impacts, so there is no reason to do another traffic impact study. The Zach Evans project was going to take out all of the commercial, the -- all of that 6.8 acres of commercial and it was going to add three story stacked apartments. It was going to add trips and so in that instance there would have had to have been an updated study, they would have looked at things like in the timing for the light, for example, at Overland. That application was recommended for approval, but it was ultimately withdrawn. That's a different group and they had a different application. This group has an application that preserves the commercial and instead of stacked three story apartments, what we are doing is -- is townhomes that are limited to two stories and to be clear those two story townhomes are separated by 20 feet, so a bigger setback than what's on the south and all of the parking is on the other side of the structures. So, that will provide for additional noise buffering. But the point I'm trying to get to with all of this is to say that no traffic Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F60 Page 56 of 62 impact study was required with this one, because it was yet another reduction on the outside impacts that were associated with the original approval of this project. Again, this -- this is not an add on in terms of units to the original approval. This is a reduction on the number of units from the original approval. You know, in terms of other things that I would mention with regard to the amenities, you know, we refer to it as a coffee bistro. We are looking at that as a -- as a really unique thing. It's a self-contained project or a -- call it application that the owner of that -- of the apartment projects would be able to administer. Really, it's much like a community center with open space. So, I don't think we should get wrapped up around what exactly is proposed in it. It is going to be something that's going to be operated by the owner. You know, the question came up a few times about amenities for children. This is a project that is not anticipated to be marketed to that family that would be looking for tot lots. All of these various components of the development have the number of amenities to be able to stand alone. We don't think that a tot lot is marketable or works in this location, but if it's the recommendation of the committee -- and we have talked about -- and we have talked about this before with other applications, we think of far more appropriate use would be climbing boulders. We think that that type of outdoor play area makes a lot more sense and gets better usage, if that's the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. We think that what we have proposed here more than adequately satisfies code and certainly it meets what we believe is the market for these townhome units. You know, I think with that I will leave it and, you know, if there is any follow up I would be happy to hang on here. Seal: Okay. Thank you, Commissioners, do we have any questions -- further questions for the applicant? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Ma'am, you have -- yeah. I was going to say, you already had your three minutes. Ma'am, you have already had your three minutes. You will not be asked to come up again. Thank you. Commissioners, do we have any further questions for the applicant? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Grove. Grove: Hethe, question for you, kind of in terms of the overall development of this area. Are any of the neighboring developments -- are they age restricted? Clark: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Grove, no, it's -- it's -- I would say The Village is targeted, but certainly not age restricted. Grove: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Any other questions from the other Commissioners? The only question I have on this right here is I have -- is this portion of the Movado project the only portion that you have been involved in or have you been involved in the other pieces of the development? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F61 Page 57 of 62 Clark: Mr. Chair, if you are asking me personally, this is the first one I have been involved in. But Flex Space, Conger Group, has been involved in the other -- the other phases as well. Seal: Does that include the property directly to the south? Clerk: Yes. Yeah. Mr. Chair, the answer to that is yes. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Okay. I got to get on with the rest of my job here. So, if there is no further questions from the Commissioners, can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Movado Mixed Use, H-2020-0123? Yearsley: So moved. Seal: Could I get a second? Grove: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on item number H-2020- 0123, Movado Mixed Use. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Who would like to start this off? Don't everybody rush in at once here. Commissioner Holland, I see you are off mute. Holland: Oh, I keep forgetting to mute myself after I say aye. I made some of my comments directly to Hethe earlier. I always have a challenge when you have got a master plan that shows something that doesn't end up staying that something. I know that was a concern of some of the people who testified tonight, too. If this was the first time I was seeing it it might be a different story, but it's always hard for me when someone comes back and changes the plan, especially when they are reducing commercial. So, do have some heartburn about it. I appreciate some of the features that they have. appreciate that it's not standard four-plexes, that they do have a couple seating areas and kind of -- they are -- they are willing to work with staff on doing a plaza space. I'm not opposed necessarily to mixed use projects, but where these townhome units are two story and they backup to the single family homes, there might be some challenges there with transition, too, and I don't know exactly how to condition that or how to help them. You know, maybe it's a requirement that they have to do a single story townhome product on that, or a duplex style product on that southern side backing up to those residential houses, maybe that would be a good compromise. I'm not really sure exactly what to recommend there, but I have some heartburn on it, so I will pause for now and I want to hear what the other Commissioners have to say. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F62 Page 58 of 62 Seal: Okay. Who wants to go next? Yearsley: Commissioner Seal? Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead. Yearsley: You know, when I look at these, one of the things that I do my judgment on is the amount of public testimony on this and, you know, understanding their concerns, especially when they were told it was going to be one way and, then, it's going to go back to another, you know, for me I -- I struggle like Commissioner Holland, I -- I think this corner is going to be busy enough and at this point I don't know if I could support the conditional use permit for the apartments. Seal: Okay. I will -- I will throw my two cents in here, so -- it might be five cents tonight. But just -- there is a lot of focus around the lack of a traffic impact study and things like that and, unfortunately, that's something that the City of Meridian does not have control over, so -- we have input into it, but if we are told that a traffic study isn't going to be recommended, then, there is literally nothing we can do about it, so -- I mean we can't stop that. That's something that we can't stop the process as a result of. The other thing that brought-- was brought up a couple times was how many rentals are enough. I mean if you look at the entire City of Meridian, the answer seems to be it will never stop, so -- I mean I know that there is a lot of rentals that are visible from everywhere. My question is how many of those are vacant. So, you know, I live in Meridian, too. I'm not opposed to seeing them come up. I definitely would not want one in my backyard, but at the same time if we have to ask how many are enough -- how many are vacant. If none are vacant, then, we don't have enough, unfortunately. That's the downside to the values of our house increasing by, you know, a hundred percent in the last seven years. So, you know, I very much enjoy that as well. So, I'm -- as a person living in Meridian as well I'm willing to help swallow some of that pill, as bitter as it may be sometimes. So, that said, I also agree with the other Commissioners in what they said, especially with the question that I asked as far as them being involved in the development to the south. I'm sure part of them developing that was knowing -- or, you know, relying on what that property to the north was going to be. So, knowing they had a hand in that and, then, now they are trying to switch that, I just -- I can't agree with that. I mean I appreciate the fact that they are trying to keep the commercial property on Overland and I think that's something that will probably, you know, have to stick in order to get through Planning and Zoning into -- into City Council in any way, shape, or form, just because as a city we are trying to grow up and we need more places, we need more commercial businesses, we need more places of employment to exist. That's about all I have for my comments on this. So, I will let my other Commissioners get back to it. Commissioner Lorcher? Grove: Mr. Chair? Seal: Oh. Commissioner Grove, go ahead. Grove: Commissioner Lorcher, you can go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F63 Page 59 of 62 Lorcher: I don't have anything else to add. I -- I support what Commissioner Holland said and Commissioner Seal. It's very difficult when you have open space and the developer has an idea, but if it doesn't work, then, they are going to a plan B and I think there is always a risk of moving into an area where there is undeveloped area around you. There is no legal precedent, I don't think, for you as a homeowner to say -- you can dictate what happens to the piece of dirt that's in front of, you know, five or ten years down the road. But I also appreciate that you moved into a neighborhood that you thought was going to stay residential with light commercial and, then, all of a sudden it turns into apartments and maybe the developer-- like I don't know who mentioned it -- could consider a different product closer to the homeowners and, then, have the apartments be a little bit further out to kind of dilute some of the -- having those high density right in their backyard, but this is development in Meridian where you have open space and in-fill and the developer is trying to make a product that they can sell and, unfortunately, the one that they had proposed didn't work and now they are trying something else, but it doesn't fit into the neighborhood -- Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, we missed just the last couple words you said there, but -- Lorcher: I don't have anything else to add. Seal: Thank you. Okay. Commissioner Grove, do you want to go ahead and jump in? Grove: Sure. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have a lot of conflicting thoughts probably on this a little bit, which is probably not that uncommon for my opinions on most things here. I -- agree with the applicant in the sense that I don't think a tot lot fits on this project just because of its proximity to the type of structures that they are presenting. I have some issues with the general layout of this, however, and I don't feel -- it feels like it's mixed use in the sense that there is two different product pieces, but it's not integrated, in my opinion, and is lacking in taking on the spirit of what we would want in a mixed use setting to be able to tie the residential and the commercial aspects a little bit more. It feels like you are just really trying to get two things butted up next to each other, versus finding ways to integrate them and make it into a more cohesive community and I think if that were more of the case the neighbors that have testified tonight might feel like, you know, it's being tied into their development. I would like to -- I think Commissioner Lorcher summed up some of my feelings on the pain points that people have when moving into a place that is not completely developed. You can be promised a lot of things, but until a shovel hits the dirt, you know, you are not guaranteed anything essentially and it's frustrating, you know, especially when you have seen, you know, the plans and everything, what it's supposed to be, but until it's built you don't -- there is no guarantee that it's going to look and feel exactly how you have been promised, unless you own that land, but that means that I do think that there is a way that this can be developed in a way that creates a little bit more cohesion between what is wanted from flex from the developer and from the neighbors and from the city standpoint of having a mixed use. I don't think that, you know, having a heavy commercial use makes sense here, you know, with the corner that -- of Silverstone that's already there and what's going in across Overland with Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F64] Page 60 of 62 the Eagle Landing, I think that the market has probably changed considerably from when this originally went forward and I think there is a middle ground, I don't know that we are there yet, and I would want to see a different approach to this. Holland: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Holland, go ahead. Holland: The only other comment I would make is I agree that whenever there is, you know, dirt next to your house that it could become almost anything. In this specific case it's a little bit unique, because they -- they did already go through an entitlement process and had a development agreement in place. So, there was some sort of concept plan that was approved by the city that they -- they are still held to currently. Even if we approve the conditional use permit tonight they still have to go to Council to release them from that development agreement and form a new one. So, just wanted to make that note, too. Our conditional use permit is really just around the multi-family project. That's -- that's what we are deciding on this, whether that fits the Comprehensive Plan and this specific development project. So, that's kind of where we are -- where we are set at and I'm -- I'm leaning towards where Commissioner Yearsley is, is I have a hard time approving the conditional use permit for the apartments as it's shown here. I -- could this work potentially? Sure. Is it the best fit and the best possible layout for the City of Meridian and what we are trying to strive for, you know, excellence when we are looking at projects? I don't know that it's the perfect layout. I think it could use some more work. So, I'm leaning towards the nay as well. I know that this developer has a number of great successful products. I think we are all kind of in the same boat where it just doesn't check all the boxes for us right now. Seal: Would anybody else like to chime in or take -- take a shot at a motion here or -- Holland: Mr. Chair, could I ask one question for staff? Seal: Absolutely. Go ahead. Holland: If we were to say no to their conditional use permit request, would they be able to come back forward to us with another site plan in the future or does it put the time clock on them of a year? Dodson: Good question. Parsons: Joe, I can take that if you want. Dodson: Thank you, sir. Parsons: You're welcome. So, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, as you stated, they still have to go -- they still have another shot in front of City Council. So, they are going -- going before them, because it is concurrent applications. So, this is moving Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F65] Page 61 of 62 up to them with that DA motivation. So, they have the option to plead their case to Council and potentially overturn your decision if that's what you choose to do. If they came back with something substantially different than that year time frame wouldn't -- wouldn't apply. They just couldn't come back with the same application that's before you tonight, the same layout. So, there is still some flexibility there under the requirements of the code. Holland: Thanks, Bill. And I believe that we are not really a -- we can certainly make a recommendation on the development agreement, but we are not a deciding factor on the development, so -- Parsons: Correct. You are not the decision making body on that, but you hit it right on the head, Commissioner Holland, that your-- your job is to state whether or not this meets the code and if it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. So, that's still your purview this evening. Holland: Thank you, Bill. Seal: All right. Thanks, Bill. Appreciate that. Still willing to entertain a motion at this point, unless we want to have more discussion on it. I would help you with a motion, but I can't tonight, so -- Holland: I can make a motion. I was waiting for Commissioner Yearsley or Commissioner Grove -- Yearsley: I was just stepping up, so -- Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny file number H-2020-0123 as presented in the hearing date of March 4th, 2021, for-- we don't feel like it fits the Comprehensive Plan. Not liking how the apartments are so close to the residential and it just doesn't fit for the area. Seal: Is there a second? Holland: I will second that. Seal: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to recommend denial of item number H- 2020-0123, Movado Mixed Use, for the aforementioned reasons. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Motion for denial. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Seal: Okay. That was the last one on our record there, so I'm always ready to entertain that last motion. Holland: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing for the date of March 4th, 2021. Grove: Second. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. March 4,2021 F66 Page 62 of 62 Lorcher: I second. Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Thank you, everyone. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:36 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 3 I 18 12021 ANDREW SEAL - VICE-CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Item 1. 3 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the February 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission Item 1. February 18,2021 F52 Page 49 of 49 McCarvel: Okay. Motion carries. And, Madam Clerk, did you need roll call on that or did you get them? Weatherly: Commissioner Cassinelli, I heard you as a nay. Cassinelli: That is correct. McCarvel: Okay. I think all others were yea. Okay. With that I will take one more motion. Seal: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move we adjourn. Grove: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. Good night. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED RHONDA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Hearings Changes to Agenda: Item #3: Kiddie Academy CUP (H-2021-0003) Application(s):  Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site is located at 3335 E. Victory Road (near SEC of Victory and Eagle); site consists of approximately 1 acre of land, currently zoned C-C. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning:  North – future multi-family, C-C and R-15 zoning;  East – Single-family residential, R-4 zoning;  South – County residential  West – Commercial, C-C zoning History: AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012; A-2015-0061 and DA instrument #111032845. DA restricts hours of operation on this property from 6am-10pm. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-Use Community Summary of Request: The Applicant is requesting CUP approval for a new 7,926 square foot, single-story daycare facility. The Applicant has noted a maximum child capacity of 158 children with no more than 21 staff members on the property at peak hours; Staff has recommended a condition of approval to limit the number of children served to 158. The Applicant did not apply for design review with this application but have provided staff with conceptual elevations. These elevations show adequate façade modulation, a number of field materials, and appropriate scale and finish materials for the proposed use. Prior to obtaining building permits, the Applicant will be required to obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative Design Review approval. Access into the site is proposed via driveway connections from Victory and Eagle. Both driveways are existing and were constructed with previous approvals. In addition to the access points the parking abutting Victory is also existing. Following initial review by Staff, the Applicant revised the site plan to provide a better circulation pattern. The revised site plan shows 30 total parking stalls with additional parking on the north side of the building and to the west of the building. Between these western parking spaces and the building is the discharge area for children. This drive aisle is shown as a one-way pick-up/drop-off area for parents that goes from south to the north, adjacent to the west facing daycare center. The Applicant has proposed the one-way drive aisle in this direction with the anticipation of a majority of the future children coming from subdivisions to the south of the property and the shared access along Eagle Road, shared with the proposed development, via an approved cross access agreement. Staff finds the site plan to provide adequate safety and circulation to meet the required standards. In addition to the future daycare building itself, the Applicant is also proposing 3 outdoor play areas to the south and east of the building. These play areas are shown to be fenced for safety, meeting code requirements. The subject property has an existing sidewalk connection to the subdivision directly to the east and this sidewalk connection will be maintained with this new use. Maintaining this pedestrian connection makes this a truly walkable commercial use and offers adjacent parents an extremely safe access to the daycare. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject CUP application. 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-2021- 0003, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 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-2021- 0003, as presented during the hearing on March 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0003 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4: Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) Continued from February 18, 2021 per applicant request. Application(s):  Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 7.69 acres of land, currently zoned RUT, located at 3247 S. Locust Grove (SWC of Victory and Locust Grove intersection). Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: County Residential to the North (Application is in process with the city for low density residential project); Single-family residential and R-8 zoning in all other directions. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (3-8 du/ac) Summary of Request: This project was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 3, 2020 and the Commission recommended denial of the project to the Meridian City Council. Following this recommendation, the Applicant made a request to the City Council to be remanded back to P&Z with a revised plat and open space pursuant to comments made within this staff report and by Commissioners. The City Council agreed with this request and remanded the project back to P&Z. The main changes made by the Applicant following the recommendation of denial are related to the number of residential units proposed, the road layout, the amount of usable open space, and the Applicant is no longer requesting a Planned Unit Development. Annexation and zoning of 7.69 acres of land with a request for the R-15 zoning district; Preliminary Plat consisting of 38 residential building lots and 10 common lots on approximately 4.69 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; Private Streets throughout the development; Alternative Compliance to connect a private street directly to an arterial street. The proposed uses are all single-family residential but in multiple forms: attached townhomes (triplex), attached duplexes, and detached 4 single-family homes as well. The project is proposed with a gross density of 4.94 du/ac and a net density of 9.82 du/ac, lower than the previous proposal. The Applicant is proposing to construct private streets that are 24’ wide with 5’ attached sidewalk on at least one side of the street throughout the project. At the north end of the main street within the development (labeled as Compass Lane on the landscape plans) the Applicant is proposing an emergency only access to Victory Road. This access is required if more than 30 homes are to be constructed. The proposed access for this development is to S. Locust Grove and lines up with E. Coastline St. on the east side of Locust Grove, the access into Tradewinds and the future Teakwood sub. The access point into the development does not meet ACHD district policy but they are modifying their policy to accommodate access into the development because this is the best place for an access to a residential development on this site (furthest access point available away from the Locust Grove/Victory intersection). This is largely because of the site constraints that exist for this parcel. The site is a triangle shape, bordered on two sides by arterial streets and on one side by the Ten Mile Creek, there is no opportunity for road connectivity to any adjacent site and so ACHD prefers private streets within the development. City code requires that private streets are to be used in either a mew or gated development and this Applicant has proposed a gate meeting these code requirements. Staff recommended removing the parking spaces before the gate to ensure there is an area for vehicles to turn around should they enter this street on accident. The Applicant has shown this revision with the revised plans. The proposed private streets are not wide enough to accommodate any on-street parking and the Applicant is proposing to construct some extra off-street parking along the main street as seen on the proposed plat. There are no multi-use pathways proposed or required for the development. However, the Applicant is proposing a 5-foot wide pathway on this side of the creek and behind the proposed homes. This pathway connects to the private streets at the southern end of the project and thru the common open space lot located midblock on the west side of the site. This pathway also continues north and connects to the required sidewalk along Victory Road. In addition, Staff recommended an additional pedestrian connection to the sidewalks along Locust Grove From the revised street layout. The Applicant has submitted revised plans showing compliance with this recommendation as well. There is no existing sidewalk along Victory Road or Locust Grove; both arterial streets are scheduled to be widened as part of the roundabout project at this intersection in 2021-22, according to ACHD. With the roundabout project, the Applicant is required to dedicate additional ROW for the intersection and the future widening of Victory and Locust Grove adjacent to the site. ACHD is requiring the Applicant enter into a road trust for the arterial sidewalk improvements adjacent to the site as they will be constructed by ACHD with the roundabout and widening projects. A minimum of 10% qualified open space meeting UDC standards is required. According to the property size of 7.69 acres, the Applicant should supply at least 0.77 acres of qualified open space, or approximately 33,500 square feet. The applicant is proposing 3.91 acres of open space, of which 3.4 acres is shown as qualifying open space on the submitted open space exhibit, vastly more than the minimum requirement. However, some of the area listed as qualifying open space by the Applicant does not meet UDC standards due to their size not being at least 5,000 square feet or being near the dimensions of 50’ x 100’. Once this area is removed, the qualified open space proposed is 2.97 acres. More importantly, the open space for this development is largely made up of the Tenmile Creek easement (2.12 acres) and the arterial street buffers (19,158 square feet of qualifying area). All of this area is qualifying but the Tenmile Creek will be left natural and will be a buffer and more of a visual amenity than usable open space for the development. Abutting the creek and generally mid-block, the Applicant is proposing an open space lot that is approximately 5,700 square feet. This open space lot contains one set of the amenities and a micro-path that connects the private street to the pathway along the creek. This open space lot and micro-path offers a clear connection to the attached sidewalks throughout the development and an additional open space area centrally located within the development. This 5,700 s.f. open space lot is the most active and usable open space lot within the development. In general, the Applicant has increased the usable open space areas throughout the site following the Commission’s recommendation of denial and comments. With the reduction in unit count and additional centralized open space, Staff finds the proposed open space not only in excess of code requirements but also an improvement from previous layouts. The applicant submitted conceptual elevations for the proposed attached single-family homes, both the duplexes and the triplexes. The submitted elevations show all two-story attached structures with two-car garages and finishing materials of wood and stone. In addition, the elevations show modern architecture designs with shed roofs, second story patios with glass railings, and stone accents that go the full height of the proposed homes. However, attached single-family homes require design review approval prior to building permit submittal and at that point, Staff will ensure compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual. Since the previous meeting, the Applicant has provided conceptual elevations of the proposed units offering different designs and color combinations. Written Testimony: 41 pieces of written testimony were submitted for the project the first time thru – The main concerns regard the proposed density in comparison to adjacent subdivisions, amount of open space, school over-crowding, and the traffic issues already existing in this area. Neighborhood has issues with proposed access to Locust Grove and there only being one access for the development. No public testimony has been submitted for the remand. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject applications with the conditions and DA provisions noted 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- 2020-0113, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 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- 0113, as presented during the hearing on March 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0113 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: Movado Mixed-Use (H-2020-0123) Application(s):  CUP and DA Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of \[#\] acres of land, zoned \[district\], located at \[address/general location\]. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: History: \[if applicable\] Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: \[details\] Summary of Request: \[details\] Written Testimony: \[name(s)\] - \[issue(s)\] Staff Recommendation: \[Approval/Denial\] Why? \[i.e. what is unique/premier (Comp. Plan policies/goals), meets minimum requirements or not, process comments/story\] 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- 2020-0123, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 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- 0123, as presented during the hearing on March 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2020-0123 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Changes to Agenda: Item #2: Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) Application(s):  CUP Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.61-acres of land, zoned C-G, located on the west side of N. Ten Mile Rd., north of W. Lost Rapids Dr. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North & South: Vacant undeveloped land, zoned C-G West: Drive aisle, Costco & future MFR, zoned C-G and R-40 East: Ten Mile Rd., SFR, zoned R-8 History: This property was annexed in 2018 as part of the Lost Rapids project. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: A CUP is requested for a drive-through establishment within 300’ of a residential zoning district on 1.61-acres of land in the C-G zoning district. The residential zoning district that constitutes the CUP requirement is located to the southwest of this site where Lost Rapids Apartments are approved and in the development process. There are also residential uses and zoning to the east across N. Ten Mile Rd. but because the uses are separated by an arterial street, a CUP is not required. There are specific use standards in the UDC that apply to drive-through establishments. Staff has reviewed these standards and finds the following: 1) at 259’+/- in length, the stacking lane for the drive-through has sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways and drive aisles by patrons; 2) the stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access & parking; 3) the stacking lane isn’t within 10’ of any residential district or residence; 4) an escape lane is provided because the stacking lane is greater than 100’ in length; and 5) the drive-through window is visible from Ten Mile Rd. and an internal driveway for surveillance purposes. Access is proposed via a north/south driveway along the west boundary of the site from W. Lost Rapids Dr. and a driveway via Ten Mile Rd. exists along the north boundary of the site – direct access via Ten Mile is prohibited. Parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards; a minimum of 23 spaces are required, 77 spaces are proposed. This lot has a shared parking agreement with the two lots to the south. Staff recommends a pedestrian walkway, minimum 5-feet in width, is provided to the sidewalk in front of the building from the sidewalk proposed along the west boundary of the site; and along the north boundary of the site between the sidewalk along Ten Mile Rd. and the sidewalk along the west boundary of the site for safe pedestrian access. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that incorporate a mix of materials consisting of wood siding on the top portion and stone veneer on the lower portion of the building with glass store-fronts and a combination of flat and pitched rooflines. Final design is required to be consistent with the design standards listed in the ASM. Written Testimony: Derek Gasser, DFG Development (Applicant) – requests to not be required to provide a sidewalk along the west & north boundaries of the site consistent with the pedestrian circulation plan approved with the DA. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2021-0001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 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-2021-0001, as presented during the hearing on March 4, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2021-0001 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) FLUM Item 2. 53 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) by Lost Rapids Development, LLC, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Rd., North of W. Lost Rapids Dr. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of a residential use and zoning district on 1.61 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Item 2. F54 (:�N-VE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Sonya Allen Meeting Date: March 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) by Lost Rapids Development, LLC, Located on the West Side of N. Ten Mile Rd., North of W. Lost Rapids Dr. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through establishment within 300 feet of a residential use and zoning district on 1.61 acres of land in the 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 HEARING SIGN IN SHEET 3 DATE: March 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 2 r PROJECT NAME: Lost Rapids Drive-Through (H-2021-0001) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify a YES OR NO 7 1 ; i 9 2 3 4 i 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 2. ■ C�, EI IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT .►a H o COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/4/2021 Legend DATE: f ILI PmAteci L�=fl-Ro, TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner REM 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2021-0001 �M Lost Rapids Drive-Through—CUP LOCATION: W. side of N. Ten Mile Rd.,north of W. Lost Rapids Dr. (Lot 13,Block 1,Lost Rapids Subdivision—Parcel #R5330761300), in the NE '/4 of Section 27,Township 4N.,Range 1 W. Fl�q RR c�] I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use permit for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of a residential zoning district on 1.61-acres of land in the C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.61-acres Future Land Use Designation Commercial 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) Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 11/24/20;2 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2018-0004(DA#2018-079970,Lost Rapids-GFI Meridian Investments II,LLC);FP-2020-0045 Page 1 � m 1 1 1 uulluMr. - . IIII 11. IIII 111+ S I ' �. , •l =_ Yk�_. �CH: E EH:INDE - --x- mgi111111111111 IuuNll gllp •■uulxuu� Ipl •__ -1_:[_ .ry� IIY—_YIIIIII — 11111III J IIIIII NIIII� — i.;i.. ' � IIIII�NIII�i , III_:_111 1 1 III I—--__ Imo{ 111 IIIIII : +I I _"I r '■III _— 14��yy!! __ I _ �I 11 _IIIIII ;;1 slil=111 Y ��III-11■1• _ � :1►.1"" i s '_}T.. .. f IIIIII- 11 IIIIti II _ _ is■_ -2 lil _ 11151i .. '._ _ — 11111� 11 I�I�I Y F +.=Z_• - IHIM Y _ IIIIII a ■w �i _� � •"?-'. 1 uu4„- I- �� #x '' 1 ■ -_,_: xlll a 111 Iln I� t __ . =ter. -�1 1■g - - ■■IIIN II 11 IIII -' y■■:2__1 III IN 1��I - ■ = '� - _-- '�• IIIII=I 1� 1= } _ -:- IINI 1■■ _:- ' iJ =� 11 ._. ... _ ''I r�..��_ -■ 11 IIIII IINI - .._. ,l4 II -� � - - F 1 - ■■■■I IIII -_x III I� ■ ■1 �.. = ■■■■I IIII -- LG I , _ �IIA II IIN II IIII Y IIIIIIM1 IIIINI Y■ I1 MITI IN IIII Y 5r:11 F+ II111. III ry I�iu14lt J=1 IIII 1 I • IIII IIII kil 113:1 _�.'w��1� I .. + IINIIII I I IYMI 11 -IIIIII Y Ilil - ._k_'. I•jL ' NIIII : 11■ III �112 _. �_ IIII �1III1 ��.� 1 � '+ I _ _ MINI p w ---- IIII ,nl • _ _ _ NII : Ix ry 2�= -Hill W1I MINIM ■ IIII �111 --- Nit r� ur Dill 1111r, •I - - -- l+ 111 Y11:: ■M III 2 1n p� I IIIIIII III. I IIII■Ix111Y.- � III III ICI NIIIIII � i • _IIIIII I- IS '- •d 7 1 u u =3 IIII= 1 ii =ii=: -2�' wgi111111111111- I�luuull gllp llllllll ��_II .uulxuu11 IIII 1 III II� 1 - - _-- IIY=_YIIIIII .IIIIIII} I.Illllr 2millfal I IIIIII NIIII w — I IIIII ° i:: :: -- •1_=w 1 1 x■II_I a e= ;••Iw uuu, : IIIIII I1IN a -uu■ II } - _ _ -• 1 0 •_: :: II uuu. I IIIIIII 2 ? ulllry u11I1 111� - IIIII 11 IIIII _� IIIIII � QM� _ 1� -2- 1 uxl Nlllu Ip■IIIII a ■w � r �� 2-: I •NII( I� � �.�■ .1�1 - I 1 ■ - : 'T+111• =II III IIII -- 1 11111�:IIII IIII I1111IIIII1111111 IIIIIII. I IIIIII ��1 ��-:: IINI u■ _��1' 2: 11 I■ IIIII IIII III III -■ _ - - IIIII IINI -�_ - �1 } 111 IIII:= ■uu r� (IIIIIII _ NII IIIII - IIII =2 IIL �■ ■1 1 - uuIIII �1Y 11 0 : uu mm11r loll 11111�-u u a■w Y loom uuntl I■ u ■ 1N uugn N 1 : II■ II =11 - uuuu ■ III II 11 -: uuu■ 1 11 11 NOHI1I1I I . ■u■- IIII ■11 �_ 1 IIII --IINIIII I I IY;1 11 _111111 I■I W•■�■11 _ I�1� I Iir - NIIII : 1I■ 1I1 �112 _ _ IIII II■■ _- : 11■ W;+m -� �I1NI111 uNI ■ IN M III 1 : IIIIIII HIN I111 •jNO IN I r !� ,IIM: ■ii 1 ■ IIII - IIIIIII �111 i11 111 I I , ■ , � 11 i i1 • Item 2. ■ C. Representative: Derek Gasser, Lost Rapids Development,LLC—74 East 500 South, Ste. 200,Bountiful,UT 84010 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/12/2021 Radius notification mailed to 2/9/2021 properties within 300 feet Site Posting Date 2/23/2021 Next Door posting 2/9/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed drive-through is within 300-feet of a residential zoning district,which requires Conditional Use Permit approval(CUP)per UDC Table 11-2B-2. The residential zoning district that constitutes the CUP requirement is located to the southwest of this site where Lost Rapids Apartments are approved and in the development process. There are also residential uses and zoning to the east across N. Ten Mile Rd. but because the uses are separated by an arterial street, these are not a factor in the CUP requirement per UDC 11-4-3-IIA. Specific Use Standards: The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. A site plan is required to be submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. At a minimum,the plan is required to demonstrate compliance with the following standards: Staff's analysis is in italics. 1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons; At 259'+/-from the drive-through window to the nearest drive-aisle that serves the row of parking in front of the building, Staff believes the stacking lane has sufficient capacity to serve the use without obstructing driveways and drive aisles by patrons. 2)The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designed employee parking. Although the stacking lane isn't a separate lane from the driveway that provides access to the site and access to parking, more than 13 vehicles would have to be waiting in the stacking lane before it would block access to the parking area (based on 259%20), which the Applicant doesn't believe will be an issue due to the types of restaurants being considered for this tenant space. 3)The stacking lane shall not be located within ten(10) feet of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is not located within 10'of any residential district or residence. 4)Any stacking lane greater than one hundred(100) feet in length shall provide for an escape lane; and Page 3 Item 2. ■ The stacking lane exceeds 100'in length and an escape lane is proposed. 5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The drive-through is visible from N. Ten Mile Rd., a public street along the east boundary of the site,for surveillance purposes. Based on the above analysis, Staff deems the proposed drive-through in compliance with the specific use standards as required. The proposed restaurant is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49 Restaurant, which requires at a minimum, one (1)parking space to be provided for every 250 square feet of gross floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan is required to be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies with UDC standards. Access: One driveway access is proposed to the site via the north/south driveway along the west boundary of the site from W. Lost Rapids Dr. from the south; a driveway access exists via N. Ten Mile Rd. on the adjacent property to the north. A reciprocal cross-access easement exists for lots in this subdivision as noted on the Lost Rapids subdivision plat(note#12) and in the Declaration of Easements, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions(Inst. 2020-071547). Parking: 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 9,392 square foot(s.£)multi-tenant building is proposed with 2,596 s.f.proposed for the restaurant tenant. Based on the requirement,a minimum of 23 spaces are required; a total of 77 spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. The recorded Declaration of Easements, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for this development establish cross-parking easements for lots in certain groups within the development(Inst. 2020- 071547,Amended Inst. #2020-171404). This lot(Lot 13) is grouped with Lots 14 and 15 to the south and shares a perpetual,non-exclusive cross-parking easement with those lots. A minimum one(1)bicycle parking space is required to be provided for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bicycle parking shall be depicted on the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application in accord with the aforementioned standards. Pedestrian Walkways: A pedestrian walkway is depicted on the site plan from the perimeter sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd. to the main building entrance as required by UDC 11-3A-19B.4a. Where pedestrian walkways cross vehicular driving surfaces,the walkways are required to 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.The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should reflect compliance with this standard. Staff recommends a pedestrian walkway,minimum 5-feet in width,is provided to the sidewalk in front of the building from the sidewalk along the west boundary of the site; and along the north boundary of the site between the sidewalk along Ten Mile Rd. and the sidewalk along the west boundary of the site for safe pedestrian access. The walkways should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface as noted above. Landscaping: Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. Landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan in Section VII.B in planter islands Page 4 Item 2. 59 within the parking area as required.A minimum 5-foot wide landscape buffer is required to be provided along the perimeter of the parking or other vehicular use areas as set forth in UDC 11-3B- 8C.1. This requirement may be reduced or waived at the determination of the Director where there is a shared driveway and/or recorded cross-parking agreement and easement with an adjacent property. Because there is a recorded shared access and cross-parking agreement between this property and the property to the south(Lot 12),the Director waives the requirement for a buffer along the southern boundary of this site. This will allow the trash enclosure to be located as close as possible to the southern property line and should reduce conflicts between trash trucks servicing the dumpster and vehicles entering the drive-through if service occurs during business hours of the drive-through. The striped drive-through lane should also assist in directing drive-through traffic outside of the area needed to service the dumpster. A hammerhead turnaround is depicted on the site plan that has been approved by Republic Services. Street buffer landscaping, including a sidewalk, along N. Ten Mile Rd. was installed with development of the subdivision. Because the drive-through lane and back of the building(with mechanical equipment)will be highly visible from N. Ten Mile Rd.,Staff recommends additional landscaping(i.e. coniferous trees/bushes)is provided within the street buffer along to screen this area and these functions while preserving a clear view of the drive-thru window for surveillance purposes. Mechanical Equipment: 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. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VII.0 that incorporate a mix of materials consisting of wood siding on the top portion and stone veneer on the lower portion of the building with glass store-fronts and a combination of flat and pitched rooflines. Final design shall be consistent with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. The trash enclosure is proposed to be constructed of split-face CMU in a color to match the building. Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: 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 the conditions in Section VI1,UDC standards and design standards. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions included in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. Page 5 Item 2. F60 VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 2/25/2021) UM DATA ------------------ ZZ, VKVM LOP L T7 LOT 13 Loii --------------- &"' .. AL SITE PLAN L. TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATONS Page 6 Item 2. F61 B. Proposed Landscape Plan(dated: 2/26/2021) I �I f �cuccow.m.�w.x ruo xn x.m�m ^'O,°6 q°"��T mM�c�—•�•mwra Ahl PRE I l l L _ /� ••P, �' ..m waa.s�r..•vr uame v.�� •nE�wc•a1a.owo• �# 5 8 Oa da cr m LAN PE PLAN\fy PROJECT CALCULATIONS �•"`•, STREET BUFFERS °°.' STREET TREES,I PER 35 LR} �. °Y `�"'°•""'" PARMM BUFFERS"• ne, PPARKINO COlM15�'� — ouau o.w km BUFFER WIOTIAS'BETWEEN USES FF TREE SPECIES M I%�s MQIGATION REQUIREMENTS yIn,LlcurmcE BEEIUUpISTREE�PLANIINGANUSfPYJN6 PEfAIL u.B Page 7 F62 C. Coneeptual Building Elevations G�Eat FA�y�ST =� op Page 8 BAKERY�CpFE '�� . • a' T U 0 � � g��n .`1� d Item 2. ■ VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the existing Development Agreement(Inst. #2018-079970,Lost Rapids-GFI Meridian Investments II, LLC)and associated conditions of approval(H-2018-0004; FP-2020-0045). 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(s),and window location shall be depicted in accord with UDC 11-4-3-IIB. b. Depict bicycle parking as set forth in UDC 11-3C-6G in accord with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. c. Where pedestrian walkways cross vehicular driving surfaces, the walkways shall 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. d. 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. e. Include additional landscaping(i.e. coniferous trees/bushes)within the street buffer along N. Ten Mile 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. f. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide walkway from the sidewalk along the west boundary of the site to the sidewalk in front of the building; and along the north boundary of the site between the sidewalk along Ten Mile Rd. and the sidewalk along the west boundary of the site. The walkway shall 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-1913.4. 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 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. 6. 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.ory/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=222769&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity Page 9 Item 2. ■ C. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=223051&dbid=O&repo=MeridianC Lty D. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciN.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=222667&dbid=O&repo=MeridianC Lty https://weblink.meridianciiy.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=222166&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty E. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.orzlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=222736&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv IX. 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. 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 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 VIII 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. Staff 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. Stafffinds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VIII 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. Stafffinds 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. Page 10 Item 2. ■ 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. Staff ,finds 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) Staff ,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 11 TO CHINDEN BLVD. (HWY 20/26) i I I f f f f f TO CHINDEN BLVD. ® (HWY 20/26) �I 9- -4- m r I� 10 1 i -- EXISTING e ,■ INTERIOR SITE CONNECTION o p FROM TEN MILE ■ ■ llUUU � 11 a s s s s ■ O ■ MUM 3 10: I 0 12 W�dLI 10 WC, CAWnO Q 0 0 ui z I a PROPOSED SITE mod vi PROPOSED o INTERIOR SITE CONNECTION FROM TEN MILE m an c � 14 LOST RAPIDS APARTMENTS Ix 0 0 n Q 15 N \ \ O _ M m w z COST RAP/ps DRIVF r r — — LEGEND 3 0 100 200 300 0 X Plan Scale: 1" = 100' PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CIRCULATION PATHWAYS z 0 ADDED CIRCULATION PATHWAY N N O N H Z ENGINEERING LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION LOT 13 E 9233 WEST STATE STREET BOISE,IDAH083714 MERIDIAN IDAHO PHONE(208)639-6939 o kmengllp.com z a DATE: 03/03/21 PROJECT: 20-228 CIRCULATION EXHIBIT a EX1.0 g _ e W,CHINDEN OLVR.(11 W 20/26) — _i 1 y --het - ., .. - 3 0 0;) I a LU _ 'Ul' RCIAI W wJ 4� � SUBGMSICJN li o 51 NORTHFUME BDM510N &PJNBRIDGk 8: If' '1 Illt" , SUMMSIONH4Ea , �S 7 {FUTURE R5 .y I ♦ 1 ,1 ;14 l FUTURE SJRORIISION �.. � arr � � � 3,� �1. � •=; i�}��:<'� t ,, w•�— I I GINU '1t .... Y LEGACY PARK � 1 6PINCHIIK t ' - -- SJ,IBaNlSIUN - {FIlTUREPH.45E, � ® .•• ••., 30' 7' IDAHO KEY NOTES (TYPICAL) ACHD LANDSCAPE NOTES ••""'••• CITY OF MERIDIAN POWER .�%*.% vE0FIL) SEWER AND WATER EASEMENT 1. INSTALL 3' DIAMETER SHOVEL CUT TREE RING, WITH BARE EARTH SURFACE AT ALL 1. TREES SHALL NOT BE PLANTED WITHIN THE 10' CLEAR ZONE OF ALL ACHD STORM �••''�'�•.- N EASEMENT 219' PARKING LOT BUFFER TREES WITHIN TURF AREAS. DRAIN PIPE, STRUCTURES, OR FACILITIES. .` �'6SSAYE'� '•• � (1) TREE PER 35' (6) TREES REQUIRED 2. 40' CLEAR VISION TRIANGLE. SEE KEY NOTE #5 FOR TREES PLANTED WITHIN VISION 2. SEEPAGE BEDS MUST BE PROTECTED FROM ANY AND ALL CONTAMINATION DURING THE TRIANGLES. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF ANY VEGETATIVE GROUND COVER AT MATURITY CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF THE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. (6) TREES PROVIDED I I I WITHIN THE CLEAR VISION TRIANGLE SHALL BE 3' FROM THE ADJACENT STREET GRADE. : W I I I 3. ALL PLANTED BEDS TO RECEIVE A MIN. 3" DEPTH ORGANIC PERMABARK MULCH WITH ,� ••�031051210 (,��.` GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES • d •••••••• 4 • 6 j I I TORORDERINGLE AAND INSTARIC WEED LLBNGRITHE USESUBMIT OFSMULCH OR ROCK OWNER A�THEPON�YAGROU�D ,0 •,gNDSCA4�,� N 1 6 1 COVER IN REQUIRED PLANTING ARES IS PROHIBITED. IMPERMEABLE PLASTIC WEED 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND IDENTIFY EXISTING UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD ••••��.�• SHARED ACCESS DRIVE i I I BARRIERS ARE PROHIBITED. UTILITIES WITHIN CONTRACT WORK AREAS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTACT DIG I I i LINE, INC. ® 1.800.342.1585. PROVIDE ADEQUATE MEANS OF PROTECTION OF soco N I I I 4. SCHEMATIC PATIO AREA. FINAL DESIGN TO BE APPROVED WITH CONSTRUCTION PLANS. UTILITIES AND SERVICES DESIGNATED TO REMAIN. REPAIR UTILITIES DAMAGED DURING SITE WORK OPERATIONS AT CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. O O • ° • o 0 0 0 ' `' 00 O O O O O O C) Q o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 5. REQUIRED PARKING ISLAND TREE WITHIN CLEAR VISION TRIANGLE TO BE PRUNED MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 8' ABOVE THE GROUND OR SIDEWALK SURFACE AND 14' ABOVE 2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN NURSERYMAN STANDARDS FOR 2 THE ADJACENT STREET SURFACE PER CITY OF MERIDIAN CODE 1 1-3A-3. TYPE AND SIZE SHOWN. N N 0 N � : o I 6. INSTALL FLAT-BLADE SHOVEL EDGING AT INTERFACE OF SOD AND PLANTER BED. SEE L1.0-1. GENERAL IRRIGATION NOTES N N O ° a Q d 7. TRASH ENCLOSURE. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. N N 12 1. ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO BE WATERED BY THE DEVELOPMENT OR SUBDIVISION 0 0 8. EXISTING TREE PER LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN. SEE TREE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEM. O ' • + + • d + O PROTECTION NOTES. + :: O I 10 2. COVERAGE; THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE ONE HUNDRED d DRIVE THROUGH 8 :. ,°° 9. EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION TO REMAIN. RETAIN, PROTECT, AND OR PERCENT (100%) COVERAGE WITH HEAD TO HEAD SPACING OR TRIANGULAR SPACING 5 f ° WINDOW I ADJUST AS SHOWN. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE AND AS APPROPRIATE. • 4 +s I PATCH BACK ALONG PHASE BOUNDARY AS NECESSARY. TRANSITION BETWEEN NEW N d AND EXISTING LANDSCAPE SHALL BE NON RECOGNIZABLE AND COHESIVE WHEN 3. MATCHED PRECIPITATION RATES: SPRINKLER HEADS SHALL HAVE MATCHED PRECIPITATION 3 13 I a FINISHED. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO REPAIR ALL EXISTING LANDSCAPE RATES WITHIN EACH CONTROL VALVE. , , I PLANTING AREAS AND IRRIGATION COMPONENTS DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF NEW o I 10 10 I I CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT THE EXISTING IRRIGATION 4. IRRIGATION DISTRICTS: SPRINKLER HEADS IRRIGATING LAWN OR OTHER HIGH WATER N SYSTEM REMAINS OPERABLE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND THAT FOLLOWING DEMAND AREAS SHALL BE CIRCUITED SO THAT THEY ARE ON THE SEPARATE ZONE OR z N N CONSTRUCTION, THE EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEM OPERATES AS GOOD, OR BETTER DISTRICT FROM THOSE IRRIGATING TREES, SHRUBS, OR OTHER REDUCED WATER z z N I° THAN EXISTED PRIOR TO THIS PROJECT. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE, AT NO DEMAND AREAS. N g g • ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER, PLANT MATERIALS DAMAGED DURING EXECUTION OF j W g g d °4 � I THIS PROJECT OR DAMAGED DUE TO THE CONTRACTORS FAILURE TO MAINTAIN Lu 0 0 I d 5. OVERSPRAY: SPRINKLER HEADS SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO REDUCE OVERSPRAY ONTO u u 14 OPERATION OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. SEE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES SUCH AS STREETS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, AND PARKING } } Lu �`i+ r LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN. AREAS. u u ° d a I I J V a + Id m 10. EXISTING SIDEWALK. PRESERVE AND PROTECT. 2 w 2 w 2 w 2 w 2 W 2 w 2 ww °W I TREE PROTECTION NOTES ° 11. PROPOSED SIDEWALK. INSTALL PER ISPWC. d o 12. VEGETATION TO SCREEN VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS. 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE EXTREME CARE TO PROTECT THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE 6"S 6" 4"S 4"S 4 S 4 S 4'S 4"S d o OF ALL TREES AT ALL TIMES THROUGHOUT PROJECT. 8 13. DRIVE THRU WINDOW MAINTAIN CLEAR VIEW TO TEN MILE ROAD. 15 Q d I Q w o 2. PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK, TEMPORARY FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED ° 9 U 0 14. EXISTING WATER SERVICE PER APPROVED LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION ENGINEERING IMMEDIATELY AROUND EACH TREE IMPACTED BY DEMOLITION OR CONSTRUCTION. 0 I I Of w w w p PLANS. EXTEND SERVICE TO BUILDING. FENCING SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE ENTIRE mdz o: DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. G) d 0 w Z D 15. EXISTING SEWER SERVICE PER APPROVED LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION ENGINEERING a ° I a0 0 J CY Co PLANS. EXTEND SERVICE TO BUILDING. 3. BULK MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES, AND CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND WASTE � > O d O I I W M Of wi SHALL NOT BE STOCKPILED WITHIN HE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE. w 0 o w 5 N 16. ALL WEATHER SURFACE TO BE SPECIFIED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS. S m M uj o ° 0 J Of w w 4. COMPACTION BY EQUIPMENT TRAFFIC IS PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE. 0 " ° w 1 Z 17. BIKE RACK. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. ~p w w w I N ° 5' I I z a w N 5. MAINTAIN WATERING WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE. APPLY A MIN. 1.5" OF WATER J a m "' Lu w � w OVER THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE PER WEEK. THIS IS A MIN. RECOMMENDATION. w N cn I u + d d w CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO DETERMINE IF MORE WATER IS NECESSARY DURING -zwww • • + z w Y a' w w �a {� �' + �' in O I v PLANT SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION. +Lu MENU BOARD d ° m" w P2 d O I I d DECIDUOUSTREES BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE MATURE HXW CLASS CITY REMARKS 6. ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE THE "`�° `�° Q I a - - CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM REMEDIAL WORK TO N =i I I 22' O I 9 dl o v DAMAGED TREES AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. `-1 9' 19'-►I O I I z CARPINUS BETULUS 2"CAL.B&B 50'X40' CLASS II 6 I O I II EUROPEAN HORNBEAM d o ° o I N � LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACI FLUA'SLENDER SILHOUETTE' 2"CAL.B&B 25'X15' CLASS II 6 1�4' COLUMNAR SWEET GUM I a 1 1 • a I PYRUS CALLERYANA'CAPITAL' 2"CAL.B&B 35'X15' CLASS II 12 CAPITAL CALLERY PEAR 17' d 12 1 � 17' ° o d� EXISTING TREES BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE MATURE HXW CLASS CITY REMARKS EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING VARIES CLASS II 7 v N • ° d I I° SEE LOST RAPIDS SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT 25 25 a 6 o I I O dl d SHRUBS BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE MATURE HXW CITY REMARKS J ° M 4 A `n° I O BUXUS SEMPERVIRENS'VARIEGATA' S GAL. 6'X6' 23 EVERGREEN SHRUB Z O z d d p VARIEGATED BOXWOOD O ° a d a° 4 ° 3 • a I c.n a J N + ° I I JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM'BLUE ARROW' 6'-8' B&B 12'X3' 7 EVERGREEN SHRUB BLUE ARROW JUNIPER / N O O - w \/��) + + � d . O . 10' PUBLIC UTILITY +� LIGUSTRUM VULGARE'LODENSE' 5 GAL. 4'X4' 10 EVERGREEN SHRUB m a / 17 {+� d EASEMENT U d + + I I LODENSE PRIVET a _ p cn N N \ • I I d --op op GRASSES BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE MATURE HXW CITY REMARKS 0 - - z 7 + BOUTELOUA GRACILIS'BLONDE AMBITION' 1 GAL. 3'X3' 34 0 Lu F \ I° BLONDE AMBITIONS BLUE GRAMMA GRASS C a � - - - - - ofl a 35' CALAMAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA'KARL FOERSTER' 1 GAL. 4'X2' 49 d N. TEN MILE ROAD FEATHER REED GRASS I ENTRY CORRIDOR 16 ( Id° LANDSCAPE BUFFER HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS'BLUE OATS' 1 GAL. 3'X3' 41 N I I BLUE OAT GRASS O .W C-G I I d I PERENNIALS BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE MATURE HXW CITY REMARKS I I I O HEMEROCALLIS X'HAPPY RETURNS' 1 GAL. 1.5'X1.5' 9 HAPPY RETURNS DAYLILY LANDSCAPE PLAN LAVANDULA ANG USTI FOLIA'M U NSTEAD' 1GAL. 2'X3' 94 0 20 40 60 MUNSTEAD ENGLISH LAVENDER Plan Scale: 1" - Zo' PROJECT CALCULATIONS CONTACT INFORMATION STREET BUFFERS RUDBECKIA FULACK-EY D SUTRUM' 1 GAL. 2'X2' 42 BREMOVE RANCHES ANDPRUNE TOGOLDSTRUM BLACK-EYED SUSAN STREET NAME CALCULATION REQUIRED PROVIDED INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE STANDARDS; OWNER LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT TEN MILE ROAD NA 35' 35' SOD/SEED BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME CONT CITY REMARKS IMPROPERLY PRUNED TREES LOST RAPIDS DEVELOPMENT, LLC KM ENGINEERING, LLP STREET TREES (1 PER 35 LF) p LANDSCAPE IARCHITTECT)NED BY E 74 EAST 500 SOUTH, STE. 200 9233 WEST STATE STREET BOUNTIFUL, UT 84010 BOISE, IDAHO 83714 EXISTING TURF SOD 5,319 SF SEE KEY NOTE 9 p O SHALL BE REMOVED AND PRESERVE AND PROTECT PHONE: (801)-512-2221 PHONE: (208) 639-6939 STREET NAME CALCULATION REQUIRED PROVIDED p p O REPLACE. FAX: (208) 639-6930 (2)-BVC WOOD TREE o CONTACT: ALYSSA YENSEN, PLA TEN MILE ROAD 239 LF/35 7.00 7.00 STAKES(MIN. 6' HT) p p p TRUNK FLARE. LOCATE PRIOR o EMAIL: oyensen@kmengllp.com pp O O TO PLANTING. FLARE SHALL PARKING BUFFERS REQUIRED PROVIDED CHAINLOCK p p '� BE VISIBLE AFTER PLANTING. o TREE TIES Nw. 6" MULCH PER PLAN KEEP BUFFER WIDTH. SEE DIMENSIONS ON PLAN 5' 5' 3, MIN 1"-2" AWAY FROM TRUCK FLARE z PARKING COUNTS FINISH GRADE Z CALCULATIONS REQUIRED PROVIDED MULCH AT 3' 3" HT. WATERING BASING PLANTER ROOT- 1= PARKING STALLS - 9400 SF/500 = 19 77 TURF 8" BEDS BALL BERM PERCENT OF PARKING AREA WITH INTERNAL LANDSCAPE NA 1 1.3% DEPTH I_I I ° - = FERTILIZER TABLETS 0 2,824 SF OF LANDSCAPE/24,896 SF OF PARKING LOT (DRIVE THRU EXCLUDED) -I I-I I-III I FOLD BACK BURLAP FROM v _ I I II II I I I I I I II I I I I I I I TOP i3 of ROOTBALL. E N G I N E E R I N G BUFFER WIDTHS BETWEEN USES I-III I I-III _ -III- h REMOVE WIRE BASKET. 9233 WEST STATE STREET BOUNDARY USES / BUFFER TYPE REQUIRED PROVIDED I I -I -III-. I ^ -I IHT NOTE: REMOVE TREATED ROOT- BACKFILL SOIL MIX GENTLY BOISE,IDAHO 83714 z III III-III- _ _ c,� _= OR SYNTHETIC BURLAP BALL PACK BACKFILL USING WATER PHONE(208)639 6939 -III III- COMPLETELY. REMOVE TO SETTLE SOIL AROUND kmengllp.com g NORTH DRIVE AISLE / PARKING BUFFER 5' S' o, WIDTH I-III=III III=11 III -111- -III-11 EAST TEN MILE ROAD / ENTRY CORRIDOR BUFFER 35' 35' FINISH -I I i I III-III-III=�_I I _ -III 1=I ANY SOIL AND/OR ROOTBALL i TOPSOIL MULCH AWAY FROM 8" MIN PLANTING PIT 8" MIN ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED DESIGN BY: KAP E SOUTH C-G INTERIOR SIDE SETBACK 0° 0' GRADE III-,IIIi i IIIII I ITIII 11=I I- TREE CROWN AFTER PIT SHALL BE A MIN. 2 TIMES WIDER SOIL DRAWN BY: KAP WEST DRIVE AISLE / PARKING BUFFER 5' S° INSTALLATION. THAN ROOTBALL AT BASE AND A CUT EDGE MIN. 3 TIMES WIDER THAN ROOTBALL CHECKED BY: AY E TREE SPECIES MIX REQUIRED PROVIDED AT FINISH AGRADE. DEPTH SHALL BE DATE: DECEMBER2020 SAMEa NOTES: PROJECT: 20-228 Z24 TOTAL SITE TREES 3 3 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO INSURE THAT ALL TREES ARE PLANTED a STRAIGHT AND THAT THEY REMAIN STRAIGHT FOR A MINIMUM OF 1 YEAR. ALL SHEET NO. MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS a STAKING SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE END OF THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. SHOVEL CUT EDGE DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING AND STAKING DETAIL L1 0 THERE ARE NO HEALTHY TREES > 4" CAL. PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL a NTS NTS Item 3. 66 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Kiddie Academy (H-2021-0003) by neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located at 3335 E. Victory Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 8,436 square-foot, single-story daycare facility on approximately 1 acre of land on Lot 3 of The Shops at Victory plat in the C-C zoning district. Item 3. F67 (:�N-WE IDIAN IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: March 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Kiddie Academy (H-2021-0003) by neUdesign Architecture, LLC, Located at 3335 E.Victory Rd. A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 8,436 square-foot, single-story daycare facility on approximately 1 acre of land on Lot 3 of The Shops at Victory plat in the C-C zoning district. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing i PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: March 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 3 PROJECT NAME: Kiddie Academy (H-2021-0003) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 3. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/4/2021 L Legend DATE: I�l U Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 3 ® SUBJECT: H-2021-0003 r _ a k ; The Kiddie Academy LOCATION: 3335 E.Victory Road j ® ' I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant,neUdesign Architecture,requests Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a new 7,926 square foot, single-story daycare facility on approximately 1 acre of land on Lot 3 of The Shops at Victory plat in the C-C zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.06 acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed-use Community Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial—Daycare Center Lots(#and type; One (1)building lot bldg./common) Phasing Plan(#of phases) One (1)phase Neighborhood meeting date; # December 21, 2020;no attendees I of attendees: History(previous approvals) AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012; A-2015-0061 and DA instrument#111032845. DA restricts hours of operation on this property from 6am-10pm. Page 1 Item 3. ■ B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) No—Staff letter • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Access Access to Victory Road via an existing driveway (Arterial/Collectors/State connection near the northeast corner of the site.No Hwy/Local)(Existing and other road improvements are proposed or required. Proposed) Stub Cross-access to adjacent parcels is already in place Street/Interconnectivity/Cross with the existing Development Agreement Access Existing Road Network Yes Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 0.6 miles from Fire Station#4 • Fire Response Time Within 5-minute response time goal C. Project Area Maps .Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend MU, Legend Project Location Project Location C ium ensl e e . ResidentialMU-C \C Liu r 9 9 .. MU-N Low-Density Residential `mod .Zoning Map Planned Development Map Page 2 Item 3. F 0 Legend =p R= C- 0 Legend 0 Project Location e L_0 Project Location e R-8 City Limits RUT Planned Parcels Rr8�C-G ' Q RUT Rl R-15 °O G_ RUT R-$ RUT RUT R-15 RUT �� 4 R-= CIE III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Amanda Bidwell,neUdesign Architecture—725 E. 2"d Street,Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owner: Jason White,WL Victory Crossing,LLC—8385 W. Emerald Street,Boise,ID 83704 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/12/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 2/9/2021 Site Posting Date 2/22/2021 NextDoor posting 2/9/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https:llwww.meridianciu.or /elan/elan) The fixture land use designation for this property is Mixed-use Community—The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses,including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N)areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU-R) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to three or four Page 3 Item 3. 71 miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. The proposed use of a Daycare Center(more than 12 children) is a community-serving use that fits within this future land use designation as it can serve both the immediate area but also the nearby community at-large. When analyzing projects within this designation, the other uses provided nearby and within the same designation area should also be taken into account. Of this mixed-use area, a majority of it has not yet redeveloped from county residential uses. The commercial subdivision that the subject site is a part of contains a Rite-aid and one additional commercial lot that is not yet developed. This MU-C designation also exists across Victory Road where a higher density multi family development has been approved and is currently under review for their administrative approvals. With the existing residential to the east and south of this development and the possibility for more commercial uses further north along Eagle and within this future land use designation, Staff finds the proposed use to be consistent with the MU- C future land use designation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridiancity.or /ccoompplan): • "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips,and enhancing overall livability and sustainability" (3.06.02B).Adding a daycare use in this location introduces an additional use to immediate area. In addition, this property has direct pedestrian access to the adjacent subdivision to the east, therefore promoting overall sustainability and the benefits of having a supportive commercial use nearby residential. • "Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas" (3.06.02C). The proposed daycare is not near an employment center but is part of a smaller commercial subdivision. Furthermore, the remaining undeveloped Mixed-use area north of the subject site could also contain employment opportunities making the location of this daycare to those future employers equally important. • "Locate smaller-scale,neighborhood-serving commercial and office use clusters so they complement and provide convenient access from nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadways and multimodal corridors."(3.07.02B).Despite the subject property being within a mixed-use community designation, this area of MU-C is relatively small in size and is separated from the rest of this designation by an arterial street, Victory Road. This separation makes it more feasible for smaller-scale commercial like that of the proposed daycare. In addition, this property has direct pedestrian access to the subdivision to its east providing convenient pedestrian access to the adjacent residential development. • "Require appropriate building design, and landscaping elements to buffer, screen, beautify, and integrate commercial,multifamily, and parking lots into existing neighborhoods."(5.01.02D). With the proposed landscaping and landscape buffer, and easy pedestrian access, the proposed use should be both buffered and integrated into the existing neighborhoods. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject site has some partial improvements from its original approvals in 2005 including an access to Victory Road,parking spaces adjacent to the street, and existing cross-access and cross- parking agreements. There are no other existing structures on this site. Page 4 Item 3. 72 D. Proposed Use Analysis: A Daycare Center(more than 12 children)is listed in UDC Table 11-2A-2 as a conditional use in the C-C zoning district. See narrative included in the application for more specific details on the proposed use from the Applicant's perspective. E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): A. General standards for all child daycare and adult care uses, including the classifications of daycare center; daycare, family; and daycare, group: 1. In determining the type of daycare facility,the total number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator's children,is the determining factor. The Applicant's narrative states the maximum number of children at the facility is 158 children. The building will have multiple rooms for different age groups. In addition, a maximum of 21 staff members will be employed here during peak hours throughout the day. 2. On site vehicle pick up,parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. The Applicant has revised their site plan to meet this requirement. The revised site plan shows additional parking on the north side of the building and to the west of the building. Between these western parking spaces and the building is the discharge area for children. This drive aisle is shown as a one-way pick-up/drop-off area for parents that goes from the south to the north adjacent to the west facing daycare center. The Applicant has proposed the one-way drive aisle in this direction with the anticipation of a majority of the future children coming from subdivisions to the south of the property and the shared access along Eagle Road, shared with the proposed development, via an approved cross access agreement. The parking area specifically for this lot is proposing 30 parking stalls, of which 18 will be brand new to the site. However, the subject property has a shared access and parking agreement with the rest of the Shops at Victory commercial subdivision, noted on the approved plat. The adjacent drive aisles appear to be 25 feet wide, meeting code requirements for a two- way drive aisle; the Applicant will be required to show compliance with the parking lot standards at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal. With the proposed parking and the revised layout showing a true pick-up/drop-off area, Staff finds the proposed use and site design will provide for safe discharge and pick up of children at this business and is enough for the proposed use and submitted maximum capacity of 158 children. 3. The decision making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours of operation as conditions of approval. Staff recommends a maximum of 158 allowable clients at any one time unless the maximum occupancy is limited further by fire or building code; Staff has written a condition of approval commensurate with this recommendation. 4. The applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11,Idaho Code. Said proof shall be provided prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. The Applicant has agreed to comply with this requirement in their narrative. 5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence,the hours of operation shall be between six o'clock(6:00)A.M. and eleven o'clock(11:00)P.M. This standard may be modified through approval of a conditional use permit. The subject property has limited hours of operation of 6am to IOpm due to a provision of the existing Development Agreement. The Page 5 Item 3. 73 Applicant has stated in their narrative that they intend to operate within these hours and is not seeking to change this DA provision. Staff has included a condition of approval related to the proposed business hours. 6. Prior to submittal of an application for an accessory daycare facility in a residential district,the applicant or owner shall hold a neighborhood meeting in accord with subsection 11-5A-4B of this title.Notice of the neighborhood meeting shall be provided to all property owners of record within one hundred feet(100') of the exterior boundary of the subject property. NA B. Additional standards for daycare facilities that serve children: 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot(6')non-scalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The submitted landscape plans show a 6'tall steel tube fence proposed along perimeter of the play areas. 2. Outdoor play equipment over six feet(6')high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. The play equipment being proposed is not known at this time;Applicant will comply with this requirement if any equipment is ever proposed. 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk.Not applicable, C-C zoning district. F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The daycare center will be in a new building that requires Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review approval prior to building permit submittal.All UDC dimensional standards appear to be met with the submitted site plan but the Applicant shall comply with the required dimensional standards at the time of CZC submittal. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Direct lot access is provided via a driveway connection to E.Victory road,an existing arterial street. Further cross-access is provided to the west through the rest of the commercial subdivision which provides an additional arterial access to S. Eagle Road. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): The proposed building is shown as 7,926 square feet,requiring a minimum of 16 parking stalls. 30 parking stalls are proposed to meet this requirement in addition to having an existing cross- parking agreement with the adjacent commercial lots to the west.All parking and parking lot landscaping meet UDC standards. I. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): There is an existing five-foot(5) sidewalk that traverses the site from the Astoria Subdivision to the east. There is also existing attached sidewalk along E. Victory road. A portion of the sidewalk traversing the site is proposed to be removed to accommodate the new daycare facility but is shown as connecting to the required sidewalk surrounding the entire building and will provide access to the parking around the building. UDC requires that new commercial buildings provide 5-foot wide sidewalks from all public entrances to the arterial sidewalks. The submitted plans do not show this connection and the most logical and feasible place for this to occur is by continuing the sidewalk within the existing landscape buffer along the east boundary. Staff is recommending the site plan and landscape plan Page 6 Item 3. ■ are corrected at the time of CZC submittal to show this sidewalk connecting to the existing sidewalk along Victory Road. J. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): The project requires a 25-foot landscape buffer to adjacent residential uses and is already in place with previous approvals. This landscape buffer is shown to remain on the submitted landscape plans. All other landscaping proposed is for the parking lot landscaping and appears to meet UDC standards. K. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): There is existing 6-foot vinyl fencing along the property boundary that the Applicant is showing to retain and protect. The Applicant is proposing new 6-foot tall steel tube fencing to enclose the play areas as discussed in the specific use standards section above. The existing and proposed fencing meets UDC standards. L. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): All new non-residential buildings require Administrative Design Review(DES) approval prior to submitting for building permit. The Applicant has submitted conceptual elevations including color elevations. The submitted elevations appear to meet architectural standards by providing varying roof heights,two different field materials,building modulation, and accent materials providing fenestration for the building. The building is shown with stucco and wood field materials providing for earth tones and differing transitions between the proposed building modulation. Staff will analyze the elevations in more detail with the future required 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 7 Item 3. F75 VII. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan(date: 2/17/2021) 0 s Q ne design ' 9 ---- — ------ ,2TF2ds1 Malden.ID 83642 1- 208.884.2324 CO CONSULTANT ti a I tLFP.F �ti Q w j � p Q Q � Q UU & J ' 0 i } ❑ n Q Q RUFFAIE I PROMSIONALSFAL 10 10 KIo❑ oe.,�r �Q. EL \` PO - cLeeT Pe�ia�. .ice SITE PLAN I 1 L J SITE PLAN-NEW _O A-101 Page 8 B. Landscape Plan(date: 2/24/2021) Cm LU ffid LU LU CL ENIM RKLU Fo zq IL Page 9 Item 3. ■ C. Conceptual Building Elevations(date: 2/18/2021) W � Efl a n � a z O � O O , i ii r Y n � o c HI n 40, VIJAY ILAVARASAN -7ICD �0'P o KIDDIE ACADEMY - i"j� �O =„s ��j� r scvicicv�ru.nekmiaN.i�aewz - - Page 10 Item 3. 78 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Planning 1. The Applicant shall comply with all existing conditions of approval and Development Agreement provisions(AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-08-012; A-2015-0061 and DA instrument#111032845) 2. The Applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 for Daycare Facilities. 3. The maximum number of allowable clients(children)at the facility at one time shall be limited to one hundred and fifty-eight(158)unless building/fire code limits this further;the more restrictive number shall apply. 4. The daycare/pre-school shall operate between the hours of 6:00 am and 10:00 pm per the recorded development agreement. 5. The Applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11,Idaho Code prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all State of Idaho and Department of Health and Welfare requirements for daycare facilities. 6. The site plan and landscape plan shall be revised prior to submittal for Certificate of Zoning Compliance to show the continuation of sidewalk from the building to the existing sidewalk along Victory Road in accord with UDC 11-3A-1913.4. 7. Prior to building permit submittal,the Applicant shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Administrative Design Review approval from the Planning Department. 8. All existing landscaping on-site shall be protected during construction; if any is damaged or removed, it must be replaced prior to obtaining certificate of occupancy. 9. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district. 10. Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 12. 11. 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. 12. The conditional use approval shall become null and void unless otherwise approved by the City if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use, satisfy the requirements,acquire building permits and commence construction within two years as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.1; or 2) obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-513-6F.4. B. Central District Health(CDH) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=221698&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty C. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancily.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=221993&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty Page 11 Item 3. 79 D. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=222751&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty E. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=220295&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Ry 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 appears to meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the C-Czoning district for the proposed use and will be verified upon CZC submittal; therefore, Staff finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Staff finds the proposed daycare center will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that it will provide a much needed service for area residents with easy access to and from the site. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds the operation of the proposed daycare should be compatible with the residential and commercial uses in the close vicinity and the existing and intended character of this mixed-use area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. If the proposed daycare complies with the conditions of approval in Section VII as required, Staff finds the proposed use should not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Because the site is already annexed into the City and these services are already being provided to the surrounding buildings, Staff finds the proposed use will be served adequately by all public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Staff finds the proposed use should not create any additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Page 12 Item 3. 80 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Although traffic may increase slightly in this area due to the proposed use and clients dropping off and picking up children, the proposed use and effects were planned for with the design of the discharge area; therefore, Staff finds the proposed daycare should not be detrimental to the general welfare. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features in this area and finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 13 KIDDIE ACADEMY i � �i II 11 I I w ire Fw- 3335 E Victory Rd. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Irmo imlyll I Am. I C IL i mrry d E i Lurx f � E Ciillkn$# F rUIIc7-;;1 F Cu Mi E r4Yp�� a,4� ��'' _�tl •.gal a �L, _ i� ��+� � � milka t 4 a r €Falcan I_::n Di I cu t +ff � m Z a E Vi o d E ictory Rtl E Vict,ory Rd SITE 1 .06 Acre Parcel 7,950sf - Building 5,850sf - Play Area 3 Separate Play Areas 30 Parking Stalls on Site Pedestrian Connection North and East d E Vi o rt E ictory Rd E lli a Rd SITE . , Am- Drop Off/Pick Up Lane -4 Parents at one time on average LANDSCAPE iii0ili 'f O O iii3O'f Fence around building and play yard Landscape buffer on East and South sides 4 O 4 C � O op�� tt FLOOR PLAN 158 Children NEI I 15 Employees w4d 21 Employees ' •FFICE ® LZ during peak hoursRECEP -77- FLEX ROOM j I j Operating hours I , ■� _g�' ' LOBBY between 6:30am RR and 6:OOpm I ® � �� ® i��■■,3 _ l h - HALL 77 Ga.,7 _ ILLI OLDS II® l® Elm M III® � NS KIDDI k _ t77 77 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ :1 SH FLOOR COLORED rPl ' 'k ■ COLORED 12d-0" PARAPET 113'-0- i.0.PLATE .. .. _ .. _. .. ,Fl I5H FQOR- 109•d' NORTH ELEVATION-COLORED RR izo'ENr o• PARAP i 135-d' 1 i3'-d f r E llr-d- FINISH FLOOR t� lou-0 7 S9l1 'ELEVATION-COLORED QUESTIONS2. 1 J Legends Project Location E'VICTORY RD r. 5 1 w• e � .CUL EN" LJ CT rf CO �� FFALCON�,Ir Item 4. 81 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing Continued from February 18, 2021 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. Item 4. F82 (:�N-VE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: March 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing Continued from February 18, 2021 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: March 4, 2021. ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 i PROJECT NAME: Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 1 _ i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 4. Mayor Robert E. Simison 83 E IDIAN.� City Council Members: =�� Treg Bernt Brad Hoaglun Joe Borton Jessica Perreault D A H O Luke Cavener Liz Strader March 1, 2021 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission CC: Jane Suggs, Gem State Planning FROM: Joseph Dodson, Current Associate Planner RE: Foxcroft Subdivision (H-2020-0113) Dear Commissioners, The Commission and the Applicant received the staff report on February 12,2021 for the subject applications. Following receipt of the report,the Applicant requested a continuance in order to respond to some of Staff s recommended conditions of approval. The Applicant has submitted revised plans and provided additional information related to the conditions of approval and many of the concerns presented within the staff report. The revised plans have resulted in a number of recommended changes to the conditions of approval and development agreement. The revisions made by the Applicant have not changed any of the open space or layout in noticeable ways except for a loss of one building lot. Any updated numbers and analysis can be added to the staff report following the Commission's final recommendation to City Council to ensure transparency IF the Commission so chooses for Staff to update the entire staff report. Please refer to the attachments and subsequent bullet points below regarding the recommended changes from the revised plans. The revised plans show the following changes made by the Applicant in response to the staff report: • To meet the minimum dimensional standards for the R-8 zoning district in a section of the project with alley loaded homes,the Applicant removed a building lot instead of moving the road—this is an acceptable way to fix the issue presented. o Associated condition can be stricken. • The Applicant corrected the irrigation district easement width along the northern boundary and now shows adequate width outside of the building lots to have landscaping on at least one side of the multi-use pathway. o Associated condition should be stricken • Multi-use pathways throughout the single-family portions of the site are now shown in a 20' wide common lot, in line with code requirements. The segments of pathway within the Tenmile Creek Community Development Department . 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 208-884-5533 . Fax 208-888-6854 . www.meridiancity.org Item 4. 84 Easement continue to show trees on the outer side of the pathway but will still require a license agreement with the irrigation district. In addition,the condition to obtaining Alternative Compliance for not being able to provide trees on both sides of these segments of pathway is still applicable. o After discussions with the Applicant and further review of the planned pedestrian facilities,the condition regarding the construction of pathways should be modified to allow pathway construction in accord with the phasing plan. • Applicant has verified the amenities currently proposed for the multi-family development—the proposed amenities include, a clubhouse,pool, fitness facilities,pedestrian pathways, and additional open space. • In response to Staff s analysis and conditions of the proposed multi-family unit count and height, the Applicant provided the following additional information: o The Applicant did a line of sight analysis based on existing and planned elevation conditions to demonstrate the existing single-family homes to the north are at a higher elevation than the multi-family site(see Exhibit E below). The exhibit is a cross-section view of the linear distance and proposed height of the proposed apartments versus the existing SFR. ■ According to the exhibit,the proposed apartments will be approximately 90' away from the rear-yard fence of the existing SFR at its closest point. ■ The exhibit also shows the 3'floor balcony would be approximately 4' above the second floor of the adjacent SFR. o The Applicant is now showing 11 additional parking spaces in the multi-family development—four of the spaces proposed are located at the end of a dead-end drive aisle that would exceed 150' in length with the new spaces. These spaces should not be added in the final documents to ensure a fire turnaround is not needed in this area. ■ With the seven(7) additional spaces proposed that should stay,the Applicant is now proposing 425 spaces which is nearly 2 spaces per unit and is in excess of the minimum amount of 411 spaces. o After review of the additional documents and exhibit, Staff is amenable to revising the conditions related to the apartment unit count and parking. Specifically,with the distance and land elevation differences between the subject site and the existing SFR to the north(in addition to the already proposed dense landscaping), Staffs concerns regarding the 3-story apartments are largely mitigated but Commission and Council can determine whether they agree with Staffs original conditions. Staff recommends the following changes be made to the staff report by the Planning and Zoning Commission per the changes above,noted with strikeout and underline changes below: • Add a condition regarding the legal descriptions and annexation boundary to reflect the true property boundary of one of the included parcels— o At least ten(10)dqsprior to the City Council hearing,the he Applicant shall submit revised legal descriptions and exhibit maps of the annexation boundary to reflect the true property boundary, specifically that area in the very southwest corner of the property abutting the railroad property. • Add condition regarding single-family lots adjacent to multi-family development— o With future sale of single-family homes on Lots 20-32,NW Block 1,the Applicant shall include the multi-family site plan and renderings in the sales and advertising information for these homes. • A.La—Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the approved plat, site plan,landscape plan,open space exhibit,conceptual building elevations, eeneeptual 2 Item 4. 85 r-edevelepment plan,pathway and pedestrian circulation exhibit, and the proposed phasing plan included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. • A.Lb—The 10-foot multi-use pathway segments surrounding the development shall be constructed with each phase Prase 4 of the development as seen on the phasing plan. • A.Lc—With the first phase of development,the Applicant shall construct the extension of W. Pine Avenue,the vehicle bridge over Ten Mile Creek,and the Pine/Ten",rile into-se ti aeeer-d wit all other ACHD requirements a d in line with the signed"Dedication and Development Agreement,"as seen in exhibit VIII.L, and the ACHD conditions of approval. • A.Lf The multi family develepmen4 shall be eenstfueted m4th fie more tLan 18 4 units wi — buildings en Lots > > and 9,NE Bleek 1 (as shown on the stibmitted plat)to be no more two stories in heigh4;proposed pafk4ag shall fiet be r-edueed by more dma 20 pafk-ifig spaees following the r-eduetien in un4s. • Strike Condition A.2—With Final P14 s„r.mit4als the ppli an, shall provide -eleyafi�r-evisoa pla-as te depiet any miner-r-evisiens shew-a on the revised open spaee exhibit. • A.3—Applicant revised the plat to meet these conditions including losing a building lot instead of relocating the road in SW Block 2). o The preliminary plat included in Section VILB, dated November- 11,-NN February 24, 2021 is approved as shown. shall be revised as fellews at least ten(10)days pr-ier-te the City Couneil r.o.,ring: a. Revise!he proposed alley between SW Bleek 2 a-ad SW Bleek 3 to be a miner-ur-bawi leeal s4eet, s,..aetea M. minimum of 24 feet,,vide with, fb a-a ,.u#e no sidewalks, and tie .,fk4a. n either side. e. Redtiee appheable building lots in the single family areas of the site te aeeemmeda4e • Strike A.4a,4b, &4c—the Applicant revised the landscape plan to show these items. • Modify Condition A.5—The Applicant shall apply for Alternative Compliance with4he-fifst-each Final Plat submittal to propose an adequate alternative for all of the required pathway landscape requirements, in accord with UDC 11-5B-5. • Strike Condition A.6—NMID is not allowing a micro-path across the sub-drain. • Strike Condition A.12— single family attaehed dwellings buildings a4 least ten(10) days pfief to the Git-y COUReil heaning • Add condition regarding Conceptual Redevelopment Plan—it is not appropriate to place it with the DA so Staff is recommending a condition of approval be added to ensure concept plan is still generally adhered to: o Future redevelopment of existing homes (Lots 2 &7, SW Block 4) shall be generally consistent with the submitted Conceptual Redevelopment Plan as seen in Exhibit VII.G. Public Works has also revised their conditions following additional conversations and clarifications with Planning Staff: Strike the following conditions under VIII.B: o 1.1 — , mainline. This eandition ea-a also be satisfied with a 14 feet wide paved suffaee. The pathway shown ever-the existing sewer-a4eng the neAh pr-epeAies is stibjeet to this requirement, as weil as, roadway shall have a4 a minimum, a 14 ft wide eempaeted grave aeeess feadway eenter-ed ever-the Item 4. 86 0 1.2—Please redesign the sa-mitafy sewef r-et4iag to elimina4e the sewer-mainline passing thfetf allowed ifAe-a manhole,with a ininiffmm 30 degrees�fangle separation). 0 1.7— with"to and thfough"fv"ir-emeffts. This fiew mainlifie shall eefineet to existing water-mains a the west and east ends 0 1.8—The water-main in N.White Leaf Way neaf SSN4H GS needs to eefmeet to the pr-epose wa4ef main to the east(Mile High Pines Siib). 0 1.9—The water-main in W. Stigaf Pine Q. that etiffenfly dead ends needs to eemeet te the pfopesed water-main te the east(Mile High Pines Stib)in N. Side Cr-eek Lane. Cuffen4ly this dead end dees not meet fire flew pr-essufe r-eqttifemeats. 0 1.10—Ther-e are a few w4er-mains in the multi family area that may have an eppefftmity4e� eliminated. See Exhibit Seetien V11(I.)Watef Mafkup fef Afeas of Pessible Wa4er-Main o In addition,remove the water markup exhibit,Exhibit V11.1 The revised exhibits are as follows: A. Revised Preliminary Plat B. Revised Conceptual Engineering Plan C. Revised Landscape Rendering D. Revised Open Space Exhibit E. Ten Mile Stub Drain Cross-section F. Conceptual Elevations of Single-Family Homes 4 Item 4. F87 A. Revised Preliminary Plat pp. I 4d� ® . EO r _ I esm Y YE # gzr$ , �c _ / 1, O. I � , 17 -- — I{ � — 3• I e -K ` g N '� 3 PHI yxa - - 4 ,� n a E �o;n z�z�M zA 1 m� 2 T„�� J, 3 f _ 11 q Q 'Act was N' €..APB �� _ •�. z77 P R E L I M I IV A R Y P L A T €g X •'•. - _. .•.- b iley Engneering,Inc. I '-Am;^�h�i P��EneixrevixelPunxin�l Cd�� TRILOGY DEVELOPMENT, INC 5 Item 4. 88 Cal ✓ T ®® j i s ____ 3 wo a ct s t& a:e ysgeanrsnef:aBBee B.."se"s aaa ax®aeky7 '� C4 -� kkyRm ka BR A&FRg Yeg56ex B9 E&9 SYAS6R Y y:455� Q CGg9:5"gj�€�;5 �egpge . S III — !�" kN. H Mql WRiM 92?a�s�saeaasxaee@se�dewss9 I 1 CC� CCCCGGaasse'sa"CCa'CRgRa�a®a C BABYSY kY Rk8 SR R �$%I �l ' �i $ay 3 t8aw SEG4P'�' yw I,i.i ,>< p•.D I II� s n �i�a 4iL yawlRYS"a jesy5 w' �.§?i u�,5a15 -!I I w ex a xx p.E-kvaCr::sir:.•nv•wYE k=- �P F2 E L I M I N A F2 Y F�L.4'T ,.b �s a�w,� alley Englneering,Inc. F O X C R O mT S U B O I V 1 5 I O N ,��§a pm ExemeexmelPuxnws lCp�� T 121LOGY DEVELOPMENT, INC -""- —"•°'• 6 Item 4. F89] B. Revised Conceptual Engineering Plan I I �•11 III 3UW- �fo� - " I i ,. o I y �I 1 I � I A � / I I' S • F r^ O f 1 I S' ! CZ],. I •�...:, C, p Ib3 . p ly td I In ^m w oz N �! CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING; F _-4•''r" Ilep Engneeling.lec. b 8 FO X C R O FT S lJ B I V I S I O N i .pq CML EGUIn EM1MQ Pu iNaI(ADe W TRILOGY DEVELOPMENT, INC """""' 7 Item 4. Fg-o C. Revised Landscape Rendering V. �'-Ttvt' ML d L i 9oL r �-8_ir'.l ]ate e V FETE�P, FOXCROFT SUBDIVISION ® o FEBRUARY 25,2021 MERIDIAN, ID PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN g Item 4. ■ D. Revised Open Space Exhibit PARKING lN.CEO SPACES-ate SINGLE EunILV PnRwNG ^� nrs - -z1R z �__•SPACES CARE UNIT PROPOSED HAS REOIIIRED SPACES: -9H-NDINOARO CAR GARAGE e i.f UNANDICAE SPACES FOR2OFFSTEREOUIRING PER OPEN SPACE AND PARKING E UNCOVERER SPACES 213 FOR20FFSTREET PARKING PER rXHIDI•C I'OH 5a a ----- 9NII. d -" 113G3.R_1-e.13290 sf® -- raawNc rOF C—PSIsE=a al Aoo rorvAL PARKINGFOXCEOFT SUBDIVISION =. NCAr srnces;=1zsrAOEs 9 B—AL REOIJIREry ell Ory raEEREIU2TOENN IDENTIFIED a ONBE 71EPUBLI 6TREEED r OUTO QD LF i ��1 µNAY A5 AN US ATION OF SONAHL—RKNc uE of , DRIVE—SANDOTHER DEsrRucnouE 'r 1 ti 4 ry J UAL I _-5- P QUALIPIED O A. `-- � { B.1.�.7,339 sf QUALIdIED UDC 1r a-L14C J _ ?DALIFIE=U113G-3.B,4,4,'IOS sf 8 1 I 0 0S.LTP 111 p -=QUA ` Z U o z ALFIED LVC -30-3.B-1 a.5,5850 '^ F QUALIFIED UDC II-30-3.B.1.a. F OPEN SPACE NO DRAINAGE 50K100 MIN z > z 50,8455F Y W � ® �•� 1.17ACRES Q m QUALIFIED UDC 11 3G 3 d PATHWAYS WITH LANDSCAPE 1F -USN. 31,598 RF 0 0,73ACRES Q QUALIFIED UDC II-3G-3.B.3. LE IL 0 COLLECTOR BUFFERS Q a�2 9 ® ,_ il_I� serlD 1,04 ACRES N a' �T ` ® QUALIFIED UDC 11,3G3.B.4. U Q �� ONE HALF ARTERIAL BUFFERS z X J 2,503 sf W O a' 05 ACRES O IE F QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G-3.B.7 m a� ,,,,, �y ® ® (g QUAL IE❑UDC NATURAL WATERWAY Mar.. 11,732 A2175ACRES p 9 Item 4. F92] E. Ten Mile Stub Drain Cross-section 3RD FLOOR BALCONY IS 4' ABOVE 2ND FLOOR OF EXISRNG HOME C T ELEV- 2S�f.01 m d a gWWW FLOORm F1EV-3597.53 EIEV= 2��IR0 FLOOR&LLCaN1' C N m -0 ROOF PEM 43 N nt m C ROOF PEAK G1 2610 —o ' 261❑ 2600 FP o a e 2600 2590 a 4 h 2590 2nd noor a 2580 2rrd Flo a fst F7aar � 2580 2570 Tst Hoar20' I 25 35' ^——— ——__—` 35211 i 1 2560 ———— 2560 ELEY ELEY-�?502.3fl . 2550 is A ' 2550 •'1 RAYM 2540 — 254D 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 Ten Mile Stub Drain PROFILF F. Conceptual Elevations of Single-Family Homes i ■■ >s.. IN 400 f - � 10 Item 4. F93 : :- _ _t _ - CM!f 11 Item 4. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 2/18/2021 Legend DATE: ��Proect Location s TO: Planning&Zoning Commission II�� i FROM: Joe Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0113 Foxcroft Subdivision LOCATION: The site is located directly west of Ten ; '�. Mile Road, on both sides of the proposed ; Pine Avenue extension, and east of the ' SR Tenmile Creek, in the E '/2 of Section 10, �® Township 3N.,Range 1 W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Annexation of 23 acres of land with a request for the R-8 zoning district; • Preliminary Plat consisting of 85 building lots and 31 common lot on 35.7 acres of land in the proposed R-8 zoning district and existing R-15 zoning district; and • 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,by Gem State Planning,LLC. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 35.7 acres(R-15— 12.74 acres;R-8—23 acres) Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential&Mixed Use Community Existing Land Use(s) County residential and farm land;vacant R-15 zoning Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential and detached single-family residential Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 116 total lots—9 multi-family residential;76 single-family lots;and 31 common lot. Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as three(3)phases Number of Residential Units(type 292 total units—76 single family;216 apartment units of units) Density(gross&net) Gross(overall)—8.17 du/ac.;Net—18.3 du/ac. Gross per area:NW Block—3.35 du/ac.;SW Block— 3.28 du/ac.;NE Block(apartments)—16.95 du/ac. Page 1 Item 4. F95 Description Details Page Open Space(acres,total 6.88 acres of qualified open space OVERALL [%]/buffer/qualified) (approximately 19.2%)—5.31 acres for 11-3G requirements(approximately 15%); 1.57 acres(69,123 square feet)proposed for 11-4-3-27(Multi-Family) standards. 18,360 square feet of private open space is proposed (approximately 85 square feet per unit)to meet specific use standards. Amenities 7 qualifying amenities— 10' multi-use pathway,pool, clubhouse,picnic areas,tot-lot,fitness facilities,and a pedestrian/bicycle circulation system. Physical Features(waterways, Tenmile Creek abuts the property along the entire western hazards,flood plain,hillside) boundary; some floodplain exists on site due to creek. Neighborhood meeting date;#of October 14,2020— 13 attendees attendees: History(previous approvals) R-15 portion of property—Ellensburg Subdivision,AZ-05- 051;PP-05-052;CUP-05-047.CUP and plat have long expired but zoning ordinance was approved. 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 connections to the extension of W. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Pine Avenue west from N. Ten Mile Road(arterial).Pine Proposed) will be extended by this Applicant and the adjacent Applicant on the south side of Pine from the intersection of Pine&Ten Mile west to the eastern boundary of the southern portion of this site.Access is proposed as 3 public street connections for the SF portion of the site and 2 driveway accesses for the multi-family site. Traffic Level of Service Ten Mile Road—Better than"E"(1.474/1,540 VPH) Pine Avenue(existing section only)—Better than"D" (182/425 VPH) Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross No public stub street connections are proposed.Applicant is Access allowing adjacent property to southeast to connect one of their private drives to a proposed public street connection on the south side of Pine Avenue.Applicant is also allowing an emergency only access near the southeast corner of the site for the benefit of this project and the adjacent project. Existing Road Network No(Pine Avenue exists on the west side of the Tenmile Creek) Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ Existing sidewalk along Ten Mile but no buffer. Buffers Proposed Road Improvements The Applicant,in conjunction with the Applicant of the property to the southeast,is proposing to extend Pine Avenue west from the intersection of Pine and Ten Mile to the Ten Mile Creek.This Applicant is responsible for the construction of Pine that this property abuts(approximately Page 2 Item 4. F96 Description Details Page 1,650 feet)and construction of the vehicular bridge over the Tenmile Creek along the western property boundary. Distance to nearest City Park(+ 0.9 miles to Fuller Park(21.9 acres in size)by car; size) approximately 0.5 miles to Fuller Park via existing and Tanned pathway and sidewalk connections. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station Approx. 1 mile from Fire Station#2 • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#2 reliability is 85%. • Risk Identification Risk Factor 2—residential with hazards(multi-family and waterway) • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required access,road widths,and turnarounds. Proposed phasing plan shall be adhered to;any changes in the phasing shall be approved by the Fire Department. Police Service • Distance to Station Approximately 4 miles from Meridian Police Department • Response Time Approximately 4.5-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. See attached documents for details. • Additional Concerns None West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) 0.1 miles to Chaparral Elementary 2.4 miles to Meridian Middle School 1.0 mile to Meridian High School • Capacity of Schools Chaparral Elementary—700 students Meridian Middle School—1,250 students Meridian High School—2,075 students • #of Students Enrolled Chaparral Elementary—423 students Meridian Middle School—1,022 students Meridian High School— 1,852 students Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services NA • Sewer Shed ` South Black Cat Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.02 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Additional 16,555 gpd of flow committed to model. •Per minimum city requirements,all sewer mainlines and manholes outside of a paved roadway shall have at a minimum,a 14-ft wide compacted grave access roadway centered over the mainline. This condition can also be satisfied with a 14-foot wide paved surface.The pathway shown over the existing sewer along the north properties is Page 3 Item 4. F97 Description Details Page subject to this requirement,as well as manholes SSMH A2, SSMH A3,and SSMH A5. •Please redesign the sanitary sewer routing to eliminate the sewer mainline passing through the common driveway labeled as Lot 20,NW Block 1. Water • Distance to Services 0' • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Applicant shall be required to construct 12-inch water main in W.Pine Avenue to comply with"to-and-through" requirements.This new mainline shall connect to existing water mains at the west and east ends. •The water main in N.White Leaf Way near SSMH G5 needs to connect to the proposed water main to the east(Mile High Pines Sub). •The water main in W. Sugar Pine Ct.that currently dead- ends needs to connect to the proposed water main to the east (Mile High Pines Sub)in N. Side Creek Lane. Currently this dead-end does not meet fire flow pressure requirements. •There are a few water mains in the multi-family area that may have an opportunity to be eliminated. See Exhibit Section VII(L)Water Markup for Areas of Possible Water Main Elimination. COMPASS—Communities in Motion 2040 2.0 Review Housing w/in 1 mile 3,801 Jobs w/in 1 mile 1,454 • Ratio 0.38—Indicates an employment need(ratio between 1-1.5 is considered healthy ratio) Farmland Consumed? Yes Nearest Bus Stop 0.8 miles Nearest Public School 0.1 miles Nearest Public Park 0.1 miles Nearest Grocery Store 0.5 miles Recommendations See agency comment section for link to full file. Page 4 m 1 1 1 ■ rll�ll nln i • . - . . .HER'RY'ts" �� _ � (�• . - . . ;;RR�Y ...: ... m - • - ■ ��■■ ��i■■ ■ W All :nnunnn nn u iiii- � 1 q h�1•nm�hi■iJhJ� -nunnm nnn 0.nm�-nu■■■.nn nnn n u■ A F•I � ■i nw nnn nnn ��.,- ■■::r� •i'.■�'.'.��:III c-SSdrZS• -._�. 1 •�no�■� �E'• LU ....-1%L■IIII■1■�11111:IIId7i P IN E- •••,, P IN E ■III um �liiiii'--3==-= nm � T�.`- i�:mmiwunl►� R\�ll::11 ll�11111111111111 IIYIIII, i o - • Id" FRANKLIN ` FRANKL-IN I - IIIIIIIIIIIIIn11a6d6, — 1 nIW1YY - =Lau n;••snnnll==nn loll - � R'Y .pn...n , .. 'nnu 1 .IH :u ;■m ♦ n■■■nl u ;■m ♦ 6•■■u n■ 1 p •Illnrl Dunn nn�nn ■�IIIUW Dunn...ii.. ■■.L 1 n 1. n r m_I u.nnnn n■ . f :m: ....uuun n. ■■.. -�: In■■?Mn y •o � nu.nn■1■O■11 •o-■ -" nu■numonsoons n. �� ♦ ■■ y•r -: lnunnn mn • -■ •• - ■ :nnunnn nu. ■ �1 • ..ulmmn nnn • - •nl.omn unn ■■■ h wnm��1 nm�h1� ICI m • q1 .mi:■nnnuu■nnn il.ni:nunnnn nnn ■■ n ann m■■■■Inn �.... a••1 a n.n m.■■■Inn n��.�'•• .a► �::.-::■guano n..•� . ■ �.m �::.-:i■guano . ..-=ter :::1�1�'" . ■-.-. .- ■h. _ _==a__ •J - N:�.1�6n - nl■.■ _ � 1�■I nln■ : ': •■ ■:-::III � .it IFI mn■ :::'- ■ ■'-::III QI tr �Vmm�I�_-. IIII � mn■ ■.:�:-�Il..0 nm.A:-un: � � S ,,�. ■::�:_I ll..0 nm.d:-u1.: �e ► `� - _ ■. :mm�n u1 s+ � �• n■.. ■■ :,ninon anon■■ 1_ ♦ nl.� •° � �LI�J .�■S■._■ un: nnlnn numni:�2i_ r �ji��_-� �'•___■: .■. ....: 011llll■�I 1; :.t, f -.:u minuir ' -- 4, �_, �'.-'--- - ■Ill ..—.II...LL111 IIII 11111111•.,•. ® - �N.=• �.■—..I...Lull, ..,In 1111111 ,..; J��Cl_` �--p IN EirL un �J = �::°►I:a"s ^ ■ uni �liiiii€�.-■:_:9 mu �:`.. t' W m u I �nnn= _■---u.ui�nl ''. ��• a••1 .innmuu nlll @-`j.11.111.111 • 'ni�+`�'L� I IIn\VII::II�IIIILInlllI1111111111�_, -'E\ �� i IILN�•f ■nm\Vnc:mtun.nuunnnnnn� -- 111111 11111111111111111�I11..16. — . ;•,unmet i • _ Item 4. 99 1 C. Representative: Jane Suggs, Gem State Planning—9840 W. Overland Road, Ste. 120,Boise, ID 83709 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 2/3/2021 Nextdoor posting 1/12/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridianciu.or /g compplan) The subject project area contains two future land use designations,Mixed-use Community(MU- C)and Medium Density Residential(MDR),with the MDR designation taking up a larger area of the project, 12.1 acres and 23.6 acres,respectively. Mixed Use Community—The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community- serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses,including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N)areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU- R)areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to (up to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Medium Density Residential—This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. The subject project is located west of Ten Mile Road near the intersection of Pine and Ten Mile and its western border is the Tenmile Creek. The project has existing City of Meridian zoning and development to the west and north of the property consisting of R-8 zoning and detached single- family homes and R-4 zoning containing Fuller Park and Chaparral Elementary. South of the southern section of the project is the railroad easement for the historic Oregon Short Line RR; south of the railroad tracks is a 15-acre self-storage facility. Directly to the east/southeast of this project is a project that recently received approval by City Council for a mixed-use development consisting of 135 multi family units and three commercial pad sites. Across Ten Mile Road is existing commercial zoning and uses as well as a Church use. The project to the south/southeast has the MU-C designation which is also on a portion of the southern section of the subject project. The majority of the subject project contains the MDR designation. Future land use designations are not parcel specific and therefore, when a project contains more than one designation the Applicant has the opportunity to float the designations and propose a project that may fit with both or only one of the designations. In this case, the Applicant has not chosen to include any commercial uses with the subject project and instead has proposed a project that is entirely residential, corresponding with the MDR designation. The Applicant is proposing detached and attached single-family residential and multi family Page 6 Item 4. Fool residential which are also recommended uses within the MDR. Despite intentionally not proposing a project consistent with the MU-C designation, the Applicant understands some integration of uses and incorporating adequate transitions between uses is still important. Thus, this Applicant and that of the project to the east have worked together to allow cross-access between the projects located on the south side of the Pine Avenue extension so both vehicles and pedestrians of this project can have easier access to the commercial approved on the west side of Ten Mile. Commission and Council should determine if this sole connection is enough integration. Other than integration, the density of the project also comes into play when discussing the future land use designations. MDR allows projects with densities in the range of 3-8 du/ac and overall, this project is proposed with a gross density of 8.17 du/ac which is rounded down to 8. The MU- C designation allows gross densities of 6-15 du/ac but Staff finds this range to be generally nonapplicable because the Applicant is largely not proposing a mixed-use project; in short, it would not be appropriate to allow an overall higher density based in a future land use designation that is otherwise not apart of the project in any other aspect.A potential issue arises when the density is broken out into the segments of the plat that happen to coincide with the proposed phasing plan—the southwest block, the northwest block, and the northeast block, according to the Applicant. The Applicant breaks the density of the project down into these three areas on the submitted preliminary plat. The single-family portion of the project is proposed with a gross density just above 3 du/ac with the apartments being proposed at a gross density of 16.95 du/ac. The same difference in the numbers is also revealed when looking at the number of units proposed within the requested zones; 216 multi family units on 12.7 acres versus 76 single-family units on approximately 23 acres. If the Applicant was only requesting approval of the apartments, the proposed density would not comply with the Comprehensive Plan and therefore the only reason it is compliant now is because of the single-family portion of the project. Despite this fact, Staff agrees that apartments make sense on the R-15 piece abutting a collector street, adjacent to a school, and across from a mixed-use development to the south and more commercial to the east across Ten Mile. However, Staff does have concerns on how the apartments transition to other development and the impact that the proposed number of units will have on the transportation system in this area. To help in these regards Staff is recommending the Applicant lose some apartment units in the form of reducing some of the buildings to two-story structures instead of three. Specifically, Staff recommends that buildings on Lots 4, 5, 6, and 9, NE Block I (as shown on the submitted plat) within the multi family portion of the site be no more than two stories. This would help with the transition of multi-story structures abutting the backs of single-family homes to the west and to the north (Moshers Farm Subdivision) and reduce the number of units by approximately 32 units. Reducing the number of apartment units by 32 would revise the total number to 184 units and change the density of the apartments to approximately 14.4 du/ac which would fall within the allowed range of the MU-C designation. Again, this designation is generally not being analyzed by Staff but because part of the project does contain it and the adjacent project south of the proposed apartments also has the MU-C designation, Stafffinds it appropriate for the higher density portion of the site to not exceed the allowed density within the MU-C because it makes for a more cohesive density between the proposed apartments and all adjacent development, both existing and approved. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A.In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, Staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section VIII.A1. The DA is required to be signed by the property owners)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council Page 7 Item 4. ■ and subsequent recordation.A final plat will not be accepted until the DA is executed and the AZ ordinance is approved by City Council. The Applicant's submitted Annexation and Zoning exhibit does not appear to match the parcel lines shown on the submitted plat in the very southwest corner of the site. The COGO provided by the City's GIS department shows this in the clearest way: x 5LiiQ417�2�a ; 1�f04f7 1 Sf21041.7919 51s21041 Si�il141•l 4a s• r r As seen by this blue area,the red line of the submitted Annexation and Zoning Boundary missed this small area. The aims to minimize leaving small slivers of county land whenever possible. So, prior to the City Council hearing,the Applicant should provide revised legal descriptions and exhibits to include this small sliver of land. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https://www.meridianciU.or /g compplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff analysis in italics. "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City"(2.01.01G).Foxcroft Subdivision proposes multiple different types of housing within the project to include single-family attached(duplexes), alley- loaded single-family homes, as well as traditional detached single-family and garden style, walk- up apartments. Staff finds the proposed housing diversity would offer new types of housing for this immediate area. "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices"(3.07.01A). The proposed site design incorporates some transitional densities and pedestrian facilities within open space to act as buffers between the subject parcels and existing development.As noted above, Staff does have concern between the transition of the apartments to the detached single- family homes abutting the project to the northeast. The project also abuts the Tenmile Creek on its entire western boundary which is a natural buffer between this subdivision and those to the west. Within the site the Applicant is proposing alley-loaded units abutting Pine Avenue on the south and duplexes on the north side of Pine Avenue abutting the apartments. Both of these choices offer a good transition from a busy collector street to the more traditional detached single-family homes. In addition, Stafffinds placing attached units next to the apartments in order to transition from a higher density to the existing Creekstone and Castlebrook Subdivisions to the west is appropriate. Page 8 Item 4. F102 "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 network abutting the site to the east and to the west within the existing section of Pine Avenue,per Public Works comments. The Applicant will be extending Pine from Ten Mile Road all the way to the west and constructing a bridge over Tenmile Creek to complete this segment of Pine. Subsequently, all public utilities will also be extended at the Applicant's expense in order to connect to the existing services within the right-of-way. This project also lies within the Fire Department response time goal. West Ada School District has offered comments on this project estimates 73 additional school aged children in this development. Chaparral Elementary abuts the subject site directly to the north and the Applicant is extending the multi-use pathway network to incorporate pedestrian connection to Chaparral. 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, especially with Staffs recommended revisions. "Preserve,protect,and provide open space for recreation, conservation,and aesthetics" (4.05.01F). The proposed project offers open space that exceeds the minimum requirements in the unified development code (UDC) because of the preservation of the Tenmile Creek. This creek is one of the natural waterways specifically noted within the UDC that should be left natural and unimproved in order to provide for conservation of historic waterways. Other than the creek, the Applicant is proposing open space areas that exceed the minimum 50'x 100'dimensional standards that should allow for usable open space in all areas of the proposed project. The Applicant is also proposing multi-use pathways along the creek and adjacent to Chaparral Elementary and Fuller Park which provides more usable open space and additional pedestrian connections in this area of the City that is currently lacking in connections to Ten Mile Road. "Coordinate with developers, irrigation districts,and drainage entities to implement the proposed pathway network along canals, ditches,creeks,laterals and sloughs." (3.08.02B). The Applicant is proposing a large extension of the multi-use pathway network with this development adjacent to the Tenmile Creek. The Applicant has coordinated with the irrigation district to ensure adequate access for maintenance as well as allowed landscaping. In addition, the Applicant is proposing segments of the multi-use pathway along the north boundary to be wider than the 10'requirement to accommodate adequate access for public utility maintenance. This also offers additional room for pedestrians and cyclists to travels safely from the east and west of the site to Fuller Park and Chaparral Elementary. "Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together and to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system." (6.01.01H).As discussed above, the proposed development is constructing large segments of the regional pathway system which helps connect multiple areas of the City to Fuller Park and Chaparral Elementary. In addition, there are proposed connections to the required detached sidewalks along the Pine Avenue extension.All of the proposed pedestrian improvements would improve the access and safety for pedestrians and cyclists in this area of the City. "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid-mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B).Pine Avenue is a collector street east of Ten Mile Road and west of the adjacent Tenmile Creek but the segment of Pine that bisects the property is only a dirt-road,private access at this time. With the development of these parcels and the recently approved project to the southeast, Pine Avenue will be constructed as a collector street as noted on the MSM. This will make a much needed connection for the overall transportation network of Meridian and especially within the immediate area of the development. Page 9 Item 4. 103 Staff finds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: The subject development consists of 7 parcels and on three of them are existing homes that are proposed to remain. Access to all of the existing homes is currently via Pine,a private street that connects to Ten Mile Road but is required to be constructed as a public collector street with this development.No other site improvements are currently known. D. Proposed Use Analysis: The Applicant is proposing multiple types of residential uses within this development—detached single-family, attached single-family,alley loaded single-family, and multi-family residential. Multi-family residential is a conditional use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. All other proposed residential uses are principally permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district. Multi-family developments require Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC)and Design Review so Staff will have additional opportunities to review this portion of the site. The Applicant has provided a phasing plan notating the project is to be constructed in three phases with the single-family south of Pine being first,the single-family area north of Pine second, and lastly the multi-family development in the third phase. The Applicant is required to and has proposed to construct a vehicle bridge over Tenmile Creek and extend Pine Avenue from Ten Mile Road over the creek with the first phase of development. The proposed residential uses and how they are laid out provide for a transition from Ten Mile Road to the existing detached single-family subdivisions on the west side of Tenmile Creek despite not including the 16 acres abutting the development to the east(a different owner that has received approval for a multi family development). Abutting the creek, the Applicant is showing traditional detached homes that front on a north-south local street that connects to Pine Avenue. East of this local street, and on the south side of Pine, the site transitions to alley loaded homes that front on Pine. South of the alley loaded units are two of the three existing homes that are to remain and they are proposed to take access from the new local streets proposed within the development. These homes abut the developments eastern boundary along a long segment but are somewhat removed from the boundary by the existing yards. The Applicant has provided an exhibit showing how this are of the plat can redevelop in the future should those existing owners relocate or choose to redevelop. Stafffinds it appropriate to incorporate this exhibit into the Development Agreement because it shows a logical extension of the single-family development within the project for future development. East of the local street on the north side of Pine the site transitions to single-family attached homes inform of duplexes. These homes abut the proposed apartment complex within the existing R-1 S zoning district. According to the Applicant, these homes are proposed as single-story structures which is a major factor in Staff's recommendation to limit the centrally abutting apartment building(Lot 9, NE Block 1) to a two-story structure to offer a better transition within this area of the project. The apartments are proposed with five buildings along the northern boundary abutting Chaparral Elementary and an existing subdivision.As noted, Staff believes the three buildings adjacent to the existing subdivision should also be limited to two-story structures to offer a more appropriate transition regardless of the approximate 80 foot buffer between the apartment buildings and the back of the single-family lots. Staff finds the centrally located clubhouse and open space for the multi family units to depict good site design and should offer adequate opportunity for use by everyone within the multi family development. Page 10 Item 4. F104 E. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed multi-family development use is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission and subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3- 27 and below: 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe, interesting outdoor spaces for residents. B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios,and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project shall comply with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas,outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures that are only visible from the private streets; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3.A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title.According to the revised open space exhibit, the apartments are proposed with approximately 85 square feet of private open space in the form of private patios and decks for each unit, commensurate with traditional garden style apartment buildings. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5.No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate,designated and screened area. Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts",of this title. See analysis in staff report below. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: Page 11 Item 4. ■ a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail)that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) Per the submitted plans, the Applicant appears to meet these requirements. Where it is not clear on the submitted plans, the Applicant shall comply with these requirements at the time of CZC submittal. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict these items. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. Note: Open space standards found in UDC 11-3G AND those found in these specific use standards shall apply to this project.Please see the applicability section of both code sections. Staff analysis for both open space requirements is in Section V.L of this staff report instead of splitting the analysis into two parts. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area,and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20').Proposed open space submitted as meeting this requirement has been reviewed.All area labeled as qualified common open space on the open space exhibit complies with this requirement. 3. In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. The multi family portion of the project is proposed to be developed in one (1)phase. However, all pathways and required landscape buffers to Ten Mile Road and Pine Avenue will be required to be constructed with the first overall phase of development. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4') in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff.retroactive to 2-4- 2009). The buffer along W. Pine Avenue, a collector street, and the buffer along N. Ten Mile Road, do not count toward the common open space requirements for the multi family specific use standards. However, those areas along the arterial and collector roadways do count towards the minimum 10%required open space for the residential development as a whole. D. Site Development Amenities: Page 12 Item 4. F106 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life,open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2)Fitness facilities. (3)Enclosed bike storage. (4)Public art such as a statue. b. Open space: (1) Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100)in size. (2) Community garden. (3)Ponds or water features. (4)Plaza. c. Recreation: (1)Pool. (2)Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two (2) amenities shall be provided from two (2) separate categories. b. For multi-family development between twenty(20)and seventy-five (75)units,three (3) amenities shall be provided,with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy-five (75)units or more, four(4) amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision- making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Based on 216 proposed units or the reduced amount of 184 units recommended by Staff, a minimum of four(4) amenities are required;however, the decision-making body is authorized to consider other amenities in addition to those provided per the standards listed above in 2.d. It is not entirely clear what amenities are proposed only for the multi family portion of the development. Therefore, the following amenities are what are known by Staff to be proposed from the quality of life, open space, and recreation categories:a clubhouse, a swimming pool, pedestrian and bicycle paths, a segment of multi-use pathway, and open space that is at least 5,000 square feet. Therefore, the Applicant is proposing S qualifying site amenities to meet the multi family standards. Staff is not in full support that the proposed 5 amenities can adequately serve nearly 200 apartment units.At the Commission hearing, the Applicant should clarify Page 13 Item 4. 107 what other amenities are proposed for the multi family portion of the development to ensure compliance with code. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide. b. For every three(3) linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The submitted landscape plan appears to meet these specific use standard landscape requirements and shall be further verified at the time of CZC submittal(see Exhibit VII.D). F. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed building lots appear to meet all UDC dimensional standards except for Lots 3-8,of SW Block 2 (some of the alley loaded lots),per the submitted plat;these lots do not meet the minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet. The Applicant is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the requested zone so the noted lots must be enlarged to meet the minimum lot size requirement. To do this, the Applicant will likely have to reduce the open space lot directly south of these lots and push the alley further south. Note: The alley that is shown on the plat does not meet ACHD policies for an alley. Therefore, this alley must instead be constructed as a minor urban local street which is a minimum of 24 feet wide with curb and gutter and no parking is allowed on either side. Staff is recommending a condition of approval in line with ACHD's condition to ensure this street segment is revised. In addition,all subdivision developments are also required to comply with Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards (UDC 11-6C-3). The Applicant is proposing a cul-de-sac that is over the permitted 500 foot length and therefore must be approved by City Council,per the UDC standards. The submitted preliminary plat depicts this cul-de-sac to be approximately 710 feet in length and ends in a cul-de-sac that has an emergency access to the adjacent Mile High Pines subdivision directly to the east. This Applicant needs the emergency access in order to maintain Fire Department approval. The adjacent subdivision was recently approved with maintaining this access but Commission and Council should determine if the overall site design of this southern section of the site is sujf cient for 26 homes to take access from when developing around existing structures. G. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, 11-3H-4): Access is proposed local street connections to the W. Pine Avenue extension for the single-family portions of the development;the multi-family development is proposed with two driveway access points to Pine Avenue that line up proposed accesses on the south side of Pine (one within this development and one within the Mile High Pines project on the south side of Pine). There is no access to N. Ten Mile Road except through the collector street,Pine Avenue. Because of the Tenmile Creek and other easements along the boundaries there are no other stub streets that exist to this development. Subsequently,the Applicant is not proposing any stub streets to adjacent subdivisions. The proposed public streets and driveway access points have been approved by ACHD despite the easternmost driveway not meeting district policy. ACHD has recommended a Page 14 Item 4. Flo] 25%modification to their standards to allow this access so that it aligns with the one approved for Mile High Pines to the south and to allow overall traffic circulation in the multi-family development. As noted,the Applicant is proposing a cul-de-sac over the permitted length. Please see previous section for analysis and requirements on this issue. Traffic Impact Study Analysis: The proposed project proposes more than 100 units and therefore requires a Traffic Impact Study(TIS). The Applicant's traffic impact study has been analyzed by ACHD and specific conditions of approval are outlined in their staff report(see exhibit VIII.K).Despite ACHD analyzing and discussing the TIS in their own report,Staff finds it necessary to highlight the main points of discussion and road improvement requirements,specifically those related to the extension of Pine Avenue. This Applicant and the Applicant for the approved project to the southeast of this project have entered into a legally binding "Dedication and Development Agreement"that outlines the potential options for how the Pine Avenue extension will be constructed(see Exhibit VIII.0). In addition,ACHD has outlined different options for how this extension and road improvements can occur. The Applicant's agreement discusses that whoever obtains City approval second is required to dedicate the required amount of right-of-way to ensure Pine Avenue is constructed centered on the section line dividing the two properties. Staff appreciates the forethought of this agreement to ensure correct construction of the Pine Avenue extension. Therefore,Staff recommends a condition of approval in line with this agreement. At a minimum, this Applicant will construct Pine Avenue west of the Pine/Ten Mile intersection as % of a 36 foot collector street section with vertical curb,gutter, and detached sidewalk on the north side. This half street section is proposed and has been approved by ACHD for approximately 890 feet into the site from Ten Mile because the Mile High Pines development will construct the southern half the street section abutting their site. West of this line, this Applicant is required to construct Pine as the full collector street section to the west boundary and construct the vehicle bridge over Tenmile Creek.In addition, the Applicant is required to enter into a signal agreement for the required signal improvements at the Pine/Ten Mile intersection. H. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for single-family and multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. The single-family portion of the site must comply with these standards and will be confirmed at the time of building permit submittal. The Applicant has provided data regarding the multi family portion of the site to show compliance with the parking requirements. Based on the number of bedrooms, the minimum parking required for the multi family development is 415 spaces; according to the submitted preliminary plat, 429 parking spaces are proposed. This amount exceeds the minimum requirements by only 14 spaces. Pine Avenue will be a collector street which does not allow on- street parking so there are only 14 extra spaces for guests to park within the apartment complex. Staff has major concerns regarding the proposed parking which is an additional reason why reducing the number of units as previously discussed is recommended. By losing 32 units, the parking requirement will be reduced by 48 spaces if they are all one-bedroom units and will be reduced by 64 spaces if they are all two-bedroom units. Staff recommends a reduction in apartment units but not a significant reduction in parking spaces. Following the reduction in Page 15 Item 4. Flog] units, some of the parking could be removed in order to move Lot 11 or Lot 9 away from the single-family homes to the west;some parking could also be removed to increase the amount of open space within the apartment complex. Staff recommends that no more than 20 of the excess spaces are removed to accommodate the above options. The Applicant did not submit a separate parking plan for review. I. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is required and proposed along the property's western, northern,and southern boundaries. The Applicant's submitted plans show compliance with this requirement in line with the Master Pathways Plan(MPP). The Applicant will continue the new segment of pathway from Mile High Pines to the east along the southern boundary and abutting the railroad easement. This section of multi-use pathway will then connect to a segment along the east side of the Tenmile Creek that will be shared with the irrigation access road.Approximately 425 feet north of the southern boundary, the pathway turns west and crosses the creek at an existing culvert to end up behind the Chesterfield Subdivision. This juncture of the pathway also turns east to become a micro path and connects to the attached sidewalk along the internal local street.Along the creek the pathway continues north to Pine Avenue and will connect to the sidewalks along the collector street and allow for access to the existing multi-use pathway on the north side of Pine that continues further north to Fuller Park and the Castlebrook Subdivision. Per the MPP, the Applicant is also proposing to construct another large segment of multi-use pathway along the northern boundary that starts at Ten Mile Road and continues all the way to the western boundary with a new pathway connection to Fuller Park from this development. This new connection will allow residents of this development, the future Mile High Pines residents, and those of existing developments to the west to use the sidewalks and this new pathway segments to access Fuller Park further east than what is currently existing within Castlebrook Sub. In addition to the required multi-use pathways, the Applicant is proposing a micro path between the apartment complex and the northwest block of single family homes that connects the detached sidewalks along Pine to the multi-use pathway along the norther boundary. This is yet another pedestrian and bicycle connection to increase the pedestrian circulation in this area. Despite all of the proposed pathways within the development, there is one additional connection that could tie together even more paths and add a quicker way for children to walk to Chaparral Elementary, if it can be done. Staff believes adding a new micro path connection to the open space and pathway within Moshers Subdivision to the northeast would be a great benefit to this development and the recently approved Mile High Pines.Adding a new connection to the school is not preferred by either the school district or Police because it creates another access point to monitor for safety reasons. Mosher Subdivision already has a dedicated micro path connection to Chaparral so if this Applicant can work with the Mosher HOA and tie into their existing network, the overall pedestrian access to the school will be increased. Overall, this Applicant is proposing to construct approximately 4,500 linear feet(approximately 0.85 miles) of pathways with this development, which does not include the detached sidewalks along Fine Avenue. This is an abnormally high number for one project to construct so Staff is appreciative of the proposed pathways that are required and not required. Staff is in full support of the proposed pathway plan for the subject development. J. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): 5-foot attached sidewalks are proposed along all internal private streets and 5-foot detached sidewalks are proposed along Pine Avenue, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Page 16 Item 4. ■ The sidewalks in this development create connections throughout the project including to and from the multi-use pathway segments surrounding the development. All open space areas also appear to be directly adjacent to sidewalks which add to the accessibility of these areas. Staff supports the sidewalk and pedestrian circulation plan for this development. See Exhibit VII.E. K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 20-foot wide street buffer is required adjacent to W. Pine Avenue, a collector street,landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. At least a 20-foot wide common lot is depicted along both sides of Pine Avenue and the submitted landscape plans appear to show landscaping in excess of code requirements. There is also a 25-foot wide landscape buffer required adjacent to the small area of the site that abuts N. Ten Mile Road, an arterial roadway; the submitted plat and landscape plans also show compliance with this requirement. The submitted landscape plans appear to show the correct amount of landscaping per the UDC standards for the landscape buffers. Landscaping is required along all pathways (including micro-pathways) in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. The total lineal feet of all pathways with the required and proposed number of trees are included in the Landscape Calculations table on the submitted landscape plans, sheet LA. The correct number of trees appear to be shown on the submitted plans.However, the required 5 feet of landscaping and trees on both sides of the pathways is not shown at any point throughout the site. Staff understands the pathways are encumbered by the Tenmile Creek to some degree. Therefore, at a minimum, the Applicant should apply for Alternative Compliance at the time of Final Plat submittal to show an adequate alternative to the required landscaping on both sides of the multi-use pathways. Prior to the City Council hearing though, the Applicant should revise relevant plans to reduce the depth of the lots along the southern boundary to include the required landscaping on both sides of the pathway in this segment. In addition, the segment that runs along the east side of the creek should widen the landscape area adjacent to the pathway to at least 5 feet;the submitted landscape plans show only a 3-foot wide area of landscaping. The lots adjacent to this segment can accommodate a loss of at least 2 feet in lot depth to include 5 feet of landscaping on at least one side of the pathway. The segment of multi-use pathway along the north boundary and proposed apartments is also encumbered by irrigation and sewer easements as well as the required dimensional standards for drive aisles and parking spaces. Because of this, the Applicant has proposed trees and landscaping on the buildable lots abutting the pathway that exceed UDC minimums.Staff agrees with this decision but this alternative should also be included in the alternative compliance request required at the time of final plat submittal. For the segment of pathway along the north boundary but behind the single-family lots, no landscaping is shown beyond grasses. This does not meet code and at a minimum, these lots should be reduced to accommodate at least 5 feet of landscaping(including trees) between the pathway and the buildable lots.As discussed previously, the lack of trees on the drain side of the pathway should be part of the required alternative compliance request. Common open space is required to be landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3G-3E. The total square footage of common open space and the required number of trees to demonstrate compliance with UDC standards is included in the Landscape Calculations table and meets UDC requirements. Page 17 Item 4. F-1111 L. Qualified Open Space (UDC 11-3G): As discussed previously,the open space standards for both the standard 11-3G-3 and the multi- family specific use standards are analyzed in this section. A minimum of 10%qualified open space meeting the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B is required for the overall development, including the multi-family portion of the project. Based on the proposed plat of 35.72 acres,a minimum of 3.57 acres of qualified common open space should be provided to satisfy the requirements of 11-3G-3. In addition,because there is a multi-family development within a residential zoning district,the common open space standards listed within the specific use standards,UDC 11-4-3-27, also apply. The minimum amount of open space required to satisfy the specific use standards is 1.24 acres of common open space. Combined,the required amount of minimum qualifying open space that should be provided is 4.81 acres. The Applicant's revised open space exhibit shows a total of 6.9 acres of qualifying open space.5.31 acres meet the 11-3G-3 standards (approximately 14.9%) and the remaining 1.59 acres meet the common open space requirements in the multi-family development specific use standards(see Exhibit VII.C).The qualified open space consists of the required street buffers,the Tenmile Creek,and other open space areas throughout the site. This area exceeds the minimum UDC requirements. The 1.59 acres of common open space proposed to meet the specific use standards for multi- family development consist of the clubhouse/pool with some adjacent open space,two areas that are at least 5,000 square feet, and other smaller areas of open space that meet the minimum 20' x 20' multi-family open space dimensional standards. The open space proposed to meet the specific use standards also exceeds the minimum UDC requirements. As noted above, the common open space provided with this development exceeds the minimum amounts required by code. Despite proximity and ease of access to Fuller Parkfor this development, the Applicant proposed open space in excess of UDC standards. In addition, the Applicant is not counting a majority of the multi-use pathways as open space because they know they cannot accommodate the required landscaping adjacent to them. Staff appreciates the amount of open space proposed and even though it is not centrally located, Staff believes there is adequate open space within Fuller Park to engage in larger activities. In addition, the Applicant is proposing private open space for the multi family development that complies with code requirements. Staff appreciates all of the pedestrian pathways throughout the site; these pathways and sidewalks connect the main areas of open space to the residential units offering fairly equitable access to the proposed open space. Staff supports the pedestrian network and the connections to open space anchored by usable open space and amenities and the commercial area on the eastside of the site. All in all, Stafffinds that the proposed common and private open space are sufficient for a project of this size and proposed use. M. Qualified Site Amenities (UDC 11-3G): Based on the area of the proposed plat(35.7 acres),a minimum of two (2) qualified site amenities are required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3C. The applicant proposes three(3)qualifying amenities to satisfy the requirements in this section of the UDC; 10-foot multi-use pathway segments, children's play structure, and a gazebo. All other site amenities(analyzed in an above section) satisfy the multi-family specific use standard amenity requirements. Page 18 Item 4. F112 N. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing is proposed as shown on the submitted landscape plans and appears to meet UDC requirements. O. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): The applicant has submitted conceptual renderings and elevations only for the apartment buildings. Attached single-family homes and multi-family structures require Administrative Design Review(DES)approval prior to building permit submittal. The submitted multi family elevations show traditional, walk-up garden style apartment buildings. The buildings appear to have at least three field materials of stucco, lap siding, and stone and incorporate adequate roofplane variation along the roofline. The buildings all share the identical color palette which does create a singular identity. The ASM notes that no two multi family buildings should look the same.At the time of DES submittal for these structures, the Applicant should create more differentiation between the units to ensure compliance with the ASM. This could occur by adding variation in the amount of accent materials and/or accent colors. Staff will ensure compliance with the ASM at the time of design review submittal for both the multi family units and the attached single-family dwellings. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the requirement of a Development Agreement and approval of the requested conditional use permit and preliminary plat applications 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 19 Item 4. F113 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation and Zoning Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Maps Description for R-8 ZONE Foxcroft Subdivision November 19,2020 A parcel of land located in the Southwest 114 of the Northeast 1/4 and the North 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 10,Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the East 1/4 corner of said Section 10 from which the Center 1/4 corner of said Section 10 bears, North 89°36'02"West,2655.68 feet;thence on the East-West centerline of said Section 10, North 89136'02"West,939.50 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said centerline, South 06°07'28"West,415.20 feet; thence South 42152'02"East,798.04 feet to the centerline of the Oregon Short Line Railroad; thence on said centerline, North 88°51'42"West,703.34 feet; thence leaving said centerline, North 33°15'25"West,241.17 feet; thence North 48°32'21"West, 101.97 feet; thence North 43°57'49"West, 144.27 feet; thence North 88°52'12"West,50.71 feet to the Easterly boundary line of Chesterfield Subdivision No.4 as filed in Book 112 of Plats at Pages 16216 through 16218, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on said Easterly boundary line the following seven(7)courses and distances: North 45°26'50"West, 1.76 feet; North 39°43'48"West,89.05 feet; North 39°20'28"West, 100.02 feet; North 25°23'24"West, 125.16 feet; North 19'21'27"West,94.89 feet; �- •µ... s 11779 Page i of 2 Page 20 Item 4. 114 4 ' North 22°44'42"West,83.44 feet; North 17'25'33"West, 198.22 feet to the East-West centerline of said Section 10; thence on said centerline,South 89136'02" East,39.48 feet to the Easterly boundary line of Ten Mile Creek as described in Easement Deed recorded on March 15, 1946 in Book 121 of Deeds at Page 23, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on said Easterly boundary line the following three(3)courses and distances: North 17'27'31"West,530.79 feet; 120.85 feet along the arc of curve to the left having a radius of 176.00 feet, a central angle of 39°20'32"and a long chord which bears North 37'07'47" West, 118.49 feet; North 56°48'03"West, 118.30 feet to the North boundary line of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 10; thence on said North boundary line,South 89'37'19" East,765.14 feet to the Northeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 10; thence South 00°03'48"West, 663.57 feet to the Southeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 10; thence on the East-West centerline of said Section 10,South 89'36'02" East, 388.34 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 24.567 acres,more or less. End of Description. ti OFPage 2 of 2Y;�` Page 21 Item 4. Fl 1-5 4 150 600 0 300 SCALE: 1" = 300' .] L C-S-NE 1/64 S89'37'19"E 765.14' S.10 <g - Ln Ki Z ( MOSHERS co FARM SUB 13 o o I W 0 I BASIS OF BEARING ............ •N89'36'02"W 2655.68'•............... -S89'36'02_"E 1/4 C 1/4 --- C-E 1/16 388.34' N 89'36'02"W 939.50' --- 5.10 N1T25'33"W S89'36'02"E S.10 --198.22 39.48' 1.3 OFABEG BEGINo NING NT S.1 D 5.11 R-8 ZONE Nf CO N22 4 83.44' ±24.567 ACRES f o I ti N19'21'27"W Z 94.89' N 25-23'24"W 125.16' N88'S2'12"W \� 1 N39'20'28"W 50.71' I S 100.02' S45'26'50"E 1.76' \ I N43'57'49"W �� %.o 144.27' \ p�pL LANp _ N88'51'42'W 703.34' \ 4�C ENS F i1G�G — I OREON SHORT LINE RAILROAD 11779 n N�'J�y��sZsPs rF of do per' LINE TABLE orM McCk LINE BEARING LENGTH L1 N33'15'25"W 241.17 CURVE TABLE L2 N48'32'21"W 101.97 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA CHORD BRIG. CHORD DIST. L3 N39'43'48"W 89.05 Cl 120,85 176.00 39'20'32" N37'07'47"W 118.49 L4 N56'48'03"W 118.30 .e too w Fnvc.ok a :5 P IDAHO EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR roB no. 19-133 9955 W.EMERALD ST. CITY OF MERIDIAN R-8 ZONE SHEET NO. SURVEY 8018 4"5HO 70 6 FOXCROFT SUBDIVISION 1 GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 AND THE N 1/2 OF THE SE DWG.DATE 1/4 OF SECTION$0,T.3N.,RAW.,B.M.,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 11/19/2020 Page 22 Item 4. 116 Description for R-15 Zone Ten Pine Park Subdivision October 27,2020 A parcel of land located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 10, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the East 1/4 corner of said Section 10 from which the Center 1/4 corner of said Section 10 bears, North 89°36'02"West,2655.68 feet; thence on the East-West centerline of said Section 10, North 89°36'02"West, 1327.84 feet to the Southeast corner of the Southeast 114 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 10; thence on the East boundary line of the Southeast 114 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 10, North 00°03'48" East,654.55 feet to the centerline of the Ten Mile Drain; thence on said centerline the following seven(7)courses and distances: South 85'32'14" East, 126.24feet; South 65°24'02" East,49.70 feet; North 89°34'58" East,23.00 feet; South 66°39'02" East,357.40 feet; South 67°30'53"East,357.19 feet; South 66°01'35"East,448.10 feet; South 50°13'59"East,22.66 feet; thence leaving said centerline, North 89°59'52" East,48.00 feet to the East boundary line of said Section 10; thence on said East boundary line,South 0°00'08" East, 158.64 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 12.942 acres,more or less. End of Description. R-x1 fn Page 1 of 13 Page 23 Item 4. Fl 17 150 600 0 300 SCALE: 1" = 300' S85'32'14"E 126.24' S65'24'02"E - -- 49,70' T66 i 3S3g0,2E 1N89 ,40 S6). MOSHERS r 23.00''58"E 30S3 FARM SUB 23.00' 3S j� E' � w� S6B 07 3S�. I w R--15 ZONE o f ±12.942 ACRES ` 48�� z S50'13'59"E L1 22.66' REAL POINT N OF BEGINNING 1/4 C 1/4'' N89'36'02'W 1327.84' S.10 5.10 5.11 Z N89'36'02"W 2655.68'••""""• i w BASIS OF BEARING ~ I iz G � I � I OREON SHORT LINE RAILROAD ��5y\ONPGENS�eo sG�� C� 779 LINE TABLE 1 `p �7 7 9 LINE BEARING LENGTH �0 9TF `pQ = L1 N89'59'52"E 48.00 O OF o Y� McCAM� L2 SD'00'08"E 158.64 EXHIBIT DRAWING FOR mD Ho. I DAHO 19-133 SURVEY 9955W EMEMLDST. CITY OF MERIDIAN R-15 ZONE S EET ND. (M)86-8Hoe37oa TEN PINE PARK SUBDIVISION 1 GROUP, LLC LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION m OWG GATE T.3N.,R M,U.M..ADA COUNTY,IDAHO 10/27/2020 Page 24 Item 4. 118 s65°32'4"e sg�3go2h S a e sgs 3053 e 7 m h� m SBB a735B `9 10 G �C m GL m G aQ 1327.64 n89 36'02"w Ir h 1 ,k� 1p 10/27/2020 Scale: 1 inch= 171 feet File:Ten Pine Park Sub R-15 Zone.ndp Tract 1:12.9416 Acres,Closure:s62.4340e 0.01 ft.(11686231),Perimeter-3573 ft. 01 n89.3602w 1327.84 10 n89.5952e 48 02 nOD.0348e 654.55 11 s00.0008e 158.64 03 s85.3214e 126.24 04 s65.2402e 49.7 05 n89.3458e 23 06 s66.3902e 357.4 07 s67.3053e 357.19 08 s66.0135e 448.1 Page 25 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 11/11/2020) Fl 20] -13A3C3 AC>0-MJ-L -Lt-J3VqdO 'MOURQ901203 fall -J-'IV &-Z-A V, I VN I MMMC4 MM El nmR�Am mm, mm"m -mm MOI �55 AIA FIN I 1 9 R Im. M M'.MoM —iM 5 H MMM w M M m i0l� MUM, ol L I -p b .......... 6.1 Page 27 Item 4. 121 C. Open Space Exhibit(date: 11/11/2020) ONI '1N3Wd01313❑ h`J011Li1 _ a aa3iaxixxndixuiurini�rr3iiii� rd':i '� No I rl 1^108 n s ?121Yd 3NI6 N31 W I •aul JuuaaulPlr�Aap §xF^ .�- o "�� _F^ NOIS IhIO9fl5 1-=I0L10X0-=l 'W.4„o wm LLc7 `83y_�.... vw m `6w QMwaa w� m wLL w H O d 6 MK n 12 � m K mm eUiQ Ism � , �Rz �❑ �LL �a UZ OF UU UW Uw a 69- °wLL w N 6 w o U U w u 'i� r oo_ a ao<� oaro aoa� cro�� ozr� w � � I 4 ; ! I I iU9g rr ❑ IWIII// ! NJ �• �j � y � � 3 g / / t r-T "gym c � �� ..g ma r I� •��aM;��''� '� O InO III 6 atl slam pes` � � � � © O O O III •�._ _ U O�J F,Q- ,.'i IC-D� ¢ o D O a � � �� g�� y € aPt e�'ssa�aa x �sF $� .� 4 Page 28 Item 4. Fl 22] OPEN SPACE EX91DIT ------ FOR FOXCROFT ST-13XVISION F F-, LIFIE OU I IE DC 66& QUALIFIED UDC 1 -3'7,3 1 -B.1-a-7,339si QUALIFIED UDC &-lFIE1)UDC QUALIFIEDMIDC ---------------------------- -3G-3.B.a.40.215 i4 QUAY D-UD INW LI FI ED UMC 5.58 QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G-3-B-1..- OPEN SPAC E NO DRAINAGE 50x1(10 MIN 45.763 SF I-D5 ACRES 7 wa— QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G-3-13-1e .1 PATHWAYS WITH LANDSCAPE _3�LIFIED Ua 19.308 SF C)l % N B.'-3.E53sf 0.42 ACRES QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G3133. (02) COLLECTOR BUFFERS 45.450 0 04 ACRES QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G-3-6A. ONE HALF ARTERIAL BUFFERS 2,503 sf ce 05 ACRES QUALIFIED UDC 11-3G-3-B-7 QUALIFIED UDC NATURAL WATERWAY IL 11-&G-SEL-1-1 1.732 sf 119.722sf 235 ACRES Page 29 Item 4. 123 D. Landscape Plans(date:11/11/2020) .� Wo f:Y7,; r N o �IL � 14 1�L7- 1� y P — 1 z '� �� C Q LU LL ^3 ue' � G\ O �} LU Lj- � Page 30 Item 4. Fl 24 SwAM . E � o � I ®l Y. L3 i �N� � � � iv it �;� � � �✓ �� — Q m Q LL a w L.L � Page 31 Item 4. ■ 'I4 I I ^ r a % - I I �0 „ IL II .:__-a-niePao ave ,/ Ci C7n x 3 .-O /, \ � N � _-N.-MIR•••mm-v.ccrF Aim 0 .. ... .. EDIII m I N rlr 1, � 4 1 I I II�� 4 I IA m= � ® F ° 0 � 9 e O uumuuk r€o i 7 My•' 1 r A a ' PRF_IPIINAR" PLAT LANDSCAPE FLAN ev'sEo am � e Riley Engineering,Inc. r— n FCDXCROl-7- E�u�3L7IWI�ICJ� � �IYIL NGINEENINGIPaNNING�A� TRILOGY -DEVELOPh/ENT, INC. Page 32 Item 4. Fl 26 ii,In �A f - 101K� r. 3 lw w a € f YI 11 L. i. S`7Y✓ '..5 d F ti 1/ L� �o I �lEN MILE pq, I Z x 10 ET 1 S O r Sim 10 D { m PRLLMINARY PLAT LANDSCA'L FLAN �o.x Sk. �, '"�� dailey Engineering,Inc. 1—OXC�F2O 1---T ICJ Bd I\/ISI C71V�� CIVIL ENGINEERING I PLANNING I CAUU —RILOCY D-VIELOPV-I',T, INC_ n �` Page 33 Item 4. 127 �k /P X' \ / r nln mlm y o e( - 1 - ' i f 11 / 10 m U Ado ; C z IM rn j r � s F II b� Sinn_ PRIT—WINAR" PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN aevlsEo Iley Engineering Inc. FCDXC�ROF� 51�1 L9 L-DI V IS1�?I�i �3 ' Cm�!.NwmeER!Nu!Pum mcICADD T-RI LOGY DLVLLOPN LINT, IIN C. Page 34 Item 4. Fl 28 1. t y FrT a OAR a - P � � m IT ins•.. � a S �' �� e � �� a � &�� '"��^,� rn i a k i A 8£t A - z 50 o r z : Y nn � c r - z m b k T dr ra PII a ° 51, gz_ PREL MINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAY U., d 3 � Y � ileyEngineering,Inc. ®XC FRC�I=T SUE?E7IVV��O?�I �� .-� CIVIL FiraixmnxulPuxxixolCAou T ICI LC GY CEV E LO PM TNT, INC. d;;; •„ _ .-.�.. Page 35 Item 4. 129 E. Pathways and Pedestrian Circulation Exhibit 1 � j I O = a-- � I• ^ III 0_ o b O Al o � IIFo ^ O I /0 CQ Oa III m� i I UP II fJ /l I i o� I O I•�' ran p rn'a k m f o m j ° a H - PATHWAYS EXO-iOBOT s ,�y„r*�, 9 w.i °_ Ilry Endneetln&lnc. �-3 FOXCFZO FT SUl3OIVISION � Cm�EnowEntixclPunninal CRUn T F21L0 GY DEVELOPMENT. INC Page 36 Item 4. F130] F. Proposed Phasing Plan PR ELIMINARY FORFOXCPOVTSUBDIVISIO................ .......... v 77 fio 1"w 211 ARM Z L) 0 z J Ld LZ ID L Sm > 0 w (L L Page 37 Item 4. 131 G. Conceptual Redevelopment Plan for lots containing existing homes to remain in the"SW Block" - 2r ,`:' .� FO}{CROFT SUBDIVISION i_; i_C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN �N.. _ .• FOR LOTS 2 AND 6 ` — '' BLOCK 4 SW ----------------- ---------- - ----- -- 8,392 s 1 , — i 1 - aj,sls SCALE 1"=60' II//II�YH.�//.YrS�YIIIIIHI/IIIrI/y� r S U + - 8,558 14,777 10.434+/ 1 r.�� +' � I ar0➢s +� Z4b82 y+� + SW BLOCK 4 Page 38 0 -9 : • � ., 1 "r el '4Y r b In Idw ' q i i' a'• .r' x Page 40 •� �_ III }�. r ......,� ,y.,,. r - -3� •.�. -- Page 41 Page 42 Item 4. F136] I. Water Markup for Areas of Possible Water Main Elimination oy - 7 i 9 �4 SSh1H l .� Y-SSM H`'. water loop SSW 0.... .needed? �� yIP/P• ASS .$ 1 � ` ... a _ r P/PipE� .'�i.°rp PlPpr 1+�I '_ �p v;P" �- + 3jrp R ` � IP!`I w -Y I'•p P PIP��_ Pl iA "w, • 1P 2 NE OCI[•1 p,W,•,� 1 ��_ Pl p /P! Ss�i H — P I .If water loop is needed, - - this section cT water �,1.. /P •, can—eliminated P!Pj P!R' 1 P .` R Ph r�y}R+P�ai P�P•P far better circulation ` •_P SSMH _ p-- p 7_-g P iv__`._x Pfr+Ir_ _�_�_ _ _ P~tP_P IPI� s this water mom 1- -a_ P - _P `p SIP needed? I PI dl°I ' - P 1:.' P -t P P' , rrP, * -tom- # � _ 1 a P r-- — P/ _I IPT�I #CLUBHOUSE/ 1 1 ---r-- SSMH El--:�. _ MH F1r c,� p< OFFICELL LL pI PI PI NI HI rl rl nl PI PIP Plr� P'rl ;r ��» „ t /^r .ir �v_� p ...� 1 c I f _ _ I_ NE BLOCK I 14 r .,... _ ❑ I P 1ll Do P—IP P SSMH E2 }r _ 7'I T-TF&UH D5 L 11 "-a _� �L �' }P' 15 L -- —� P 6ILPIFI PI PIP L-- - =vwr n. .,. .. VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the approved plat, site plan, landscape plan, open space exhibit,conceptual building elevations,conceptual redevelopment plan,pathway and pedestrian circulation exhibit,and the proposed phasing plan included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. Page 43 Item 4. F137] b. The 10-foot multi-use pathway segments surrounding the development shall be constructed with Phase 1 of the development. c. With the first phase of development,the Applicant shall construct the extension of W. Pine Avenue,vehicle bridge over Ten Mile Creek and the Pine/Ten Mile intersections in accord with ACHD requirements and in line with the signed "Dedication and Development Agreement,"as seen in exhibit VIII.L. d. No building permits shall be submitted until the final plat for the associated phase is recorded. e. The required landscape street buffers shall be constructed and vegetated(along N. Ten Mile and W. Pine Avenue)with the first phase of development. f. The multi-family development shall be constructed with no more than 184 units with buildings on Lots 4, 5, 6,and 9,NE Block 1 (as shown on the submitted plat)to be no more than two-stories in height;proposed parking shall not be reduced by more than 20 parking spaces following the reduction in units. 2. With Final Plat submittals,the Applicant shall provide relevant revised plans to depict any minor revisions shown on the revised open space exhibit. 3. The preliminary plat included in Section VII.B, dated November 11,2020, shall be revised as follows at least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing: a. Revise the proposed alley between SW Block 2 and SW Block 3 to be a minor urban local street constructed at a minimum of 24 feet wide with curb and gutter,no sidewalks, and no parking on either side. b. Relocate the minor urban local street further south to allow Lots 3-8, SW Block 2 to meet the minimum lot size in the R-8 zoning district of 4,000 square feet. c. Reduce applicable building lots in the single-family areas of the site to accommodate at least 5 feet of landscaping and trees along the multi-use pathway segments (Lots 12-19,NW Block 1; Lots 16-24, SW Block 1; Lots 25,28, 29, &34, SW Block 1). 4. The landscape plan included in Section VII.D, dated November 11, 2020, shall be revised as follows prior to submittal of the Final Plat application: a. Revise the landscape plans to add a 5-foot wide landscape buffer along both sides of the pathway segment located along the southern boundary of the site, landscaped in accord with UDC 11-3B-12. b. Show at least 5 feet of landscaping on the east side of the pathway segment on the east side of the Ten Mile Creek and landscape in accord with UDC 11-3B-12 c. Show at least 5 feet of landscaping on the south side the pathway segment abutting Lots 12-19,NW Block 1. 5. The Applicant shall apply for Alternative Compliance with the first Final Plat submittal to propose an adequate alternative for all of the required pathway landscape requirements,in accord with UDC 11-513-5. 6. If an agreement can be made with the Mosher Subdivision homeowner's association,the Applicant shall construct a micro-path into the Mosher Subdivision and tie into their existing pathway network generally located in the location of the existing culvert over the Ten Mile Sub Drain along the northern property boundary with the first phase of development. Page 44 Item 4. 138 7. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6,UDC Table 11-2A-7, and those listed in the specific use standards for multi-family development,UDC 11-4-3-27. 8. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family and multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 9. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 10. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review approval entire multi-family development with the submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the entire site and for the attached single-family dwellings. 11. The Applicant shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval for the entire multi- family development prior to building permit submittal. 12. The Applicant shall provide conceptual elevations for the proposed single-family attached dwellings buildings at least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing. 13. Comply with the outdoor service and equipment area standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 12. 14. Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 1 1- 3A-15,UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 15. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 16. The conditional use approval shall become null and void unless otherwise approved by the City if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use, satisfy the requirements,acquire building permits and commence construction within two years as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.1; or 2) obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.4. 17. 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. 18. The Applicant shall adhere to and maintain all standards as set forth in the Multi-family Development specific use standards,UDC 11-4-3-27. 19. Prior to building permit submittal for any structure in each phase,the Applicant shall record the associated final plat for that phase. 20. The Applicant shall record a maintenance agreement for the multi-family development that states the maintenance and the ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features, in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27. 21. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy on any building,the applicant shall submit public access easements for all of the multi-use pathways within the development to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. Page 45 Item 4. ■ B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Per minimum city requirements,all sewer mainlines and manholes outside of a paved roadway shall have at a minimum, a 14-ft wide compacted grave access roadway centered over the mainline. This condition can also be satisfied with a 14-foot wide paved surface. The pathway shown over the existing sewer along the north properties is subject to this requirement,as well as manholes SSMH A2, SSMH A3,and SSMH A5. 1.2 Please redesign the sanitary sewer routing to eliminate the sewer mainline passing through the common driveway labeled as Lot 20,NW Block 1. Sanitary sewer mainlines are not allowed within common drives, only sewer services(reminder that a maximum of three services are allowed into a manhole,with a minimum 30-degrees of angle separation). 1.3 All sanitary sewer and water easement areas must remain free of any permanent structures, trees,brush,or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for the easement. 1.4 Sanitary sewer and water service lines cannot run under carports. 1.5 Minimum distance between service lines must be maintained, 6-feet between potable/non- potable service lines, 5-feet between each sewer stub off the mainline. 1.6 Any sewer service lines greater than 100-feet will need cleanouts that are accessible for cleaning; contact plumbing official for specific details. 1.7 Applicant shall be required to construct 12-inch water main in W. Pine Avenue to comply with"to-and-through"requirements. This new mainline shall connect to existing water mains at the west and east ends. 1.8 The water main in N. White Leaf Way near SSMH G5 needs to connect to the proposed water main to the east(Mile High Pines Sub). 1.9 The water main in W. Sugar Pine Ct.that currently dead-ends needs to connect to the proposed water main to the east(Mile High Pines Sub)in N. Side Creek Lane. Currently this dead-end does not meet fire flow pressure requirements. 1.10 There are a few water mains in the multi-family area that may have an opportunity to be eliminated. See Exhibit Section VII(I.)Water Markup for Areas of Possible Water Main Elimination. 1.11 A Floodplain Development Permit and updated hydrology and hydraulic model are required for the W. Pine Ave bridge and pathways. 1.12 A street light plan will need to be included in the final plat application. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the City's Design Standards. A future installation agreement is required for the streetlights on Pine Avenue and Ten Mile Road. Contact the Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator for additional information. 1.13 The geotechnical report submitted with this application(prepared by SITE Consulting, LLC, dated November 16, 2020)indicates that they had begun the geotechnical exploration and recommendation report. This initial investigative report does not contain the final determinations. Applicant shall be required to submit the completed geotechnical report/recommendations prior to this application proceeding to the Meridian City Council for consideration. Particular attention needs to be focused on ensuring that all residences constructed with crawl spaces should be designed in a manner that will inhibit water in crawl spaces. This may include the installation of foundation drains, and the installation of rain gutters and roof drains that will carry storm water at least 10-feet away Page 46 Item 4. F140] from all residences. Foundation drains are not allowed to drain into the sanitary sewer system,nor the trench backfill for the sewer and/or water service lines. 2. General 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. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches,canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at(208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services.Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at(208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. Page 47 Item 4. 141 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing,landscaping,amenities,etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.20 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the proj ect. 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. These 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 Page 48 Item 4. F142] for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=218795&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=218971&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=217427&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=219143&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky G. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=220017&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=218921&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity I. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDH) https:llweblink.meridiancily.or /WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=218258&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Ry J. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.or /WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=221010&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity K. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https:llweblink.meridiancily.or /WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=218397&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv Page 49 Item 4. F143] L. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219 777&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty M. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=221015&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty N. PUBLIC WORKS MEMO—RESPONSE TO PRELIM CIVIL PLANS https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=220311&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty O. DEDICATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—VIPER AND BARON https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=222672&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC Ry IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application.In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment to annex the property into the City of Meridian with the R-8 zoning district and subsequent development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all conditions of approval are met. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment and request for different types of residential dwelling types will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available within the City and within this area. Staff finds the proposed development is generally consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts included as part of the application. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Because of the proposed addition of differing dwelling types and the construction of a needed Page 50 Item 4. F144] public road extension, Stafffinds the 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; Staff finds that the proposed plat, with Staffs recommendations, is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; 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 VII 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 approved the subject roads and road improvements. 6. The development preserves significant natural,scenic or historic features. Staff finds that with preserving the Tenmile Creek, the development meets this finding. C. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the submitted site plan and preliminary plat appear to meet all dimensional and development regulations in the R-I5 zoning district in which it resides. Page 51 Item 4. F145] 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 use of multi family residential, with Staffs recommended revisions, is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Medium Density Residential and the requirements of this title when included in the overall project analysis. 3. That the design,construction,operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses closest to the subject site, Stafffinds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant complies with Staff's recommended revisions. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Stafffinds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water,and sewer. Stafffinds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as all services are readily available, the nearby arterial street is widened to its full width, and the Applicant is required to construct a new public road extension to accommodate additional traffic flow. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Stafffinds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials,equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes, glare or odors. Although traffic is sure to increase in the vicinity with the proposed use, all major roadways adjacent to the site are already at their full width and the Applicant is required to extend Pine Avenue as a collector street adjacent to their site. Therefore, Stafffinds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare. Page 52 Item 4. F146] 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) With the preservation of the Tenmile Creek(a natural waterway), Staff finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 53 Applicant Presentation FOXCROFT SUBDIVISION Meridian, ID Landscaping Landscaping Vicinity Subject Property Map Landscaping Conceptual Apartment Renderings Conceptual Apartment Renderings (continued) Landscaping Landscaping Landscaping Amenities GazeboCommunity PathwaySeatingPlayground;PoolFitness Center;Clubhouse; Gazebo Playground Landscaping Thank you. PreliminaryPlat Open Space Services 20751852SchoolMeridian High12501022SchoolMeridian Middle700423Chaparral ElementaryCapacitySchool schools have capacity to serve the projectWASD–Schools•Meets Meridian Water Master Plan–Water•Meets Meridian Waste Water Master Plan–Sewer•All ACHD conditions of approval are acceptable–Traffic•Less than 4 & 1/2 min response time–Police•Less than 5 min target response time–Fire• Meridian Future Land Use Map Subject Property(adopted 12/17/2019) Outparcel PlanRedevelopment Vicinity Map Subject Property Apartments Exterior Color Palette– Item 5. L147 (:> E IDIAN*-----, AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Movado Mixed Use (H-2020-0123) by FlexSpace, LLC, Located on the South Side of E. Overland Rd. Between S. Eagle Road and S. Cloverdale Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units (56 units on 4225 E. Overland and 10 units on Parcel S1121121011) on 6.8 acres of land in the C-G zoning district B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements (Inst. #2017-12608 & #2018-012456) to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses on the remaining 6.8 acres of the Movado development. Item 5. F148] (:�N-WE IDIAN:-- IDAHO PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Staff Contact:Joseph Dodson Meeting Date: March 4, 2021 Topic: Public Hearing for Movado Mixed Use (H-2020-0123) by F1exSpace, LLC, Located on the South Side of E. Overland Rd. Between S. Eagle Road and S. Cloverdale Rd. A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units (56 units on 4225 E. Overland and 10 units on Parcel S1121121011) on 6.8 acres of land in the C-G zoning district B. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements (Inst. #2017-12608 &#2018- 012456) to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses on the remaining 6.8 acres of the Movado development. Information Resources: Click Here for Application Materials Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing 1 i PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: March 4, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 5 3 PROJECT NAME: Movado Mixed Use (H-2020-0123) PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify YES OR NO 1 2 I 3 v 4 5 i1 7 f u 8 a „y 9 ac 10 11 12 13 14 15 Item 5. ■ STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING March 4,2021 Legend DATE: Project Location , TO: Planning&Zoning Commission ' FROM: Joseph Dodson,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2020-0123 Movado Mixed-Use ' } LOCATION: Generally located on the south side of E. - - j Overland Road between S. Eagle Road ,f and S. Cloverdale Road,in a portion of A �® the NW 1/4 of the NE %4 of Section 21, _ Township 3N.,Range IE. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted requests for the following: • Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 66 attached units (56 units on 4225 E. Overland Rd. and 10 units on Parcel S1121121011)on 6.8 acres of land in the C-G zoning district; and • Development Agreement Modification to modify the concept plan approved with the existing agreements (Inst. #2017-012608 &#2018-012456)to include a mix of multi-family and commercial uses on the remaining 6.8 acres of the Movado development,by F1exSpace,LLC. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage i 6.8 acres(C-G zoning district) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Regional Existing Land Use(s) Vacant Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-Family Residential and future Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 2 existing commercial building lots—properties have not been final platted yet Phasing Plan(#of phases) Proposed as one phase for the residential;commercial is future. Number of Residential Units(type 66 multi-family units—proposed as 8-plex,attached of units) townhome style Density(gross&net) Gross—9.67 du/ac.;Net— 17.24 du/ac. Page 1 Item 5. 150 Description Details Page Open Space(acres,total 19,561 square feet of qualified common open space [%]/buffer/qualified) proposed(approximately 6.6%)—collector street buffers are not part of proposed open space but part of previous Movado Greens development. A& 7,573 square feet of private open space proposed. Amenities Three(3)amenities are proposed—Enclosed bicycle storage,plaza with BBQ&firepit,and a coffee kiosk. Further Staff analysis is below in Section V. Physical Features(waterways, N/A hazards,flood plain,hillside) Volillm Neighborhood meeting date;#of 2 meetings: October 7,2020(11 attendees)&October 8, attendees: 2020(5 attendees) History(previous approvals) Part of Movado Estates AZ,PP,PS(H-2016-0112); Movado Greens/Silverstone Apartments MCU,MDA,PP, RZ(H-2017-0104); Silverstone Apartments MDA(H- 2019-0099)&Silverstone Apartments MCU(H-2019- 0014)that were withdrawn;DA Inst.#'s 2017-012608& #2018-012456. 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 driveway connections to both sides of Hwy/Local)(Existing and S.Movado Way,a collector street.Driveway will be an Proposed) extension of driveway stub along western property line. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Internal access is via shared driveways for both the Access commercial and multi-family developments;part of this is from an existing driveway stub from the west(Silverstone Apartments). Applicant is proposing to stub a driveway access near the southeast corner of the site to the east property line for connectivity of a project within the City of Boise. Existing Road Network Movado Way is an existing collector street;Overland Road is an existing arterial street. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ The landscape buffers and arterial sidewalks along E. Buffers Overland Road are existing and were constructed with previous approvals.However,an older curb cut along Overland was not closed with curb,gutter,and sidewalk— this should be corrected with this application. Proposed Road Improvements No road improvements are proposed as Movado Way is already existing and at its full width.Additional on-site driveways will be constructed as access for the commercial and multi-family portions of the site. Distance to nearest City Park(+ Fire Station#4 Park is closest public park as seen on GIS— size) 0.4 acres in size and approximately 1.7 miles away. Movado Subdivision has two larger open space areas,as well as other smaller open s ace areas. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station Approximately 1.7 miles from Fire Station#4 Page 2 Item 5. 151 Description Details Page • Fire Response Time This project lies within the Meridian Fire response time goal of 5 minutes. • Risk Identification Risk Factor 3—Commercial • Concerns The fire department is concerned there is nowhere for visitors to the apartments to park on the west side of the project.Fire lanes may be blocked which would become an issue. Police Service No comments West Ada School District Estimated school age children 4 to Pepper Ridge Elementary generated by this development 2 to Lewis&Clark MS elem,ms,hs 3 to Mountain View HS Capacity of Schools Pepper Ridge Elementary—675 students Lewis&Clark MS— 1,000 students Mountain View HS—2,175 students #of Students Enrolled(Spring Pepper Ridge Elementary—576 students '20 enrollment) Lewis&Clark MS— 1,071 students Mountain View HS—2,237 students Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance 14.07 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns -Additional 4,272 gpd committed to model •No Permanent structures(buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls,fences,infiltration trenches,lightpoles,etc.) can be built within the utility easement. •Not clear as to how the commercial/office building in the northeast corner will be serviced. Water • Distance to Services Directly adjacent • Pressure Zone 4 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns •Eliminate water main dead-end at southeast corner of western parcel;possibly run a service line to the building instead. See attached markup. Page 3 1 1 1 a f � ' I OVERLAND .f liiiiiiiiin.iii• = - y11R�, °f - w n�IN • �ii �. r nn i �i Brno OVERL--AND _ q �_IIIIIIIIIIIIIII nnlmninn Illlllllll�r�. _ ■MIlununnnn: _ liiiiiiiiiiiiiii: -1■ � liii�ii�.-n �I/�� ■ _ N `4 jll 1' .1-1 pill -IIII � -IIIII • � �`� 111� 111� -lnunr��1 � I■t �-Ilnum=��q 1 • 11 1. so- 11 Item 5. F153 IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 2/12/2021 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 2/9/2021 Public hearing notice sign posted 2/22/2021 on site Nextdoor posting 2/9/2021 V. STAFF ANALYSIS A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) A modification to the existing Development Agreements(Inst. #2017-012608 &#2018-012456), is requested for the purpose of including a new development plan for this area of the Movado Greens development to consist of both commercial and residential uses instead of solely commercial. The existing DA provisions are still applicable as they were mostly related to the larger Movado development overall. The existing DA includes a concept plan for this area from 2017 when the property received DA Modification approval to change the number and layout of apartment units along Overland,now known as the Silverstone Apartments. The existing concept plan depicts a number of office,retail, and general commercial buildings. This concept plan was intended to maintain a commercial presence within this area of the Mixed-use Regional designation despite being removed from the main commercial area at the intersection of Eagle and Overland. The Applicant believes the existing concept plan for this area of the agreement is not feasible with that amount of commercial square footage being separated from the Eagle/Overland area by residential and is too far east in general to accommodate 56,000 square feet of commercial space. Therefore,the Applicant is proposing a new concept plan depicting three commercial pad sites and 66 multi-family dwellings in the form of townhome style dwellings. The commercial is now proposed at approximately 27,500 square feet and is shown along Overland to increase the visibility. In the western half of the site,it is separated from 56 units of the multi-family residential by a shared drive aisle that is the access to the public street network for both proposed uses and connects to the west to the Silverstone Apartments site. In the eastern half of the site,the Applicant also shows the commercial building along Overland road for visibility with the remaining area of the lot as parking until the remaining 10 multi-family townhome units are proposed in a small sliver of remaining land in the very southeast of the project. Revising the development plan for this last remaining portion of the Movado Estates development is doable if done so with the right changes in mind. Staff believes that what the Applicant has presented does not fully touch on what a mixed-use development can provide, especially in terms of creating a sense of place and providing more pedestrian focus. Staff recommends some revisions to the site plan to improve the integration of uses and to better create a sense of place in this portion of the Movado development overall. Staff s recommended changes are as follows: condense the northwest commercial into one building; widen the northernmost drive aisle and include street trees while removing all parking that backs into the driving lane; and, incorporate a shared plaza between the commercial and residential. First,the Applicant should lose the northwest commercial lot in lieu of providing a plaza for the multi- family residential and future commercial to share. Instead of two single-story commercial buildings,the Applicant should consolidate these buildings into one structure that is two-stories in height in order to better utilize the land area available. In addition,constructing a two-story structure can hold the corner Page 5 Item 5. F154 along Overland and Movado Way more efficiently than a single-story structure when accounting for the required landscape buffer along Overland. Furthermore,a two-story commercial structure offers a consistent transition to the two-story multi-family townhomes and existing residential south of the project. Staff finds it appropriate that the Applicant decide the most appropriate size of this two-story building but believes it should be at least 10,000 square feet total which requires a minimum of 20 parking spaces(1 space per 500 square feet). In addition,to ensure adequate site circulation and pedestrian safety in perpetuity, staff is recommending a new DA provision that no drive-through use is permitted on this site. If one were to be proposed, Staff does not foresee the site adequately containing the stacking lane for a busy drive-through which could seriously harbor the function of the drive aisles and reduce pedestrian safety. Furthermore,the allowed uses for the commercial within this project should be office,retail,personal and professional services,restaurant, and daycare uses to aid in the integration and compatibility between the commercial and residential uses within the project. As noted,part of condensing the northwest commercial buildings into one,two-story structure is to remove the need for two building pad sites and allow for an area that can be shared between the commercial and the multi-family townhomes. There are multiple ways to design this that can incorporate a shared plaza and create a better sense of place in this mixed-use area. Staff has some specific recommendations but final design will largely be up to the Applicant. At a minimum,the Applicant should incorporate a pedestrian crossing from the multi-family units to the new shared plaza within the commercial area. This can be located somewhat centrally on the site with parking on either side,east and west, of a more modern two-story commercial building along Overland that frames the plaza, creating a true sense of place between the two uses. The Applicant could also construct the two story building in the location of the central commercial building(southwest corner of Overland and Movado Way)as shown on the proposed site plan and have the shared plaza and parking to the west of the building. Staff can see these two options as more than feasible but,as already discussed,the format of how this area is redesigned should be up to the Applicant;the Applicant should aim to create a sense of place and provide for an area that is shared in order to meet the intent of the mixed-use policies. The final piece of this revision relates to the design of the shared drive aisle.With the removal of parking spaces along the drive aisle,the drive aisle can be widened to accommodate detached sidewalks and street trees lining both sides of the drive aisle to create a short boulevard. Across this boulevard is where the new pedestrian pathway should be constructed;the crossing should be constructed with a different material than that of the driving surface(i.e. stamped concrete,pavers,or similar)to clearly delineate the pedestrian path between the residential and commercial.An additional option for this drive aisle would be to include parallel parking spots with detached sidewalks and appropriate landscaping (street trees are not a requirement but a recommendation). With Staff s recommended revisions, Staff supports the Development Agreement Modification request. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(https:llwww.meridianciU.or /�compplan): This property is designated MU-R(Mixed Use—Regional)on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). Land Use: The MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together, including residential,and to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. For example,an employment center should have supporting retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the development. Page 6 Item 5. Fl-551 In general, the proposed uses of multi family dwellings and commercial are listed as allowed uses within the MU-R designated areas. More specific comprehensive plan policy analysis is below.As currently designed staff believes the project presents some issues for safe pedestrian connectivity and lacks a true integration of uses through the site. Staff believes the site layout can be modified to improve these issues with the uses proposed. Staffs recommended changes are outlined in the above section as well as throughout the staff report. Furthermore, the Applicant presented a thorough case for this area of the MU-R designation to lack true viability as a premier location for commercial uses due to its location being more than a half mile from the Eagle/Overland intersection, the central hub of this MU-R area. Some commercial should remain on these parcels but Staff agrees with the Applicant that the proposed amount with the incorporation of townhome style multi family is adequate to meet a majority of the mixed-use policies if better integration of uses is done as outlined above by staff above. Transportation: Access is proposed via driveways that connect to S. Movado Way,the existing collector street that bisects the project. The driveway within the northwest section of the project will connect to the driveway stub from the Silverstone Apartments directly to the west. This driveway acts as a border between the proposed commercial buildings and multi-family townhomes and shows parking backing into the driveway.As discussed, Staff finds this driveway can be better designed in order to provide for safer pedestrian connectivity through the site and provide more integration of the uses.For example,the recommended changes to incorporate a boulevard and added pedestrian crossings in this area of the site. South of this driveway are the drive aisles for the multi-family townhomes with the required parking located on both sides. The southeast portion of this area contains a segment of drive aisle that is over 150 feet in length which requires a fire turnaround. Instead, Staff recommends this segment be reduced in length to not require a turnaround; a few parking spaces in this area may need to be removed to accommodate this. The east side of the development proposes an additional commercial building as well as ten(10)more multi-family units with driveway accesses to Movado Way in alignment with the rest of the site. The submitted site plan shows more than the minimum parking required and drive aisles that meet UDC and Fire Department requirements for the commercial portion of the east site. The proposed dwellings at the very southeast corner of the project are placed with minimal room to spare surrounding the buildings but do appear to show compliance with dimensional standards. According to ACHD,the proposed driveway connections meet their district offset policies by being 220 feet from the intersection of Movado Way and Overland Road. However,these two northernmost proposed driveways will not meet offset requirements should the Overland and Movado intersection ever be signalized. In this case these accesses would be limited to right-in/right-out accesses only. The Applicant is aware of this potential and still proposed the driveways at their current locations. Therefore, Staff does not find it necessary to recommend different locations but will instead note compliance with ACHD conditions of approval and their policies. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancity.or /comp-plan): Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed multi family dwellings are shown as townhome style units and would be a new type of multi family dwelling in this immediate area and add to the available housing diversity within the Page 7 Item 5. N Movado development. In addition, all of the units are proposed at 2-bedroom units which would offer future residents rental opportunities at a lower price than three bedroom homes. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) Traditional three-story, garden-style apartments are currently under construction directly to the west of the subject site which makes the proposed two-story townhome style apartments a new type of multi family housing in this area. The proposed residential is also a different type than the single- family proposed directly south and further into the Movado development. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) Mixed-use areas require integration of uses that are not always precisely compatible but through thoughtful site design, conflicts can be minimized. With Staff's recommended changes, the proposed development offers better integration, minimizes conflicts by removing parking that backs into a drive aisle, and better utilizes the land area. The drive aisle with the revisions recommended by Staff acts as both a buffer and a point of integration between the commercial and multi family residential on the property. The required setbacks between the subject property and the apartments to the west should offer an adequate transition and screening between more intensive residential buildings and the townhome style units proposed with this development. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems by continuing existing stubs where available. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The subject site is already annexed but currently undeveloped; it is one of the last areas of the Movado development to be developed. Because everything to the south is mostly developed and the site abuts a major arterial and entryway corridor,public services are readily available for this site despite being on the outer edge of City limits. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments,including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with development as proposed. However; an existing driveway cut was not closed with curb, gutter, and sidewalk along Overland as required with previous approvals. The previous requirement to comply with this will be carried over into this project. • "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM),generally at/near the mid- mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.0313) Page 8 Item 5. ■ The Applicant is utilizing an existing collector street as the access for the proposed development. No new public roads are required or proposed with this application. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits."(4.05.03B) The proposed parcels are already annexed with commercial zoning but are not yet developed.As noted, these parcels are likely to not develop with the intended uses of only commercial when so far removed from the main MU-R center further to the west. Despite abutting the edge of City limits, City services are readily available. Furthermore, developing these parcels will allow for the entrance to the City of Meridian from the east along Overland Road to be enhanced with commercial and transitional residential. • "Monitor and adjust the amount and mix of industrial, commercial,and office areas needed to meet the employment needs of the City."(3.06.0113) The Applicant's proposal removes some commercial square footage from what is currently approved in the Movado Greens DA.According to the Applicant, the subject parcels are too far removed from the intersection of Eagle/Overland to directly compete with the already undeveloped Silverstone commercial area further to the west. Staff agrees that reducing the amount of commercial on this site to accommodate more neighborhood or community serving commercial uses rather than regional uses is prudent based on existing development patterns and size of the property. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staffs analysis in italics) • "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high density residential development alone." The proposed development includes both multi family residential and commercial pad sites.At a minimum, the development should provide two land uses immediately. With more than one commercial building, it is very feasible that at least three land uses will be provided. However, Staff does not find it necessary to require at least three land uses on the subject site due to its relatively small size (6.8 acres) in relation to the much larger parcels located further west and also in the MU- R designation. The proposed development meets this goal. • "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69." The Applicant is proposing multi family residential at a gross density of 9.67 units/acre which falls within the medium-high density residential range were the project to be located in that designation. In addition, the subject parcels have easy access to a new collector street that connects to Overland Road, an arterial; Overland provides access east and west from the site to major employment centers in Meridian and Boise. • "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for developments with a Mixed- Use designation." An overall development plan is currently in place for the subject parcels and are currently approved as solely commercial sites. The Applicant is requesting to modify this plan to include multi family residential with the commercial uses proposed along Overland Road. • "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space." Page 9 Item 5. Fl-581 Staff is recommending revisions to the site plan that will help meet this comprehensive plan policy including combining two of the commercial buildings into one in order to provide for a shared plaza between the multi family and this commercial. With these changes, the project will meet this policy. • "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development." The proposed plan depicts two-story, multi family residential as a transition from a busy arterial and commercial buildings to existing single-family homes directly to the south. The single-family development to the south would also have landscaping between their backyards and the proposed multi family residential. Many of these single-family homes abutting the subject site are attached products which makes the townhome style multi family an adequate transition to commercial uses. • "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools,parks,daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments." The proposed project is not a larger mixed-use development; therefore, strict adherence to this policy is not feasible. • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas,outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools are expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count." Staff is recommending revisions commensurate with this policy in order to provide for a shared plaza between uses that are not outdoor seating areas for restaurants. Future commercial uses are not yet known so the Applicant is not proposing this as an option at this point. • "Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-public centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play. These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking opportunities considered." As discussed earlier in the report, the subject parcels are small areas of undeveloped land within the MU-R designation and are separated from larger MU-R parcels further to the west by existing residential. These factors do not make it feasible for strict adherence to this policy. However, Staff has recommended revisions to the site plan in order to help meet other mixed-use policies that will, in-turn, move the project closer to compliance with this policy. • "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians." The proposed development will be directly accessible to adjacent neighborhoods through extension of sidewalks from the existing network into the site. Staff believes better integration could occur if the concept plan is revised to reduce the commercial footprint and increase the shared area between the uses. • "Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between residential densities and housing types." There are no alleys proposed in this development but the drive aisles within the proposed development act as a transition between the proposed residential and commercial areas as desired. Staff's recommended changes would further create this transition as described in more detail earlier in the report. • "Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town,development is not subject to the Mixed-Use standards listed herein." The subject property is not located in Old Town; therefore, this item is not applicable. Page 10 Item 5. E In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-R areas,per the Comprehensive Plan: • "Developments should comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed-Use areas." See analysis above. • "Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 40 units/acre." The proposed development meets this policy by providing more than 10%as residential and with a gross density of nearly 10 units/acre. • "There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as office, clean industry, or entertainment uses." Staff is recommending that the non-retail commercial uses on this site be limited in order to ensure compatible uses are proposed in the future. Because of the relatively small size of this mixed-use site, this policy is better adhered to further to the west in the Silverstone or Rackham commercial developments. • "Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area." Future commercial uses are not yet known at this time. However, Staff's proposed use restrictions may provide for more than 50%of the commercial area to be retail. It is more likely that office uses or a daycare may end up within the proposed commercial are due to their proximity to multi family residential. Staff will analyze this policy with future Certificate of Zoning Compliance applications. Based on the analysis above, Staff finds the proposed plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area in regard to land use, density and transportation. Several different land-uses should exist within the future commercial area of the site and Staffs recommended changes should increase the development's consistency with the comprehensive plan. B. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE(UDC)ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Multi-family Development(UDC 11-4-3-27): The proposed multi-family development consists of 66 units with 56 on the western parcel and 10 units on the eastern parcel. The proposed use of multi-family residential is subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission within the existing C-G zoning district and subject to specific use standards outlined in UDC 11-4-3-27 and below: 11-4-3-27—Multi-Family Development: A. Purpose: 1. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the quality of life of its residents. 2. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that enhance the visual character of the community. 3. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is sensitive to and well integrated with the surrounding neighborhood. 4. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe,interesting outdoor spaces for residents. B. Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, Page 11 Item 5. F160] entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Proposed project shall comply with this requirement. 2. All on-site service areas,outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures that are only visible from the drive aisles; all proposed transformer/utility vaults shall also comply with this requirement. 3. A minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios,decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title.According to the submitted open space exhibit, the apartments are proposed with approximately 135 square feet of private open space in the form of private patios and decks for each unit, commensurate with traditional garden style apartment buildings. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 5.No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area.Applicant shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.See analysis in staff report below. 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location(including provisions for parcel mail)that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) Per the submitted plans, the Applicant appears to meet these requirements except for the property management office; it is unclear where this office is located on-site. Where it is not clear on the submitted plans, the Applicant shall comply with these requirements at the time of CZC submittal. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict these items. C. Common Open Space Design Requirements: 1. A minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500)or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200)square feet of living area. Page 12 Item 5. M Each unit contains less than 1,200 square feet of living area therefore, 250 square feet of common open space is required per unit in accord with the requirements above. 2. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area,and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). Proposed open space submitted as meeting this requirement has been reviewed.All area labeled as qualified common open space on the open space exhibit complies with this requirement. The Applicant has proposed 19,561 square feet of qualified open space while needing to provide a minimum of 16,500 square feet of common open space;the proposed open space exceeds the minimum requirements.In addition to the areas shown on the open space exhibit, there is an area north of the ten units in the very southeast corner of the project that abuts Movado Way that is also qualifying. This area is approximately 2,000 square feet in area which increases the qualified open space further but the exhibit does not show this. Because these ten units are part of the CUP request, the open space exhibit should also include those units and show how they are meeting the private open space requirements as well as show any other qualifying common open space. The proposed open space consists of a buffer between the multi family residential and the existing residential to the south, a mew between two of the 8 plex buildings, a plaza area along Movado Way that contains the amenities, and other small areas that meet the minimum dimensional standards. Despite the proposed open space exceeding the minimum required by code, the only area large enough for a more active open space is the green space to the south of the plaza area that abuts Movado Way and is approximately 3,000 square feet in area.Because of this, the recommended revisions to the site design are even more important because there would be another area where residents could sit and safely enjoy their development despite not counting towards the open space. Furthermore, the developer of the subject parcels is the same as those for the rest of Movado Estates and Movado Greens directly south of the proposed development.It can be assumed these residents will have the opportunity to utilize the existing pedestrian network to access the larger open spaces within those developments. The Applicant should verify this at the Commission hearing. Overall, the proposed open space meets these specific use standards and Staff finds the proposed open space is adequate, especially with Staffs recommended changes. 3. In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. The multi family portion of the project is proposed to be developed in one (1)phase. 4. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4)in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff. retroactive to 2-4-2009). The required buffer along S. Movado Way, a collector street, is not shown as qualified open space on the submitted open space exhibit. However, a central open space area is proposed adjacent to Movado Way and is separated from the street by an existing buffer and fencing. D. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1)Clubhouse. (2)Fitness facilities. Page 13 Item 5. F162] (3)Enclosed bike storage. (4)Public art such as a statue. b. Open space: (1)Open grassy area of at least fifty by one hundred feet(50 x 100') in size. (2) Community garden. (3)Ponds or water features. (4)Plaza. c. Recreation: (1)Pool. (2)Walking trails. (3)Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2) amenities shall be provided from two(2) separate categories. b. For multi-family development between twenty(20)and seventy-five(75)units,three(3) amenities shall be provided,with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Based on 66 proposed units a minimum of three(3)amenities are required. The Applicant has proposed 3 amenities, one from each category as required by code. The Applicant has proposed an enclosed bike storage area,a plaza, and a coffee kiosk.A coffee kiosk is not an option listed above in the Recreation category but subsection D.3 allows the decision-making body to authorize alternative options if they provide a similar level of amenity.If the Applicant can provide more detail in how the coffee kiosk will be operated as an amenity for this development,Staff finds it to be an adequate substitute.If the Commission finds this not to be true, an additional qualifying amenity should be added to meet these specific use standards. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2.All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(3')wide. b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted. Page 14 Item 5. F163] c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The submitted landscape plan appears to meet these specific use standard landscape requirements and shall be further verified at the time of CZC submittal(see Exhibit VII.D). Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are no existing structures on site except for a vinyl privacy fence along Overland Road. S. Movado Way is a collector street that the Applicant was required to construct with previous approvals for Movado Estates and Movado Greens developments.All other site improvements would occur with these approvals. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed development and future commercial buildings are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. Submitted plans appear to show compliance with all dimensional standards except for the 10 units in the very southeast corner of the site, across from E. Vacheron Street. These units are also proposed as 2-bedroom units with tucked under 2-car garages facing east, meeting the minimum parking requirement for each unit. Submitted site plans appear to meet all UDC and specific use requirements. Access(UDC 11-3A-31: Access was discussed heavily in the transportation section of the comprehensive plan analysis section earlier in the report. For the benefit of this report a quick summary of the proposed access is also in this section and also includes analysis on the accesses proposed for the ten units in the southeast corner of the site across from E.Vacheron. Access for all sections of the development are proposed via driveway connections to Movado Way,the existing collector street;no units have direct vehicular access to Movado Way but do have easy pedestrian access. Staff is recommending some changes to the northernmost drive aisle in the northwest section of the development to increase pedestrian safety and create a better sense of place within the development. As noted in the previous dimensional standards section,the drive aisle access for the ten units in the SEC of the site does not show the required 5 feet of landscaping along the eastern property boundary. The driveway access for these units to Movado Way aligns with Vacheron Street and should be stubbed to the eastern property line in order to provide for cross-access to the adjacent parcel to the east that is in the City of Boise. This parcel has recently received approval from the City of Boise for a commercial and self-service storage development; cross-access to this development is already part of the existing DA in order to minimize direct access to Overland. Road Improvements: The Applicant is required to close any existing curb-cuts along Overland and/or Movado Way that are not proposed to be used. This includes the large curb cut along Overland that was required to be closed with previous approvals. In order to ensure this curb-cut is finally closed, Staff is recommending a condition of approval that no certificate of occupancy for the multi-family be issued until all curb-cuts are closed in line with ACHD requirements. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): All sidewalks adjacent to all public streets are already constructed as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17 except for the section noted above that requires the Applicant to close an old curb-cut. All other proposed sidewalks are adjacent to the multi-family residential buildings and shown adjacent to the future commercial structures. The pedestrian circulation that is a part of this project will be different should the Commission agree with Staff's recommended changes for the northernmost drive aisle in the northwest section of the site. Page 15 Item 5. F164] With Staffs recommended changes, the northernmost drive aisle would have detached sidewalks on both the north and south side of the drive aisle with ample room for additional trees. This change would create a short segment of boulevard between the residential and commercial components of the site but is both a better transition and area of integration than currently proposed, especially when the addition of a shard plaza is incorporated north of this drive aisle. In addition to the recommended detached sidewalks in this area, Staff is recommending at least one pedestrian crossing between the multi family townhomes and the commercial/plaza area that is clearly delineated from the driving surface by being constructed as either brick pavers, stamped concrete, or similar. These crossings should be clearly shown on the revised plans. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided as set forth in UDC Tables 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district, and planted in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. The Overland and Movado Way street buffers are existing and are shown to remain intact during development. As discussed in the specific use standards section earlier in the report,the submitted landscape plans appear to show compliance with all other landscaping requirements for multi-family developments including vegetative ground cover and the correct number of trees. A 25-foot landscape buffer on the south side of the C-G zoning is required adjacent to the R-15 zoning district to the south. This buffer appears to be shown on the submitted plans and includes additional landscaping to help minimize any conflicts of the different residential types. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, I1-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence is proposed to remain along all property boundaries. It appears the existing fencing along Overland is to be removed but the buffer landscaping material will remain. All proposed fencing meets UDC requirements. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18 : An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage is proposed to be mitigated by underground seepage beds and/or retention ponds in accord with ACHD design criteria. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the 56 units on the western parcel; no elevations have been submitted for the future commercial structures or the ten units in the southeast corner of the development. The Applicant should provide conceptual elevations prior to the Commission meeting. All non-residential and multi-family structures require Administrative Design Review prior to obtaining building permits. At the time of those submittals, Staff will analyze conformance with the Architectural Standards Manual.An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for this entire development and each commercial structure. The elevations submitted for the 56 units on the western parcel show two-story structures with varying roofprofiles along the rooflines and mostly lap-siding exteriors. No color elevations were submitted so materials and color palettes cannot be analyzed. However, Staff will analyze all elevations for compliance with the Architectural Standards Manual at the time of Design Review submittal. Furthermore, Staff is recommending a condition of approval that the same design elements are incorporated in the commercial and multi family development to ensure integration and congruency in design. Page 16 Item 5. 165 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the existing Development Agreement and approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit per the DA provisions and conditions of approval included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX. Page 17 13 1 � r.•-•ey�3 efi _ ry rpEpE {{II aim in IRO ; - Mol ®■�! �l� gig I Sol! OWN R �{1 ne ae _5 its-iff�!�'•c•:r�� ?' Item 5. ■ B. Site Plan/New Concept Plan(date: 2/26/2021)NOT APPROVED ri I —IT _ �� a .IMI--LL'✓ �Yi� - rz. / � Y iN STEcwAxrcAExrtcE5T 5RE 5wm. c.. 10 II � '�-�� I � � � � - �� I�� :�'• � �AFC,uno��.� �x raa�x�,. .xw gx.�x�,x�c�w��, �„�x xt, � n h wx°_........... .°=..r°xx s � s 3 ; '.., I I r.Vx nwsrv. a siwsNn�r�,cartn.�l-„s saws Mdo Ina cwuax; Q ❑ � rf a.xx xc aam s s,uis(�rmrxm) ¢ - � f-•_ "_ _— ___-. u- -- __ ' �-�- J I I cune�uv*u..e mx6e'tc'e' art vnn u,w sxx¢couurncu�w.micr � ❑ y V - �� zxE,xxrs PSII xxx cw,� —LL-- -�_1_ �u'c Pma�v. xs[wsNxlr(,acasc9-xx s,.u.s nco'x l,x cxcl.!ncc] Page 19 Item 5. F169] C. Landscape Plan(dated: 12/09/2020)NOT APPROVED PLANT PALETTE III m,ic 5( � �B�59VBEL7E T7F _ a , - , r _ g - LJ 0 LU NOTES R .. am w uIu n CONCEPT 0 1- ' LANDSCAPE _T �� .��0 I �1' PLAN d II Page 21 Item 5. ■ D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 7/30/2020)NOT APPROVED THUARCFIffECT RE . -. I I � I I �ESiCNSPLLIS,P,a. �I _ �0 L II 1 r� y 1 - 5 1 a �s-Ir rinn-curly tirnc:r J jo 4 d LEGEND ¢o z .AVA,E,�aAa ow o Page 22 Item 5. ■ E. Conceptual Building Elevations D O nxctn�c I ANYE P10S,PA. II IF FBI r—T E 0 rKc�l ELEvquoN G O O (2) C� ,r �w g w N SIDE B ELEVATION SIDE A ELEVAT ON 85 4 3 2 , O O O m - Z .... C i_..- ...�-._. .` O _ J iru 1 W rc - I W w ow O : U BACK ELEVATION —RIGHT ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THIS DR—NG AND ALL INFO.CONIAINED HEREIN GTHE PROPERTY—HIMOTURE DESH NG PLUS PA AND MY NOT BE FEUSEDATTHONT THE NPITTENFERMISSION OFTNEAR-T— Page 23 Item 5. ■ ARCIUTECTM Wri � DBS[GNSPDUS,P,A. �v m --------- ---- �._ ITK CIP)_� i x r yoo Q� _T Imo Z _ _ da ❑ ` o - f ___ LL M w Hm � _ J J❑ ��I o Page 24 Item 5. ■ 1 UEMNSHUS,P.A. EASE ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION re. S I e ; 1Itl '; 3sOUTH ELEVATION 2'T ELEVATION X NFW F=R PIAN U y & W H�h 4 -- -- �--- - Q r y8m _ y z 0 r } J W � Q Z Q G X m EET A,S.� Page 25 Item 5. F174] VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Development Agreement Modification: 1. Within six(6)months of the City Council granting the subject modification,the owner shall sign and obtain Council approval of the amended development agreement that includes an updated development plan as shown in Section VII.B; the amended DA shall include the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual site plan, conceptual building elevations,landscape plan, and qualified open space exhibits included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein with the following revisions: i. Condense the two commercial buildings on the western parcel into a singular two-story structure; ii. Remove the parking along the northernmost east-west drive aisle on the western parcel to allow for detached sidewalks on both sides with 8-foot wide parkways and street trees; iii. Add a shared plaza to be used by the commercial and multi-family residential within the development located somewhere within the area of the proposed commercial buildings along Overland—conceptual design of this area should be completed by the Applicant and submitted to Planning Staff for review prior to the City Council hearing; iv. Include at least one(1)pedestrian crossing from the multi-family townhomes to the shared plaza and commercial that is clearly delineated from the driving surface by being constructed with brick pavers, stamped concrete, or similar; b. The allowed uses within the future commercial buildings shall be office,retail,personal and professional services,restaurant, and daycare uses to aid in the integration and compatibility with the multi-family residential; no drive throughs shall be permitted within this development without obtaining a modification to this agreement. c. No building permits shall be issued for this development until the property has been subdivided in accord with the approved preliminary plat(H-2017-0104). d. The Applicant shall grant cross-access with the adjacent property to the east(Parcel #S 1121110200)located somewhere along the shared eastern property boundary; copy of the agreement shall be provided with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. Conditional Use Permit(CUP): Page 26 Item 5. E 2. The Applicant shall adhere to all previous conditions of approval associated with this site(H-2016- 0112&H-2017-0104). 3. At least ten(10) days prior to the City Council hearing,the Applicant shall submit a revised site plan and landscape plan to reflect Staffs recommended layout changes above and the following dimensional standard revisions: i. Revise the drive aisle in the southeast corner of the western parcel to reduce this segment's length to no more than 150 feet. 4. At least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing,the Applicant shall submit a revised open space exhibit showing the ten(10)units in the southeast corner of the development and compliance with the multi-family open space standards. 5. Prior to obtaining certificate of occupancy on any building within this development,the Applicant shall close all curb-cuts not being proposed for use along S.Movado Way and E. Overland Road with curb, gutter, and sidewalk commensurate with ACHD requirements. 6. The Applicant shall provide conceptual elevations for the proposed multi-family dwellings located in the very southeast corner of the site and all commercial buildings at least ten(10)days prior to the City Council hearing. 7. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. 8. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11- 3C-6 for multi-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 9. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 10. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approvals for the future commercial buildings prior to submittal for any building permits for the commercial portion of the development. 11. The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Design Review and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approvals for the multi-family residential buildings prior to submittal for any building permits for the residential portion of the development. Because the two multi-family developments are separated by S. Movado Way and on separate lots,the applicant shall submit a Design Review application for each lot. 12. Future building elevations of both the commercial and multi-family development shall incorporate similar design elements and finish materials to ensure cohesive project design. 13. The Applicant shall remove the existing privacy fencing along the Overland Road frontage for the commercial portion of the site with development of each commercial site and subsequent Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval. 14. 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. 15. Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 16. The conditional use approval shall become null and void unless otherwise approved by the City if the applicant fails to 1) commence the use, satisfy the requirements, acquire building permits and Page 27 Item 5. F176] commence construction within two years asset forth in UDC 11-5B-6F.1; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-513-6F.4. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No Permanent structures(buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences,infiltration trenches, lightpoles,etc.)can be built within the utility easement. It is unclear as to how the commercial/office building in the northeast corner will be serviced. 1.2 Eliminate water main dead-end at southeast corner of western parcel;possibly run a service line to the building instead. 1.3 A streetlight plan will need to be included in the final plat or building permit application. Streetlight plan requirements are listed in section 6 of the City's Design Standards. Streetlights are required on Overland Road. Streetlights shall be installed and operational prior to any occupancy as required in section 6 of the Meridian Design Standards. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches,canals,laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per Page 28 Item 5. F177] UDC 11-3A-6. hi 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. 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. Page 29 Item 5. E If all conditions of approval are met, Stafffinds the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district in which it resides. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Stafffinds the proposed use of multi family residential, with Staff's recommended revisions, is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Mixed-Use Regional and the requirements of this title when included in the overall project analysis. 3. That the design,construction,operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses directly to the south, Stafffinds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant complies with Staff's recommended revisions and maintains all required landscape buffers. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Stafffinds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water,and sewer. Stafffinds the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services because all services are readily available. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Stafffinds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials,equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise,smoke,fumes,glare or odors. Although traffic is sure to increase in the vicinity with the addition of more residential units, all major roadways adjacent to the site are already at their full width and the development has multiple avenues of accessing the arterial network to the north or to the south. Therefore, Stafffinds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property, or the general welfare. Page 31 Item 5. E 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. POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=222720&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU&cr =1 D. NAMPA-MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=223055&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX E. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT(CDHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=222773&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX F. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=222737&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX G. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT TABLE https:llweblink.meridiancity.or,g/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=218002&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=218955&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit Findings (UDC 11-5B-6�: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Page 30 Applicant Presentation Movado 0123)-2020-(H and CUP ApplicationsAgreement UpdateDevelopment Mixed Use Development History and Context to get underwayallows commercial housing type, and provides a fifth larger project, Proposal honors the •been last to developCommercial area has •Overland Roadover 100 acres on • Proposal Road frontagecommercial on Overland Retains ~27,500 sf of •(townhouse rentals)family units -with 66 multipreviously commercial area Replaces a portion of •project/approvalAffects 6.8 acres of existing • Proposal–seating and a firepitCoffee bistro café area with –Open BBQ/picnic area–Plaza –Amenities provided :•parking)(with carports and guest Parking is provided for all units •Commitment to two stories•townhouse rentals–Not “normal” apartments • ACHD and Agency Review In agreement with all other agency conditions•In agreement with all ACHD report–ACHD has confirmed that no TIS is required–330 from original approvalreduces anticipated daily trips by This modification • Discussions with Staff Summary than original entitlementlessTraffic production is •Movado developmenthousing type in the fifthAdds to residential mix with •more marketablemakes them Preserves commercial uses at Overland Road but • Modifications to Conditions of onlybuilding Add flex space for east commercial –Modify Condition 1.b •Required removal of parking on northern drive aisle–Delete Condition 1.a.ii•story commercial structure-Required single, two–Delete Condition 1.a.i•Staff ReportApproval in Questions or Comments? Item 5. F-18o] 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 within the development area, therefore, Staff finds the proposed use should not result in damage of any such features. Page 32